Dear all,
Thank you all for your answers. I will have a look to the different projects you have mentioned in your emails. In the meantime I have spent a bit more time exploring Wikidata for paintings as one of our project currently focuses on Art and comparing it with the Europeana Data Model in terms of properties. I have noticed the absence of some properties and I would be curious whether it is just an overlook or whether there is a real intention behind the omission:
-Cultural Heritage data have most of the time a description property where you will find lot of relevant free text information. The structured property but inside you will find mostly free- text. I couldn't find a similar property in Wikidata but there is something similar in Dbpedia. Is it something you are planning to introduce or have you made the decision to exclude any free-text infromation from Wikidata for now.
-While I was looking for painting in Wikidata I also noticed the absence of information related to the size/dimension of the Artwork. The information is most of the time present in Cultural Heritage data. Is it something Wikidata is interested in or has it been omitted intentionally?
-Then the last question is about values in different languages for a given property. How do you indicate the language in Wikidata? Are you using a xml:lang attribute or something similar?
Thank you very much for your help
Best,
Valentine
Am 01.04.2015 um 09:20 schrieb Valentine Charles:
-Cultural Heritage data have most of the time a description property where you will find lot of relevant free text information. The structured property but inside you will find mostly free- text. I couldn't find a similar property in Wikidata but there is something similar in Dbpedia. Is it something you are planning to introduce or have you made the decision to exclude any free-text infromation from Wikidata for now.
Free-form text is not machine-readable. Coding semi-structured information is very common in archives etc, but makes the data very hard to export, transform, and query. Free text fields should be used only for things that are actually text, such as a state motto.
I think the need to encode things in free-form fields arose mostly from overly rigid data schemas. If there's no dedicated field for something, just stuff the info into the text field. Such fields turn into kitchen sinks that contain a hodge podge of different kinds of information.
With Wikidata, there should be no need for this, since you can just create and use any properties you might be missing. That does mean though that wile importing, you have to somehow extract the relevant information from the free text. That effort has to be done at some point, if the data is to become machine readable.
-While I was looking for painting in Wikidata I also noticed the absence of information related to the size/dimension of the Artwork. The information is most of the time present in Cultural Heritage data. Is it something Wikidata is interested in or has it been omitted intentionally?
We don't support units of measurement yet, and without these, it's not really possible to give the dimension. We hope to finally change this over the next couple of months.
-Then the last question is about values in different languages for a given property. How do you indicate the language in Wikidata? Are you using a xml:lang attribute or something similar?
xml:lang would be used in the XML/RDF export (and lang in the HTML rendering). Internally, the language would be a string associated with the "language" key in a JSON structure. But neither fact is really relevant to the data model on an abstract level.
Most properties (most data types) are language agnostic. Quantities, strings, time values, etc, do not have any notion of language. The only datatype for properties that supports a language code is "monolingual text" (a pair of language code + text). This data type is used sparingly, since usually, the need for internationalized naming and description is covered by the labels, descriptions, and aliases associated with a data item.
Labels, descriptions, and aliases are not "properties" about which (sourced) statements would be made in the context of the data item. Instead, they are editorial attributes. They are fully internationalized, and intended to enable display, disambiguation, and search in as many languages as possible.
For example, Q219831 has labels (and descriptions) in many languages: * nl: De Nachtwacht (schilderij van Rembrandt van Rijn) * de: Die Nachtwache (Gemälde von Rembrandt) * en: The Night Watch (painting by Rembrandt van Rijn) * ru: Ночной дозор (картина)
So, when the painting is referenced elsewhere, a label (and description) can be shown in the user's language. Internationalized statements/properties are rarely needed.
We do have the "Quote" property (P1683) which has monolingual text datatype. You could certainly put free text in the value for this property and add this to a reference or even use it as a qualifier.
Joe
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Daniel Kinzler daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de wrote:
Am 01.04.2015 um 09:20 schrieb Valentine Charles:
-Cultural Heritage data have most of the time a description property
where you
will find lot of relevant free text information. The structured property
but
inside you will find mostly free- text. I couldn't find a similar
property in
Wikidata but there is something similar in Dbpedia. Is it something you
are
planning to introduce or have you made the decision to exclude any
free-text
infromation from Wikidata for now.
Free-form text is not machine-readable. Coding semi-structured information is very common in archives etc, but makes the data very hard to export, transform, and query. Free text fields should be used only for things that are actually text, such as a state motto.
I think the need to encode things in free-form fields arose mostly from overly rigid data schemas. If there's no dedicated field for something, just stuff the info into the text field. Such fields turn into kitchen sinks that contain a hodge podge of different kinds of information.
With Wikidata, there should be no need for this, since you can just create and use any properties you might be missing. That does mean though that wile importing, you have to somehow extract the relevant information from the free text. That effort has to be done at some point, if the data is to become machine readable.
-While I was looking for painting in Wikidata I also noticed the absence
of
information related to the size/dimension of the Artwork. The
information is
most of the time present in Cultural Heritage data. Is it something
Wikidata is
interested in or has it been omitted intentionally?
We don't support units of measurement yet, and without these, it's not really possible to give the dimension. We hope to finally change this over the next couple of months.
-Then the last question is about values in different languages for a
given
property. How do you indicate the language in Wikidata? Are you using a
xml:lang
attribute or something similar?
xml:lang would be used in the XML/RDF export (and lang in the HTML rendering). Internally, the language would be a string associated with the "language" key in a JSON structure. But neither fact is really relevant to the data model on an abstract level.
Most properties (most data types) are language agnostic. Quantities, strings, time values, etc, do not have any notion of language. The only datatype for properties that supports a language code is "monolingual text" (a pair of language code + text). This data type is used sparingly, since usually, the need for internationalized naming and description is covered by the labels, descriptions, and aliases associated with a data item.
