Hello,
We have a small taskforce effort at Schema.org (myself and a few others) that have been adding Schema.org mappings into Wikidata to help with alignment.
However, an issue came up where we did not have a complete 'equivalent class' between the 2 topics but had the need to say 'external subclass' instead. Example: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q474191
We searched and searched through Talk pages and querying Wikidata properties...but did not find something close to the meaning of 'external subclass' or a property that expresses 'skos:closeMatch' ?
Does anyone know if a useful property like 'external subclass' is available to use to help us with our mapping ?
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
Federico,
Not sure I understand what you mean by 'item' ? Do you mean a Wikidata topic ? We are performing mapping at the Wikidata property level with a value of URL.
Those Wikidata properties have to exist already for us to accomplish our work. Most of them do ,thanks to Denny and TPT... but this 'external subclass' is also a needed one as well. We just could not find anything close to that currently.
Help.
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 1:51 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Thad Guidry, 10/09/2016 17:03:
Does anyone know if a useful property like 'external subclass' is available to use to help us with our mapping ?
Why can't you create an item for the subclass and link from there?
Nemo
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
Thad Guidry, 12/09/2016 15:46:
Not sure I understand what you mean by 'item' ? Do you mean a Wikidata topic ?
I don't know what a "Wikidata topic" is, no such term is found on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Glossary .
Your example Q474191 already has an "equivalent class" link to SchemaOrg, can you make an example of an item (Q-number) and an external thingy which you are unable to link? Thanks.
Nemo
any Qxxxxxx is a Wikidata topic. (also called an entity) any Pxxxx is a Wikidata property.
that equivalent class = http://health-lifesci.schema.org/Diet needs to be removed and changed to
'external subclass' = http://health-lifesci.schema.org/Diet
The reason is that our definition in Schema.org is slightly different than https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q474191 which is the biological definition (a mixture of food sources that sustains a living thing) and from that derives the nutritional definition, the one Schema.org has, like a specific diet like 'Thad's Special Vegan Diet without olives :)
So we need a new 'external subclass' made available in Wikidata please.
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
Thad Guidry, 12/09/2016 21:29:
The reason is that our definition in Schema.org is slightly different than https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q474191 which is the biological definition (a mixture of food sources that sustains a living thing) and from that derives the nutritional definition, the one Schema.org has, like a specific diet
Better now? https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q26869695&diff=375889582&... https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q26869695&diff=375889582&...
Do we need a help page on how hypernymy/hyponymy is handled on Wikidata? I know it can be confusing.
Nemo
Thanks Federico. Much appreciated, but...besides creating extra layers inside of Wikidata just to expose external data correctly....
Still, there is a need to have 'external subclass' directly on the parent class of diet https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q474191
One reason is to ease the burden of SPARQL queries for both sides. Wikidata users/developers and Schema.org
We are tracking all of the work here: https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/280
SELECT * WHERE { {?property wdt:P2235 ?extsuper.} UNION { ?property wdt:P2236 ?extsub. } UNION { ?property wdt:P1628 ?extequiv. } UNION { ?property wdt:P1709 ?_equivalent_class. } FILTER( REGEX(STR(?extequiv), "schema.org") || REGEX(STR(?extsub), "schema.org") || REGEX(STR(?extsuper), "schema.org") || REGEX(STR(?_equivalent_class), "schema.org") ) }
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
Hoi, I understand that this makes for more complexity inside Wikidata. That is ok if it brings us something tangible. Can you provide me with one or two practical examples how this helps? Thanks, GerardM
On 12 September 2016 at 22:03, Thad Guidry thadguidry@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Federico. Much appreciated, but...besides creating extra layers inside of Wikidata just to expose external data correctly....
