On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Susanna Ånäs <susanna.anas(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
An independent project will require a lot of MediaWiki
related knowledge
that is not necessarily found in an initial group of interested
individuals. Or combined OSM, MediaWiki & Wikidata knowledge, which may be
even more sparse. It would be more relaxed in regard to rules and
guidelines. Could it be re-integrated to Wikidata later, or would it run to
in-evident oblivion?
It could be re-integrated, but I wouldn't start a wikibase repo only for
the specific case of historical data. If there is a sizeable community that
could mantain a full-fledged repository of geographic entities (as
understood in Wikidata terms), then the historic information could be a
subset of that. OSM can do it (and actually it is being done more or less),
but that is something that should be decided by their community.
An integrated path would require complying to all
guidelines eg. re:
notability. It would cause a lot of waiting time for reaching consensus
while defining properties - which is also needed in an independent project.
I think the main intersection points are entities and properties. With
entities it is already happening (using property
p402<https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P402>)2>),
but with properties we still have no technical means of saying "this
property in WD is the same as this other property in project X".
Are you going to be in the Zürich hackathon to discuss
this?
Not sure yet, but I have seen that Katie and Daniel will be there and they
have a
deeper technical knowledge than me :)
Cheers,
Micru