Labels, descriptions, and aliases are not "properties" about which (sourced) statements would be made in the context of the data item. Instead, they are editorial attributes. They are fully internationalized, and intended to enable display, disambiguation, and search in as many languages as possible.
For example, Q219831 has labels (and descriptions) in many languages:
- nl: De Nachtwacht (schilderij van Rembrandt van Rijn)
- de: Die Nachtwache (Gemälde von Rembrandt)
- en: The Night Watch (painting by Rembrandt van Rijn)
- ru: Ночной дозор (картина)
So, when the painting is referenced elsewhere, a label (and description) can be shown in the user's language. Internationalized statements/properties are rarely needed.
-- Daniel Kinzler Senior Software Developer
Wikimedia Deutschland Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Hoi, I do not follow ... A quote is exactly that ... it is not a place where things that do not fit neatly are to be dumped.
What you need to consider is what the value is of mono-lingual text.. A motto as used on a shield makes sense.. a quote maybe, the original name of something surely... but beyond that ...
Thanks, GerardM
On 1 April 2015 at 22:45, Joe Filceolaire filceolaire@gmail.com wrote:
We do have the "Quote" property (P1683) which has monolingual text datatype. You could certainly put free text in the value for this property and add this to a reference or even use it as a qualifier.
Joe
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Daniel Kinzler < daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de> wrote:
Am 01.04.2015 um 09:20 schrieb Valentine Charles:
-Cultural Heritage data have most of the time a description property
where you
will find lot of relevant free text information. The structured
property but
inside you will find mostly free- text. I couldn't find a similar
property in
Wikidata but there is something similar in Dbpedia. Is it something you
are
planning to introduce or have you made the decision to exclude any
free-text
infromation from Wikidata for now.
Free-form text is not machine-readable. Coding semi-structured information is very common in archives etc, but makes the data very hard to export, transform, and query. Free text fields should be used only for things that are actually text, such as a state motto.
I think the need to encode things in free-form fields arose mostly from overly rigid data schemas. If there's no dedicated field for something, just stuff the info into the text field. Such fields turn into kitchen sinks that contain a hodge podge of different kinds of information.
With Wikidata, there should be no need for this, since you can just create and use any properties you might be missing. That does mean though that wile importing, you have to somehow extract the relevant information from the free text. That effort has to be done at some point, if the data is to become machine readable.
-While I was looking for painting in Wikidata I also noticed the
absence of
information related to the size/dimension of the Artwork. The
information is
most of the time present in Cultural Heritage data. Is it something
Wikidata is
interested in or has it been omitted intentionally?
We don't support units of measurement yet, and without these, it's not really possible to give the dimension. We hope to finally change this over the next couple of months.
-Then the last question is about values in different languages for a
given
property. How do you indicate the language in Wikidata? Are you using a
xml:lang
attribute or something similar?
xml:lang would be used in the XML/RDF export (and lang in the HTML rendering). Internally, the language would be a string associated with the "language" key in a JSON structure. But neither fact is really relevant to the data model on an abstract level.
Most properties (most data types) are language agnostic. Quantities, strings, time values, etc, do not have any notion of language. The only datatype for properties that supports a language code is "monolingual text" (a pair of language code + text). This data type is used sparingly, since usually, the need for internationalized naming and description is covered by the labels, descriptions, and aliases associated with a data item.
Labels, descriptions, and aliases are not "properties" about which (sourced) statements would be made in the context of the data item. Instead, they are editorial attributes. They are fully internationalized, and intended to enable display, disambiguation, and search in as many languages as possible.
For example, Q219831 has labels (and descriptions) in many languages:
- nl: De Nachtwacht (schilderij van Rembrandt van Rijn)
- de: Die Nachtwache (Gemälde von Rembrandt)
- en: The Night Watch (painting by Rembrandt van Rijn)
- ru: Ночной дозор (картина)
So, when the painting is referenced elsewhere, a label (and description) can be shown in the user's language. Internationalized statements/properties are rarely needed.
-- Daniel Kinzler Senior Software Developer
Wikimedia Deutschland Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Hi Valentine,
The long, chatty, free-text descriptive element of Wikidata is really Wikipedia ;-)
There is a small free-text field in Wikidata for each item (the description, one per language) but it's intended for a short identifying/disambiguating note: "1887 self-portrait by XYZ"; "Danish artist and historian, 1912-1974", etc.
Dimensions are, I believe, being worked on.
Andrew.
On 1 April 2015 at 08:20, Valentine Charles valentinec89@gmail.com wrote:
Dear all,
Thank you all for your answers. I will have a look to the different projects you have mentioned in your emails. In the meantime I have spent a bit more time exploring Wikidata for paintings as one of our project currently focuses on Art and comparing it with the Europeana Data Model in terms of properties. I have noticed the absence of some properties and I would be curious whether it is just an overlook or whether there is a real intention behind the omission:
-Cultural Heritage data have most of the time a description property where you will find lot of relevant free text information. The structured property but inside you will find mostly free- text. I couldn't find a similar property in Wikidata but there is something similar in Dbpedia. Is it something you are planning to introduce or have you made the decision to exclude any free-text infromation from Wikidata for now.
-While I was looking for painting in Wikidata I also noticed the absence of information related to the size/dimension of the Artwork. The information is most of the time present in Cultural Heritage data. Is it something Wikidata is interested in or has it been omitted intentionally?
-Then the last question is about values in different languages for a given property. How do you indicate the language in Wikidata? Are you using a xml:lang attribute or something similar?
Thank you very much for your help
Best,
Valentine
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Dear all,
Thank you for your answers. I do understand indeed that the purpose if Wikidata is to have structured data but coming from the GLAMs sector I was wondering how our data could look like in Wikidata. In fact it could be an interesting exercise to evaluate from the generic description how much information could have been structured in a dedicated property. This would be valid for Wikidata but also all the data standards including the Europeana Data Model. Regarding the dimensions, it is great to know that it is on your plate. I was wondering is there a place where we can see the classes/properties that are in the pipeline and participate to discussions around them?
Best, Valentine
2015-04-01 23:51 GMT+02:00 Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk:
Hi Valentine,
The long, chatty, free-text descriptive element of Wikidata is really Wikipedia ;-)
There is a small free-text field in Wikidata for each item (the description, one per language) but it's intended for a short identifying/disambiguating note: "1887 self-portrait by XYZ"; "Danish artist and historian, 1912-1974", etc.
Dimensions are, I believe, being worked on.
Andrew.
On 1 April 2015 at 08:20, Valentine Charles valentinec89@gmail.com wrote:
Dear all,
Thank you all for your answers. I will have a look to the different
projects
you have mentioned in your emails. In the meantime I have spent a bit more time exploring Wikidata for paintings as one of our project currently focuses on Art and comparing it with the Europeana Data Model in terms of properties. I have noticed the absence of some properties and I would be curious whether it is just an overlook or whether there is a real intention behind the omission:
-Cultural Heritage data have most of the time a description property
where
you will find lot of relevant free text information. The structured
property
but inside you will find mostly free- text. I couldn't find a similar property in Wikidata but there is something similar in Dbpedia. Is it something you are planning to introduce or have you made the decision to exclude any free-text infromation from Wikidata for now.
-While I was looking for painting in Wikidata I also noticed the absence
of
information related to the size/dimension of the Artwork. The
information is
most of the time present in Cultural Heritage data. Is it something
Wikidata
is interested in or has it been omitted intentionally?
-Then the last question is about values in different languages for a
given
property. How do you indicate the language in Wikidata? Are you using a xml:lang attribute or something similar?
Thank you very much for your help
Best,
Valentine
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
--
- Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Hi, the place to discuss property proposal is https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal and its subpages. We might need more people involved in this area.
Classes are regular items in wikidata and as such can be freely create. They are, as regular items, subject to the notability policy : https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Notability to look at before creating items. Every article in WIkipedias can potentially be a class then, which means wa have a fair amount of preexistant classes ready to be used :)
2015-04-02 9:03 GMT+02:00 Valentine Charles valentinec89@gmail.com:
Dear all,
Thank you for your answers. I do understand indeed that the purpose if Wikidata is to have structured data but coming from the GLAMs sector I was wondering how our data could look like in Wikidata. In fact it could be an interesting exercise to evaluate from the generic description how much information could have been structured in a dedicated property. This would be valid for Wikidata but also all the data standards including the Europeana Data Model. Regarding the dimensions, it is great to know that it is on your plate. I was wondering is there a place where we can see the classes/properties that are in the pipeline and participate to discussions around them?
Best, Valentine
2015-04-01 23:51 GMT+02:00 Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk:
Hi Valentine,
The long, chatty, free-text descriptive element of Wikidata is really Wikipedia ;-)
There is a small free-text field in Wikidata for each item (the description, one per language) but it's intended for a short identifying/disambiguating note: "1887 self-portrait by XYZ"; "Danish artist and historian, 1912-1974", etc.
Dimensions are, I believe, being worked on.
Andrew.
On 1 April 2015 at 08:20, Valentine Charles valentinec89@gmail.com wrote:
Dear all,
Thank you all for your answers. I will have a look to the different
projects
you have mentioned in your emails. In the meantime I have spent a bit more time exploring Wikidata for paintings as one of our project currently focuses on Art and comparing
it
with the Europeana Data Model in terms of properties. I have noticed the absence of some properties and I would be curious whether it is just an overlook or whether there is a real intention behind the omission:
-Cultural Heritage data have most of the time a description property
where
you will find lot of relevant free text information. The structured
property
but inside you will find mostly free- text. I couldn't find a similar property in Wikidata but there is something similar in Dbpedia. Is it something you are planning to introduce or have you made the decision to exclude any free-text infromation from Wikidata for now.
-While I was looking for painting in Wikidata I also noticed the
absence of
information related to the size/dimension of the Artwork. The
information is
most of the time present in Cultural Heritage data. Is it something
Wikidata
is interested in or has it been omitted intentionally?
-Then the last question is about values in different languages for a
given
property. How do you indicate the language in Wikidata? Are you using a xml:lang attribute or something similar?
Thank you very much for your help
Best,
Valentine
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
--
- Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Am 02.04.2015 um 09:03 schrieb Valentine Charles:
Regarding the dimensions, it is great to know that it is on your plate. I was wondering is there a place where we can see the classes/properties that are in the pipeline and participate to discussions around them?
Note however that for dimensions, the issue is not creating the property, but teaching the software about units, so that such a property would make sense. A *lot* of properties are waiting for unit support: length, height, speed, distance, and many more are blocked on units.
Il 02/04/2015 13:51, Daniel Kinzler ha scritto:
Am 02.04.2015 um 09:03 schrieb Valentine Charles:
Regarding the dimensions, it is great to know that it is on your plate. I was wondering is there a place where we can see the classes/properties that are in the pipeline and participate to discussions around them?
Note however that for dimensions, the issue is not creating the property, but teaching the software about units, so that such a property would make sense. A *lot* of properties are waiting for unit support: length, height, speed, distance, and many more are blocked on units.
See Wikidata:Property proposal/Pending/2 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Pending/2 for a list.