Still, there is a need to have 'external subclass' directly on the parent class of diet https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q474191
One reason is to ease the burden of SPARQL queries for both sides. Wikidata users/developers and Schema.org
We are tracking all of the work here: https://github.com/ schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/280
SELECT * WHERE { {?property wdt:P2235 ?extsuper.} UNION { ?property wdt:P2236 ?extsub. } UNION { ?property wdt:P1628 ?extequiv. } UNION { ?property wdt:P1709 ?_equivalent_class. } FILTER( REGEX(STR(?extequiv), "schema.org") || REGEX(STR(?extsub), "schema.org") || REGEX(STR(?extsuper), "schema.org") || REGEX(STR(?_equivalent_class), "schema.org") ) }
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
Hi Thad,
Some time ago I proposed the property exact match (P2888), which carries the same semantics as skos:exactMatch. There are efforts to but this property in good use. In this context it would only make sense to model all aspects of similarity mapping to Wikidata properties. I hope I am wrong, but I don't think a property matching skos:closeMatch, already exists. We could go forward and propose that property, similar to what I did with skos:exactMatch. Since you are from schema.org, I would love to see a discussion on all levels of matching between concepts and how to model that in Wikidata. i.e. should we also consider proposing skos:broadMatch.
Kind regards,
Andra
On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 5:03 PM, Thad Guidry thadguidry@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
We have a small taskforce effort at Schema.org (myself and a few others) that have been adding Schema.org mappings into Wikidata to help with alignment.
However, an issue came up where we did not have a complete 'equivalent class' between the 2 topics but had the need to say 'external subclass' instead. Example: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q474191
We searched and searched through Talk pages and querying Wikidata properties...but did not find something close to the meaning of 'external subclass' or a property that expresses 'skos:closeMatch' ?
Does anyone know if a useful property like 'external subclass' is available to use to help us with our mapping ?
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
Hi Andra,
Yes, we'll want to have skos:closeMatch available....but also...
We need to help with long-tail domain support, and one way to do that is support more 'external' properties. Wikidata doesn't have all the data in the world yet, or a full understanding of it...but many times external systems do. So I'd like to see the 'classes' properties of Wikidata to also have 'external' support.
Please propose additionally, a 'external subclass' Wikidata property as well.
That should do for now.
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
Hi Thad,
Coincidentally I am drafting an abstract on exactly this topic. So yes I am keen on getting more of these properties in place. Bare mind that getting properties proposed can be challenging. I will draft the proposal for close match. Do you have a show case example, I could use to draft this proposal. An example where an actual Wikidata item, maps to the one or more systems with more granularity.
Regarding the external subclass, why not create an item for the external subclass in Wikidata and map that with the internal sub class property (P279) and then use the property exact match (P2888) to map the new item to the external class.
Cheers,
Andra
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 6:38 PM, Thad Guidry thadguidry@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Andra,
Yes, we'll want to have skos:closeMatch available....but also...
We need to help with long-tail domain support, and one way to do that is support more 'external' properties. Wikidata doesn't have all the data in the world yet, or a full understanding of it...but many times external systems do. So I'd like to see the 'classes' properties of Wikidata to also have 'external' support.
Please propose additionally, a 'external subclass' Wikidata property as well.
That should do for now.
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
Andra,
That type of powerful expressiveness is certainly doable in Wikidata. To blatantly create properties on a whim by pseudo proxy of using Wikidata items to do the heavy lifting. But that idea is against most of what I have seen in Wikidata documentation, policy, and community best practices say to do.
The right way forward is to patiently wait for the new property to exist, and then we can continue. Thank you for drafting the property proposal by the way. I'll wait for it for review.
Here's some examples where we have subclasses under these :
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q4026292 Action should also ideally have all of Schema.org's subclasses of Action that we have like http://schema.org/TravelAction
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q11410 Game should also ideally have the subclass of Videogame http://schema.org/VideoGame
Here's an example of flipping it around and saying that Schema.org can be used as an 'external parent class' https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q7889 Videogame should also ideally have a proeprty on it for 'external parent class' or something similar with the value of http://schema.org/Game
Our full heirarchy is here for your perusal : http://schema.org/docs/full.html
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
I'm a little confused by this suggestion - surely on Wikidata, the natural thing is for Game (Q11410) should have the subclass of Videogame (Q7889), or vice versa, and each of those items should link out to their equivalents of schema.org/Game / schema.org/VideoGame.
I'm not sure why we then need to add that Game has an external subclass of schema.org/VideoGame - surely this is just repeating information we already have? Mirroring all of schema.org, including its internal relationships, directly within Wikidata seems a bit excessive.
