thanks for the pointers, this is indeed a very interesting project that tie
in neatly with what we want to achieve in Wikidata. I didn't read your
paper in detail, but merely skimmed it, so I hope I have a reasonable
understanding of your proposal.
We have not yet written down the use cases, and we are aware that this
still needs to happen. I do think that your approach - especially with the
context-hash-based URIs - is very promising.
We aim to start with a simple website-level scope for Web references, but
personally I would be very happy if we could move down to the more
fine-grained level that your tools support in the first year already, down
to the very sentence that supports a statement in Wikidata. If we get this
far, your approach seems like a very strong contender for representing this.
Just a few questions - as you note, it is easier if we all use the same
standards, and so I want to ask about the relation to other related
* I understand that you dismiss IETF RFC 5147 because it is not stable
* what is the relation to the W3C media fragment URIs? Did not find a
* any plans of standardizing your approach?
We would strongly prefer to just use a standard instead of advocating
contenders for one -- if one exists.
2012/5/18 Sebastian Hellmann <hellmann(a)informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
maybe the question, I asked was lost, as the text was TL;DR
I heard that, it is planned to track provenance of facts. e.g. Berlin has
3,337,000 citizens found here:
Do you have a place where the use case and the requirements are documented
for this? Or is it out of scope?
Will it be course grained, i.e. website level ? Or fine grained, i.e. text
paragraph level? See e.g. how Berlin is highlighted here:
in this very early prototype.
Could you give me a link were I can read more about any Wikidata plans
towards this direction?
On 05/16/2012 09:10 AM, Sebastian Hellmann wrote:
(Note: I could not find the document, where your requirements regarding
the tracking of facts on the web are written, so I am giving a general
introduction to NIF. Please send me a link to the document that specifies
your need for tracing facts on the web, thanks)
I would like to point your attention to the URIs used in the NLP
Interchange Format (NIF).
NIF-URIs are quite easy to use, understand and implement. NIF has a
one-triple-per-annotation paradigm. The latest documentation can be found
The basic idea is to use URIs with hash fragment ids to annotate or mark
pages on the web:
An example is the first occurrence of "Semantic Web" on
as highlighted here:
Here is a NIF example for linking a part of the document to the DBpedia
entry of the Semantic Web:
a str:StringInContext ;
We are currently preparing a new draft for the spec 2.0. The old one can
be found here:
There are several EU projects that intend to use NIF. Furthermore, it is
easier for everybody, if we standardize a Web annotation format together.
Please give feedback of your use cases.
All the best,
Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann
Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
Research Group: http://aksw.org
Wikidata-l mailing list
Project director Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 2 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 | http://wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.