At 09:20 09/04/2012, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
First things first ... that is getting Wikidata to work for its
initial purposes. Automated updates from elsewhere are nice but
introduce a complete new set of issues including reliability.
I agree fist thing first. It seens that in a network centric world
the holistic aspects should come first. New projects necessarily come
in a context they depend on and they are networked with. They have to
be in osmosis with their context; and its possible futures, and
therefore designed for it. Foreign (whiich do not have necessarily to
be automated) batch updtes are part of their environment as well as
users individual updates. The interest of a networked datawikis
approach is that requirements can be distributed and therefore
Wikidata specifications to be simpler, as long as they are supported
by a common generic basis and an interchange protocol. The Dublin
Core results from OCLC networking in the late 70s. The W3C did not
start in thinking of semantic registries but of a semantic web. The
IRI are universal. JSON is open and universal. Denny does not even
understand what my own project basics mean, howver we can easily meet
on a JSON based protocol. Why, for example, to enter geographic
coordinates or linguistic tables manually?
For example, I look in vain for a single table quiving me the name,
value, characteristics, and 32x32 bits graphic of every ISO 10646
code poiint. If someone makes it, it should result in an easy batch
transfer, supported (both ways) by an authoritative decision. Not by
millions of human error prone manual entries. For the time being I
did not see discuss the position of the huge amount of new entries
not being validated yet. If I enter that ice melts at 5°C, will that
be immediately dessiminated or will be in stand-by somewhere until approved?
jfc
Thanks,
   Gerard
On 9 April 2012 03:25, JFC Morfin
<<mailto:jefsey@jefsey.com>jefsey@jefsey.com> wrote:
Is there an objection to the concept of, or cooperation with,
"datawiki" Wikidata compatible projects? I would define a "datawiki"
(as there are databases) as a JSON oriented NoSQL DBMS using an
enhanced wiki as a human user I/O interface. This would permit
BigData, specialized data, and graph sources to feed Wikidata along
their own data philosophy and collection/update policy. I suppose
that the main point would be an inter-datawiki interchange protocol
(RFC?) matching the datawiki authoritative operators' (the first of
them being Wikidata) requirements. I would permit projects at
different stages of R&D or with different main purposes in order to
cooperate with Wikidata.
jfc
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
<mailto:Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org>Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l