Am I missing something really obvious here? Nemo's suggestion to just create a new Wikidata entry (item, topic, Q-number) for any missing concepts, and then use the existing class properties, seems to solve the core problem without introducing excessive complexity...
Andrew.
On 13 September 2016 at 02:34, Thad Guidry thadguidry@gmail.com wrote:
Andra,
That type of powerful expressiveness is certainly doable in Wikidata. To blatantly create properties on a whim by pseudo proxy of using Wikidata items to do the heavy lifting. But that idea is against most of what I have seen in Wikidata documentation, policy, and community best practices say to do.
The right way forward is to patiently wait for the new property to exist, and then we can continue. Thank you for drafting the property proposal by the way. I'll wait for it for review.
Here's some examples where we have subclasses under these :
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q4026292 Action should also ideally have all of Schema.org's subclasses of Action that we have like http://schema.org/TravelAction
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q11410 Game should also ideally have the subclass of Videogame http://schema.org/VideoGame
Here's an example of flipping it around and saying that Schema.org can be used as an 'external parent class' https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q7889 Videogame should also ideally have a proeprty on it for 'external parent class' or something similar with the value of http://schema.org/Game
Our full heirarchy is here for your perusal : http://schema.org/docs/full.html
Thad +ThadGuidry
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
Thad,
I actually don't see how using internal properties would go against Wikidata policy. There is the requirement of notability, "
1. It fulfills *some structural need*, for example: it is needed to make statements made in other items more useful." [1]
I might be wrong, but I would consider creating a new item to describe a subclass, fulfilling a structural need. Modelling classes and subclasses this way, also makes writing federated queries where the WDQS is used in the SERVICE operator easier. I only need to consider one wikidata property to bridge Wikidata with external sources, and deal with child and parent classes in Wikidata.
Cheers,
Andra
[1] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Notability
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 3:34 AM, Thad Guidry thadguidry@gmail.com wrote:
Andra,
That type of powerful expressiveness is certainly doable in Wikidata. To blatantly create properties on a whim by pseudo proxy of using Wikidata items to do the heavy lifting. But that idea is against most of what I have seen in Wikidata documentation, policy, and community best practices say to do.
The right way forward is to patiently wait for the new property to exist, and then we can continue. Thank you for drafting the property proposal by the way. I'll wait for it for review.
Here's some examples where we have subclasses under these :
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q4026292 Action should also ideally have all of Schema.org's subclasses of Action that we have like http://schema.org/TravelAction
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q11410 Game should also ideally have the subclass of Videogame http://schema.org/VideoGame
Here's an example of flipping it around and saying that Schema.org can be used as an 'external parent class' https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q7889 Videogame should also ideally have a proeprty on it for 'external parent class' or something similar with the value of http://schema.org/Game
Our full heirarchy is here for your perusal : http://schema.org/docs/full.html
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
Hoi, Please explain how this would make a practical difference. We do not need it unless there is a structural need.
Please describe practical benefits. Thanks, GerardM
On 13 September 2016 at 12:28, Andra Waagmeester andra@micelio.be wrote:
Thad,
I actually don't see how using internal properties would go againstWikidata policy. There is the requirement of notability, "
- It fulfills *some structural need*, for example: it is needed to
make statements made in other items more useful." [1]
I might be wrong, but I would consider creating a new item to describe a subclass, fulfilling a structural need. Modelling classes and subclasses this way, also makes writing federated queries where the WDQS is used in the SERVICE operator easier. I only need to consider one wikidata property to bridge Wikidata with external sources, and deal with child and parent classes in Wikidata.
Cheers,
Andra
[1] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Notability
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 3:34 AM, Thad Guidry thadguidry@gmail.com wrote:
Andra,
That type of powerful expressiveness is certainly doable in Wikidata. To blatantly create properties on a whim by pseudo proxy of using Wikidata items to do the heavy lifting. But that idea is against most of what I have seen in Wikidata documentation, policy, and community best practices say to do.
The right way forward is to patiently wait for the new property to exist, and then we can continue. Thank you for drafting the property proposal by the way. I'll wait for it for review.
Here's some examples where we have subclasses under these :
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q4026292 Action should also ideally have all of Schema.org's subclasses of Action that we have like http://schema.org/TravelAction
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q11410 Game should also ideally have the subclass of Videogame http://schema.org/VideoGame
Here's an example of flipping it around and saying that Schema.org can be used as an 'external parent class' https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q7889 Videogame should also ideally have a proeprty on it for 'external parent class' or something similar with the value of http://schema.org/Game
Our full heirarchy is here for your perusal : http://schema.org/docs/full.html
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
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
All,
Vocabularies have their own definitions already hosted. There is no need, therefore, to replicate those same definitions in Wikidata by creating a new Wikidata item (topic / entity) for each external vocabulary class or subclass or property.
Instead, the best practice is to simply POINT to those external definitions, such as those in Schema.org, DBPedia.org, MusicBrainz, etc., etc.
(sorry, Andra, but unfortunately, your proposal to just create Wikidata items (recreating a vocabulary inside Wikidata, instead of using Wikidata properties to point to external URLs) makes Wikidata harder to use, not easier for itself, or for external partners or vocabularies. I won't do this, its not required, its the wrong approach, and gives grief to others that query Wikidata)
The right solution is to help propose and finish adding some of the missing 'external properties' in Wikidata, then we help the web to help us. By adding those missing properties in Wikidata, as is done nearly everyday from what I see. We help external communities align with Wikidata and vice-versa.
Andra - let me know once your 'external subclass' is ready for proposal review.
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
Hoi, I do not get it. At Wikidata we extensively point to other external resources with identifiers for an item. Multiple references are the norm and not the exception. One explicit benefit is that we can compare the data in an external resource and find differences. This is a tangible benefit.
Obviously we can point to schema.org for this as well.
What more do you need and, what is the benefit? Thanks, GerardM
On 13 September 2016 at 19:38, Thad Guidry thadguidry@gmail.com wrote:
All,
Vocabularies have their own definitions already hosted. There is no need, therefore, to replicate those same definitions in Wikidata by creating a new Wikidata item (topic / entity) for each external vocabulary class or subclass or property.
Instead, the best practice is to simply POINT to those external definitions, such as those in Schema.org, DBPedia.org, MusicBrainz, etc., etc.
(sorry, Andra, but unfortunately, your proposal to just create Wikidata items (recreating a vocabulary inside Wikidata, instead of using Wikidata properties to point to external URLs) makes Wikidata harder to use, not easier for itself, or for external partners or vocabularies. I won't do this, its not required, its the wrong approach, and gives grief to others that query Wikidata)
The right solution is to help propose and finish adding some of the missing 'external properties' in Wikidata, then we help the web to help us. By adding those missing properties in Wikidata, as is done nearly everyday from what I see. We help external communities align with Wikidata and vice-versa.
Andra - let me know once your 'external subclass' is ready for proposal review.
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
The benefit is directly towards WMDE's goals.
Specifically, https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2015-2016_round1/Wikime... Goal 1b: Grow the reach of Wikidata beyond the Wikimedia projects
A Wikidata property = Some external vocabulary property A Wikidata property is similar to Some external vocabulary property A Wikidata property is considered a parent class to Some external vocabulary class <-- Needs new property for support. A Wikidata property is considered a child class to Some external vocabulary class
What Schema.org needs now from Wikidata is the addition of a few new properties that seem to be missing. (I sound like a broken record now)
1. 'external subclass'.
DONE.
Let's start there. I don't even want to drag this discussion further than beyond that 1 request, at this point in time.
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
Hoi, Another broken record. I understand how identifiers added to an item make for the item and an external record to be the same. This is helpful because it allows comparison of the statements between Wikidata and the external source.
What is the benefit of Schema.org. Why have it how will it help us.
Or to give you an example. I propose to link red links and wiki links in all Wikipedias to Wikidata items. It allows for an improved quality in the Wikipedias in a similar way as the interwiki links brought more quality. It will also add items to the lists of items that have no article based on queries from Wikidata (a benefit to projects like women in red). It will make it easier to add the sources from DBpedia to Wikidata based on the statements in Wikidata.
So what is the benefit from your proposal? Stating that it will in the abstract does not give me a warm feeling. Thanks, GerardM
On 13 September 2016 at 22:24, Thad Guidry thadguidry@gmail.com wrote:
The benefit is directly towards WMDE's goals.
Specifically, https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/ 2015-2016_round1/Wikimedia_Deutschland_e.V./Proposal_ form#Financials:_current_funding_period Goal 1b: Grow the reach of Wikidata beyond the Wikimedia projects
A Wikidata property = Some external vocabulary property A Wikidata property is similar to Some external vocabulary property A Wikidata property is considered a parent class to Some external vocabulary class <-- Needs new property for support. A Wikidata property is considered a child class to Some external vocabulary class
What Schema.org needs now from Wikidata is the addition of a few new properties that seem to be missing. (I sound like a broken record now)
- 'external subclass'.
DONE.
Let's start there. I don't even want to drag this discussion further than beyond that 1 request, at this point in time.
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
Hi Gerard,
Good question. lolol. And good point, you did ask about 'how it helps' and I didn't directly answer that, so here it is.
Schema.org provides a set of guidelines for publishing structured data on the web in various formats. You can read more detail on our website.
The answer Part 1 : Schema.org helps publishers, small and large, even folks like you and me that might have small websites with important data, that can be crawled by bots, public scraping scripts, etc. to harvest more public data for Wikidata to absorb, as well as helping to reconcile data and even load the Primary Sources tool, Reasonator, or any tool eventually if we wanted. Adding references could in theory just be done by a bot that was smart enough to understand Schema.org markup (there are already many Python, Ruby, Java libraries that exist for this).
The answer Part 2: By having Schema.org properties and classes aligned to existing Wikidata properties and classes. Both sides benefit to help understand that structured data even more....and once a machine understands it better, than those machines can be programmed to gather even more data, or validate the quality of the existing data.
This mapping effort is not just limited to Schema.org however in the long term. Notice that we already have many mappings in Wikidata for external vocabularies, but its very rudimentary. We want to help Wikidata have a more full understanding of data, and that requires a few more properties to be added to support that effort.
Lydia understands this. In fact, she was one of the motivators to have us encourage us to perform the mapping on both sides, inside Wikidata and inside Schema.org (both will be done, but first it was deemed necessary for Wikidata). In addition, she understands the struggle to bring in more quality data for Wikidata and to help tool authors and publishers, which in doing so helps with Goal 1b of WMDE's future plans. Lydia and a few of us from Schema.org will be having a Google Hangout to discuss a few more details this Friday. The entire effort and comments are being tracked here: https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/280
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry
Thad Guidry, 13/09/2016 19:38:
There is no need, therefore, to replicate those same definitions in Wikidata by creating a new Wikidata item (topic / entity) for each external vocabulary class or subclass or property.
Instead, the best practice is to simply POINT to those external definitions, such as those in Schema.org, DBPedia.org, MusicBrainz, etc., etc.
Agreed. If the external definition is compatible, just link it. A specific item needs to be created only where the two definitions are incompatible. I would define two items to be equivalent iff swapping them doesn't change the truthness of any statement or inference on Wikidata (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_relation#Well-definedness_under_an... ). Makes sense?
I don't know if Q474191 and Q26869695 are incompatible definitions; I understood you claimed they were. If the two definitions are compatible, we can merge the two items and just consider Q474191 equivalent to SchemaOrg's definition of "Diet".
Nemo
Federico,
Yes they are incompatible concepts. However, one is typically treated as a subclass of the other. Its that https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q26869695 (nutritional diet) is a subclass of https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q474191 (biological needs diet) Which is correctly stated now with that 'subclass of' statement on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q26869695
Yes, it looks like Wikidata did not have the nutritional concept of a Diet, but only had the biological needs concept. Thanks to your creation of the nutritional concept of a Diet, this helps everyone, Schema.org as well as dieticians, nutritionists, and other scientists.
TODO: We just need to figure out what to do with 'external subclasses' and a few other things concerning Schema.org mapping. And that's part of our Agenda on this Friday's Google Hangout with Lydia and folks.
Thanks again Federico for the bit of help!
Thad +ThadGuidry https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry