Hoi. I have been involved with Wikidata for a long time. I know about SPARQL, when I learned about it, it had major limitations and it was highly split up in flavours.
We are talking Wikidata here and when tools are not available to Wikidata people, they are hardly relevant in the Wikidata context. When you look at Wikidata, Wikidata is increasingly relevant because of its scope and its link to people who actually care about the data and are willing to work on items one at a time.
I will accept your point if you are willing and able to bring those tools in the Wikidata world. Give them relevance and by inference they become relevant. As long as they are outside looking in, they do not really matter except for the people lucky enough to have them. Thanks, GerardM
On 29 October 2015 at 11:14, Martynas Jusevičius martynas@graphity.org wrote:
Maybe you should put it the other way: as long as Wikidata's tools do not integrate with SPARQL? Because SPARQL is well-supported outside Wikidata, much more so than Wikidata's tools. So I think you focus on the wrong "niche".
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Sorry for not replying earlier.. I am busy in real life.
It is good to be wrong, particularly about something like this. It is
much
better to have this engine available to people. What I find relevant is
that
additional tools are needed to make it shareable. This combined with the learning curve involved, I do not have much time available to me lately, prevent me from exploring it.
I do not really feel the need as WDQ fulfills my needs perfectly. It is because it integrates with the tools that I use.
For me SPARQL may be awesome but as long as it does not integrate with
tools
and is all over the place, it remains a niche; it is there for some but
not
others. Once it does integrate and is mostly hidden from view, its power becomes relevant. This has been as true for WDQ; most people use its
engine
in tools but do not make queries themselves. Thanks, GerardM
On 26 October 2015 at 16:31, Kingsley Idehen kidehen@openlinksw.com
wrote:
On 10/25/15 10:51 AM, James Heald wrote:
Hi Gerard. Blazegraph is the name of the open-source SPARQL engine
being
used to provide the Wikidata SPARQL service.
So Blazegraph *is* available to all of us, at
, via both the query editor, and the SPARQL API endpoint.
It's convenient to talk describe some issues with the SPARQL service
being
"Blazegraph issues", if the issues appear to lie with the query engine.
Other query engines that other people be running might be running might have other specific issues, eg "Virtuoso issues". But it is Blazegraph
that
the Discovery team and Wikidata have decided to go with.
The beauty of SPARQL is that you can use URLs to show query results (and even query definitions). Ultimately, engine aside, there is massive
utility
in openly sharing queries and then determining what might the real
problem.
Let's use open standards to work in as open a fashion as is possible.
-- Regards,
Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen Personal WebID:
http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata