Hello John
I'm not sure that Wikidata is the right place for this kind of information, due
to it's high granularity. As Zolo points out, maintaining a large directory of
small things may be quite a burden for the community.
However, Wikibase is by design well suited for representing research data, since
it allows for very fine grained sourcing an annotation. Europeana's EAGLE
project[1] is already using Wikibase[2] to manage diverse translations of
inscriptions (e.g. [3]). Such a local Wikibase installation could still refer to
Wikidata as a vocabulary, e.g. using Wikidata Q-Numbers to identify taxons.
-- daniel
[1]
http://www.eagle-network.eu/
[2]
http://www.eagle-network.eu/wiki/
[3]
http://www.eagle-network.eu/wiki/index.php/Item:Q5102?setlang=en
Am 25.10.2014 14:39, schrieb John Cummings:
I'm not sure if this quite fits here but it's
related.
A few months ago I went to a meeting of natural history organisations in the UK,
they were looking for a way of creating a centralised directory of specimens
held in different institutions in the UK.
Wikidata seems like a possible place for this to happen, for each species there
could be a place where specimens are held, however there would be very large
differences between number of organisations holding specimens depending on the
species and also differences in types of specimens e.g jaw bones or whole
skeleton. I also wonder if this would include other organisations like zoos
where they would be alive.
Any thoughts would be welcome
Thanks
John
--
Daniel Kinzler
Senior Software Developer
Wikimedia Deutschland
Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.