The more I think about this issue, the more I think we need a separate animal altogether that sits between Wikidata and Wikipedia (or alongside it somehow) and that is a quick-ref "simple mobile version" that acts as a go-between to image data on Commons (or any other WM project). Right now Wikipedia is still the main gateway for all related projects even though you can link those WM projects as extra "sitelinks" on the Wikidata item. We have seen with the problems regarding the label for the mobile interface that the current label falls short of what it needs to do, and the Wikipedia first sentence or paragraph is often not a viable option (too "chatty")
I am very satisified with all of the UI changes that Wikidata has implemented so far, but I don't think we should make Wikidata the definitive UI for mobile traffic, or for external websites. As more and more websites (such as GLAM's) link out to Wikipedia, we should offer them a way to tap into the wealth of info on Wikidata, especially since Wikidata is all about long-tail subjects at a higher granularity of precision, which is the same segment of information dissemination where most GLAMs reside.
It could be a "Reasonator on steroids"
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
Hi Valentine,
The long, chatty, free-text descriptive element of Wikidata is really Wikipedia ;-)
There is a small free-text field in Wikidata for each item (the description, one per language) but it's intended for a short identifying/disambiguating note: "1887 self-portrait by XYZ"; "Danish artist and historian, 1912-1974", etc.
Dimensions are, I believe, being worked on.
Andrew.
On 1 April 2015 at 08:20, Valentine Charles valentinec89@gmail.com wrote:
Dear all,
Thank you all for your answers. I will have a look to the different
projects
you have mentioned in your emails. In the meantime I have spent a bit more time exploring Wikidata for paintings as one of our project currently focuses on Art and comparing it with the Europeana Data Model in terms of properties. I have noticed the absence of some properties and I would be curious whether it is just an overlook or whether there is a real intention behind the omission:
-Cultural Heritage data have most of the time a description property
where
you will find lot of relevant free text information. The structured
property
but inside you will find mostly free- text. I couldn't find a similar property in Wikidata but there is something similar in Dbpedia. Is it something you are planning to introduce or have you made the decision to exclude any free-text infromation from Wikidata for now.
-While I was looking for painting in Wikidata I also noticed the absence
of
information related to the size/dimension of the Artwork. The
information is
most of the time present in Cultural Heritage data. Is it something
Wikidata
is interested in or has it been omitted intentionally?
-Then the last question is about values in different languages for a
given
property. How do you indicate the language in Wikidata? Are you using a xml:lang attribute or something similar?
Thank you very much for your help
Best,
Valentine
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
--
- Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Hello,
Coming back on my previous email, I do indeed understand that Wikidata wants structured data as much as possible. But you might have free-text information that might not fit in a given property or even have meaning only as a free -text description (abstract, quotes..).GLAM's are for instance very keen on using DBpedia because of some long free-text descriptions that are more readable and friendly than "dry" metadata for users applications. I guess GLAMs will continue to use DBpedia for this purpose if Wikidata doesn't offer it.
Best, Valentine
2015-04-01 23:51 GMT+02:00 Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk:
Hi Valentine,
The long, chatty, free-text descriptive element of Wikidata is really Wikipedia ;-)
There is a small free-text field in Wikidata for each item (the description, one per language) but it's intended for a short identifying/disambiguating note: "1887 self-portrait by XYZ"; "Danish artist and historian, 1912-1974", etc.
Dimensions are, I believe, being worked on.
Andrew.
On 1 April 2015 at 08:20, Valentine Charles valentinec89@gmail.com wrote:
Dear all,
Thank you all for your answers. I will have a look to the different
projects
you have mentioned in your emails. In the meantime I have spent a bit more time exploring Wikidata for paintings as one of our project currently focuses on Art and comparing it with the Europeana Data Model in terms of properties. I have noticed the absence of some properties and I would be curious whether it is just an overlook or whether there is a real intention behind the omission:
-Cultural Heritage data have most of the time a description property
where
you will find lot of relevant free text information. The structured
property
but inside you will find mostly free- text. I couldn't find a similar property in Wikidata but there is something similar in Dbpedia. Is it something you are planning to introduce or have you made the decision to exclude any free-text infromation from Wikidata for now.
-While I was looking for painting in Wikidata I also noticed the absence
of
information related to the size/dimension of the Artwork. The
information is
most of the time present in Cultural Heritage data. Is it something
Wikidata
is interested in or has it been omitted intentionally?
-Then the last question is about values in different languages for a
given
property. How do you indicate the language in Wikidata? Are you using a xml:lang attribute or something similar?
Thank you very much for your help
Best,
Valentine
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
--
- Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
For things that actually *are* free text, and not terribly long, a monolongual (or, in the future, multilingual) text property could be used. "quote" already exists, "abstract" could be added, pending community discussion. Length limitations can be adjusted if need be.
What I was warning against is continuing the misuse of text fields for semi-structured or even fully structured data that I have often seen in GLAM meta-data. That kind of thing should not be copied to Wikidata.
Am 04.04.2015 um 14:41 schrieb Valentine Charles:
Hello,
Coming back on my previous email, I do indeed understand that Wikidata wants structured data as much as possible. But you might have free-text information that might not fit in a given property or even have meaning only as a free -text description (abstract, quotes..).GLAM's are for instance very keen on using DBpedia because of some long free-text descriptions that are more readable and friendly than "dry" metadata for users applications. I guess GLAMs will continue to use DBpedia for this purpose if Wikidata doesn't offer it.
I think there is a case for including this structured data disguised as text but it should go in the reference for a statement On 4 Apr 2015 18:07, "Daniel Kinzler" daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de wrote:
For things that actually *are* free text, and not terribly long, a monolongual (or, in the future, multilingual) text property could be used. "quote" already exists, "abstract" could be added, pending community discussion. Length limitations can be adjusted if need be.
What I was warning against is continuing the misuse of text fields for semi-structured or even fully structured data that I have often seen in GLAM meta-data. That kind of thing should not be copied to Wikidata.
Am 04.04.2015 um 14:41 schrieb Valentine Charles:
Hello,
Coming back on my previous email, I do indeed understand that Wikidata
wants
structured data as much as possible. But you might have free-text
information
that might not fit in a given property or even have meaning only as a
free -text
description (abstract, quotes..).GLAM's are for instance very keen on
using
DBpedia because of some long free-text descriptions that are more
readable and
friendly than "dry" metadata for users applications. I guess GLAMs will
continue
to use DBpedia for this purpose if Wikidata doesn't offer it.
-- Daniel Kinzler Senior Software Developer
Wikimedia Deutschland Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Hi!
For things that actually *are* free text, and not terribly long, a monolongual (or, in the future, multilingual) text property could be used. "quote" already exists, "abstract" could be added, pending community discussion. Length limitations can be adjusted if need be.
Maybe if the need of bigger texts arises we can have separate field type? Right now the storage model is not very good for storing texts of non-negligible sizes, especially multilingual ones (x800 languages). OTOH, we have a type that allows us to use multimedia by integrating with Commons. So maybe the same idea with using some other wiki - quotes? sources? for bigger text snippets would work too? Just brainstorming here :)
What I was warning against is continuing the misuse of text fields for semi-structured or even fully structured data that I have often seen in GLAM meta-data. That kind of thing should not be copied to Wikidata.
Right. I think it may be useful here to understand which kinds of text we're talking about which can't be structured but are big enough to cause concern. I.e. if it's quotes - we already have wikiquote, right? Etc.
Hello,
I wanted to get an overview of all the properties used boy the instance Painting (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3305213) for further mapping with the Europeana Data Model. My initial thought that I would find a representative list at http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Item_structure but in fact I have found much more properties used in association with painting. So I was wondering whether it would be a good idea to update the template mentioned above with the additional properties. I think it would be really interesting for GLAMs to have access to to representative templates listing all the properties used for a given type of objects. It would help them to understand Wikidata and to compare it with their own data. I think it would also help mappings activities. I on behalf of Europeana would be happy to help in this task and also facilitate the discussions with GLAMs around Wikidata.
What do you think?
Best wishes, Valentine
2015-04-04 23:45 GMT+02:00 Stas Malyshev smalyshev@wikimedia.org:
Hi!
For things that actually *are* free text, and not terribly long, a
monolongual
(or, in the future, multilingual) text property could be used. "quote"
already
exists, "abstract" could be added, pending community discussion. Length limitations can be adjusted if need be.
Maybe if the need of bigger texts arises we can have separate field type? Right now the storage model is not very good for storing texts of non-negligible sizes, especially multilingual ones (x800 languages). OTOH, we have a type that allows us to use multimedia by integrating with Commons. So maybe the same idea with using some other wiki - quotes? sources? for bigger text snippets would work too? Just brainstorming here :)
What I was warning against is continuing the misuse of text fields for semi-structured or even fully structured data that I have often seen in
GLAM
meta-data. That kind of thing should not be copied to Wikidata.
Right. I think it may be useful here to understand which kinds of text we're talking about which can't be structured but are big enough to cause concern. I.e. if it's quotes - we already have wikiquote, right? Etc.
-- Stas Malyshev smalyshev@wikimedia.org
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
For paintings you can better look here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_sum_of_all_paintings
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Valentine Charles valentinec89@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I wanted to get an overview of all the properties used boy the instance Painting (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3305213) for further mapping with the Europeana Data Model. My initial thought that I would find a representative list at http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Item_structure but in fact I have found much more properties used in association with painting. So I was wondering whether it would be a good idea to update the template mentioned above with the additional properties. I think it would be really interesting for GLAMs to have access to to representative templates listing all the properties used for a given type of objects. It would help them to understand Wikidata and to compare it with their own data. I think it would also help mappings activities. I on behalf of Europeana would be happy to help in this task and also facilitate the discussions with GLAMs around Wikidata.
What do you think?
Best wishes, Valentine
2015-04-04 23:45 GMT+02:00 Stas Malyshev smalyshev@wikimedia.org:
Hi!
For things that actually *are* free text, and not terribly long, a
monolongual
(or, in the future, multilingual) text property could be used. "quote"
already
exists, "abstract" could be added, pending community discussion. Length limitations can be adjusted if need be.
Maybe if the need of bigger texts arises we can have separate field type? Right now the storage model is not very good for storing texts of non-negligible sizes, especially multilingual ones (x800 languages). OTOH, we have a type that allows us to use multimedia by integrating with Commons. So maybe the same idea with using some other wiki - quotes? sources? for bigger text snippets would work too? Just brainstorming here :)
What I was warning against is continuing the misuse of text fields for semi-structured or even fully structured data that I have often seen in
GLAM
meta-data. That kind of thing should not be copied to Wikidata.
Right. I think it may be useful here to understand which kinds of text we're talking about which can't be structured but are big enough to cause concern. I.e. if it's quotes - we already have wikiquote, right? Etc.
-- Stas Malyshev smalyshev@wikimedia.org
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
I'm confused by your use of the term "template" here. In the context of MediaWiki, "template" refers to a bit of wikitext that can be parametrized and re-used, e.g. to make info-boxes.
If I understand correctly, what you mean is a kind of schema saying which properties can and should be present on items of which type. The Wikibase software has no concept of such schemas, on Wikidata such schemas are defined and enforced by convention only.
For the sake of clarity, I suggest to use the term "schema convention" for this, to avoid confusion with wikitext templates.
Am 07.04.2015 um 13:12 schrieb Valentine Charles:
Hello,
I wanted to get an overview of all the properties used boy the instance Painting (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3305213) for further mapping with the Europeana Data Model. My initial thought that I would find a representative list at http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Item_structure but in fact I have found much more properties used in association with painting. So I was wondering whether it would be a good idea to update the template mentioned above with the additional properties. I think it would be really interesting for GLAMs to have access to to representative templates listing all the properties used for a given type of objects. It would help them to understand Wikidata and to compare it with their own data. I think it would also help mappings activities. I on behalf of Europeana would be happy to help in this task and also facilitate the discussions with GLAMs around Wikidata.
What do you think?
Best wishes, Valentine
2015-04-04 23:45 GMT+02:00 Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@wikimedia.org mailto:smalyshev@wikimedia.org>:
Hi! > For things that actually *are* free text, and not terribly long, a monolongual > (or, in the future, multilingual) text property could be used. "quote" already > exists, "abstract" could be added, pending community discussion. Length > limitations can be adjusted if need be. Maybe if the need of bigger texts arises we can have separate field type? Right now the storage model is not very good for storing texts of non-negligible sizes, especially multilingual ones (x800 languages). OTOH, we have a type that allows us to use multimedia by integrating with Commons. So maybe the same idea with using some other wiki - quotes? sources? for bigger text snippets would work too? Just brainstorming here :) > What I was warning against is continuing the misuse of text fields for > semi-structured or even fully structured data that I have often seen in GLAM > meta-data. That kind of thing should not be copied to Wikidata. Right. I think it may be useful here to understand which kinds of text we're talking about which can't be structured but are big enough to cause concern. I.e. if it's quotes - we already have wikiquote, right? Etc. -- Stas Malyshev smalyshev@wikimedia.org <mailto:smalyshev@wikimedia.org> _______________________________________________ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Hello,
Yes I might not use the right term here especially if you use it already in a different context. What I mean is that it would be good to have list of properties that can be used for a given thing. For instance if you want to describe a painting here the list of properties you can use. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_sum_of_all_paintings points to a page listing some properties that can be used for painting but not all of them.
Best, Valentine
2015-04-07 15:15 GMT+02:00 Daniel Kinzler daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de:
I'm confused by your use of the term "template" here. In the context of MediaWiki, "template" refers to a bit of wikitext that can be parametrized and re-used, e.g. to make info-boxes.
If I understand correctly, what you mean is a kind of schema saying which properties can and should be present on items of which type. The Wikibase software has no concept of such schemas, on Wikidata such schemas are defined and enforced by convention only.
For the sake of clarity, I suggest to use the term "schema convention" for this, to avoid confusion with wikitext templates.
Am 07.04.2015 um 13:12 schrieb Valentine Charles:
Hello,
I wanted to get an overview of all the properties used boy the instance
Painting
(https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3305213) for further mapping with the
Europeana
Data Model. My initial thought that I would find a representative list at
http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Item_structure
but in fact I have found much more properties used in association with
painting.
So I was wondering whether it would be a good idea to update the template mentioned above with the additional properties. I think it would be really interesting for GLAMs to have access to to representative templates listing all the properties used for a given
type of
objects. It would help them to understand Wikidata and to compare it
with their
own data. I think it would also help mappings activities. I on behalf of Europeana would be happy to help in this task and also facilitate the discussions with GLAMs around Wikidata.
What do you think?
Best wishes, Valentine
2015-04-04 23:45 GMT+02:00 Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@wikimedia.org mailto:smalyshev@wikimedia.org>:
Hi! > For things that actually *are* free text, and not terribly long, a
monolongual
> (or, in the future, multilingual) text property could be used.
"quote" already
> exists, "abstract" could be added, pending community discussion.
Length
> limitations can be adjusted if need be. Maybe if the need of bigger texts arises we can have separate field type? Right now the storage model is not very good for storing texts
of
non-negligible sizes, especially multilingual ones (x800 languages). OTOH, we have a type that allows us to use multimedia by integrating with Commons. So maybe the same idea with using some other wiki - quotes? sources? for bigger text snippets would work too? Just brainstorming here :) > What I was warning against is continuing the misuse of text fields
for
> semi-structured or even fully structured data that I have often
seen in GLAM
> meta-data. That kind of thing should not be copied to Wikidata. Right. I think it may be useful here to understand which kinds of
text
we're talking about which can't be structured but are big enough to cause concern. I.e. if it's quotes - we already have wikiquote,
right? Etc.
-- Stas Malyshev smalyshev@wikimedia.org <mailto:smalyshev@wikimedia.org> _______________________________________________ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:
Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
-- Daniel Kinzler Senior Software Developer
Wikimedia Deutschland Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Well probably not, as it is an ongoing project. You can post questions there however on the talk page that are more likely to generate useful answers for you than this list. Most Wikidatans involved there don't speak English as a first language and I don't think they are frequent readers of this mailing list. For specific questions on properties for paintings, I believe you can best look at the Wikidata items for the Mona Lisa and Vermeer's "Milkmaid" aka "The Yellow Kitchenmaid"
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Valentine Charles valentinec89@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Yes I might not use the right term here especially if you use it already in a different context. What I mean is that it would be good to have list of properties that can be used for a given thing. For instance if you want to describe a painting here the list of properties you can use. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_sum_of_all_paintings points to a page listing some properties that can be used for painting but not all of them.
Best, Valentine
2015-04-07 15:15 GMT+02:00 Daniel Kinzler daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de:
I'm confused by your use of the term "template" here. In the context of MediaWiki, "template" refers to a bit of wikitext that can be parametrized and re-used, e.g. to make info-boxes.
If I understand correctly, what you mean is a kind of schema saying which properties can and should be present on items of which type. The Wikibase software has no concept of such schemas, on Wikidata such schemas are defined and enforced by convention only.
For the sake of clarity, I suggest to use the term "schema convention" for this, to avoid confusion with wikitext templates.
Am 07.04.2015 um 13:12 schrieb Valentine Charles:
Hello,
I wanted to get an overview of all the properties used boy the instance
Painting
(https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3305213) for further mapping with the
Europeana
Data Model. My initial thought that I would find a representative list at
http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Item_structure
but in fact I have found much more properties used in association with
painting.
So I was wondering whether it would be a good idea to update the
template
mentioned above with the additional properties. I think it would be really interesting for GLAMs to have access to to representative templates listing all the properties used for a given
type of
objects. It would help them to understand Wikidata and to compare it
with their
own data. I think it would also help mappings activities. I on behalf of Europeana would be happy to help in this task and also facilitate the discussions with GLAMs around Wikidata.
What do you think?
Best wishes, Valentine
2015-04-04 23:45 GMT+02:00 Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@wikimedia.org mailto:smalyshev@wikimedia.org>:
Hi! > For things that actually *are* free text, and not terribly long,
a monolongual
> (or, in the future, multilingual) text property could be used.
"quote" already
> exists, "abstract" could be added, pending community discussion.
Length
> limitations can be adjusted if need be. Maybe if the need of bigger texts arises we can have separate field type? Right now the storage model is not very good for storing
texts of
non-negligible sizes, especially multilingual ones (x800 languages). OTOH, we have a type that allows us to use multimedia by integrating with Commons. So maybe the same idea with using some other wiki - quotes? sources? for bigger text snippets would work too? Just brainstorming here :) > What I was warning against is continuing the misuse of text
fields for
> semi-structured or even fully structured data that I have often
seen in GLAM
> meta-data. That kind of thing should not be copied to Wikidata. Right. I think it may be useful here to understand which kinds of
text
we're talking about which can't be structured but are big enough to cause concern. I.e. if it's quotes - we already have wikiquote,
right? Etc.
-- Stas Malyshev smalyshev@wikimedia.org <mailto:smalyshev@wikimedia.org> _______________________________________________ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:
Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
-- Daniel Kinzler Senior Software Developer
Wikimedia Deutschland Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Il 07/04/2015 15:21, Valentine Charles ha scritto:
Hello,
Yes I might not use the right term here especially if you use it already in a different context. What I mean is that it would be good to have list of properties that can be used for a given thing. For instance if you want to describe a painting here the list of properties you can use.
User:Magnus Manske/missing props.js https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Magnus_Manske/missing_props.js has some lists for that (look for "Potential properties").
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_sum_of_all_paintings points to a page listing some properties that can be used for painting but not all of them.
Best, Valentine
Hi,
Is the 'template' word so bad? Paraphrasing Daniel's definition of the MediaWiki template, one could see a 'WikiData template' as a set of of properties that can be re-used, e.g. to make create statements about a certain class. (the 'parameter' bit could be understood as adding or removing properties from the templates, e.g. using twice a property or adding a new one when it's needed).
What we're after seems to exist already, described as 'item structure': http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Item_structure Or 'list of properties': https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:List_of_properties/Works
'schema convention' matches the idea, but the wording may be too abstract. I come from a community that calls such things 'description set profiles'; such expressions have a hard time being adopted in less technical communities...
About the text values. A big +1 to Daniel at not trying to represent semi-structured text, which is meant to piggyback structured data in legacy systems that can't handle it. The matter is rather the availability in Wikidata of text-like summaries like the dbpedia-owl:abstract at http://dbpedia.org/page/Castle . Having things like this together with the Wikidata data would be great for data-reusers like us, instead of having to fetch it from elsewhere!
Antoine --- Antoine Isaac R&D Manager, Europeana.eu
On 4/7/15 3:21 PM, Valentine Charles wrote:
Hello,
Yes I might not use the right term here especially if you use it already in a different context. What I mean is that it would be good to have list of properties that can be used for a given thing. For instance if you want to describe a painting here the list of properties you can use. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_sum_of_all_paintings points to a page listing some properties that can be used for painting but not all of them.
Best, Valentine
2015-04-07 15:15 GMT+02:00 Daniel Kinzler <daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de mailto:daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de>:
I'm confused by your use of the term "template" here. In the context of MediaWiki, "template" refers to a bit of wikitext that can be parametrized and re-used, e.g. to make info-boxes. If I understand correctly, what you mean is a kind of schema saying which properties can and should be present on items of which type. The Wikibase software has no concept of such schemas, on Wikidata such schemas are defined and enforced by convention only. For the sake of clarity, I suggest to use the term "schema convention" for this, to avoid confusion with wikitext templates. Am 07.04.2015 um 13:12 schrieb Valentine Charles: > Hello, > > I wanted to get an overview of all the properties used boy the instance Painting > (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3305213) for further mapping with the Europeana > Data Model. > My initial thought that I would find a representative list > athttp://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Item_structure > but in fact I have found much more properties used in association with painting. > So I was wondering whether it would be a good idea to update the template > mentioned above with the additional properties. > I think it would be really interesting for GLAMs to have access to to > representative templates listing all the properties used for a given type of > objects. It would help them to understand Wikidata and to compare it with their > own data. I think it would also help mappings activities. I on behalf of > Europeana would be happy to help in this task and also facilitate the > discussions with GLAMs around Wikidata. > > What do you think? > > Best wishes, > Valentine > > 2015-04-04 23:45 GMT+02:00 Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@wikimedia.org <mailto:smalyshev@wikimedia.org> > <mailto:smalyshev@wikimedia.org <mailto:smalyshev@wikimedia.org>>>: > > Hi! > > > For things that actually *are* free text, and not terribly long, a monolongual > > (or, in the future, multilingual) text property could be used. "quote" already > > exists, "abstract" could be added, pending community discussion. Length > > limitations can be adjusted if need be. > > Maybe if the need of bigger texts arises we can have separate field > type? Right now the storage model is not very good for storing texts of > non-negligible sizes, especially multilingual ones (x800 languages). > OTOH, we have a type that allows us to use multimedia by integrating > with Commons. So maybe the same idea with using some other wiki - > quotes? sources? for bigger text snippets would work too? Just > brainstorming here :) > > > What I was warning against is continuing the misuse of text fields for > > semi-structured or even fully structured data that I have often seen in GLAM > > meta-data. That kind of thing should not be copied to Wikidata. > > Right. I think it may be useful here to understand which kinds of text > we're talking about which can't be structured but are big enough to > cause concern. I.e. if it's quotes - we already have wikiquote, right? Etc. > > --
Il 11/04/2015 13:29, Antoine Isaac ha scritto:
Hi,
Is the 'template' word so bad? Paraphrasing Daniel's definition of the MediaWiki template, one could see a 'WikiData template' as a set of of properties that can be re-used, e.g. to make create statements about a certain class. (the 'parameter' bit could be understood as adding or removing properties from the templates, e.g. using twice a property or adding a new one when it's needed).
What we're after seems to exist already, described as 'item structure': http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Item_structure
Or 'list of properties': https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:List_of_properties/Works
'schema convention' matches the idea, but the wording may be too abstract. I come from a community that calls such things 'description set profiles'; such expressions have a hard time being adopted in less technical communities...
About the text values. A big +1 to Daniel at not trying to represent semi-structured text, which is meant to piggyback structured data in legacy systems that can't handle it. The matter is rather the availability in Wikidata of text-like summaries like the dbpedia-owl:abstract at http://dbpedia.org/page/Castle . Having things like this together with the Wikidata data would be great for data-reusers like us, instead of having to fetch it from elsewhere!
There's TextExtracts https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:TextExtracts for that: example https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&prop=extracts&exsentences=1&explaintext=1&titles=Castle
Antoine --- Antoine Isaac R&D Manager, Europeana.eu
On 4/18/15 5:48 PM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
Il 11/04/2015 13:29, Antoine Isaac ha scritto:
Hi,
Is the 'template' word so bad? Paraphrasing Daniel's definition of the MediaWiki template, one could see a 'WikiData template' as a set of of properties that can be re-used, e.g. to make create statements about a certain class. (the 'parameter' bit could be understood as adding or removing properties from the templates, e.g. using twice a property or adding a new one when it's needed).
What we're after seems to exist already, described as 'item structure': http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Item_structure Or 'list of properties': https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:List_of_properties/Works
'schema convention' matches the idea, but the wording may be too abstract. I come from a community that calls such things 'description set profiles'; such expressions have a hard time being adopted in less technical communities...
About the text values. A big +1 to Daniel at not trying to represent semi-structured text, which is meant to piggyback structured data in legacy systems that can't handle it. The matter is rather the availability in Wikidata of text-like summaries like the dbpedia-owl:abstract at http://dbpedia.org/page/Castle . Having things like this together with the Wikidata data would be great for data-reusers like us, instead of having to fetch it from elsewhere!
There's TextExtracts https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:TextExtracts for that: example https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&prop=extracts&exsentences=1&explaintext=1&titles=Castle
Thanks! Unfortunately this is not in the data itself. One has to know that there is an API, and then call it.
Actually there seems to be such similar 'description' in the data at wikidata: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q23413 says "type of fortified structure built in Europe and the Middle East during the Middle Ages by nobility" It matches partly the rdfs:comment at http://dbpedia.org/page/Castle and the output of the TextExtract. It's a bit mysterious why it's not been exactly entered as on the Wikipedia page (and thus DBpedia) but well, I guess it meets the original question: while the Wikidata page doesn't say it's a statement, it is accessible through the API and the SPARQL endpoint(s).
Best,
Antoine
Valentine Charles, 07/04/2015 15:21:
What I mean is that it would be good to have list of properties that can be used for a given thing.
Autocompletion often guesses well, but you can set a non-mandatory constraint: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Category:Properties_with_constraints Really, in this thread I still have no idea what problem you're trying to solve in the first place. :) Could you make a specific example and what you're finding hard to do?
Nemo
Il 04/04/2015 23:45, Stas Malyshev ha scritto:
Hi!
For things that actually *are* free text, and not terribly long, a monolongual (or, in the future, multilingual) text property could be used. "quote" already exists, "abstract" could be added, pending community discussion. Length limitations can be adjusted if need be.
Maybe if the need of bigger texts arises we can have separate field type? Right now the storage model is not very good for storing texts of non-negligible sizes, especially multilingual ones (x800 languages). OTOH, we have a type that allows us to use multimedia by integrating with Commons. So maybe the same idea with using some other wiki - quotes? sources? for bigger text snippets would work too? Just brainstorming here :)
<spam>Structured Wikiquote https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Structured_Wikiquote</spam>
What I was warning against is continuing the misuse of text fields for semi-structured or even fully structured data that I have often seen in GLAM meta-data. That kind of thing should not be copied to Wikidata.
Right. I think it may be useful here to understand which kinds of text we're talking about which can't be structured but are big enough to cause concern. I.e. if it's quotes - we already have wikiquote, right? Etc.