Le 2013-08-10 09:30, Denny Vrandečić a écrit :
[Sorry for cross-posting]
Yes, I agree that the OmegaWiki community should be involved in the
discussions, and I pointed GerardM to our proposals whenever and
discussions, using him as a liaison. We also looked and keep looking
at the OmegaWiki data model to see what we are missing.
Our latest proposal is different from OmegaWiki in two major points:
* our primary goal is to provide support for structured data in the
Wiktionaries. We do not plan to be the main resource ourselves, where
readers come to in order to look up something, we merely provide
structured data that a Wiktionary may or may not use. This parallels
the role of Wikidata has with regards to Wikipedia. This also
highlights the difference between Wikidata and OmegaWiki, since
OmegaWiki's goal is "to create a dictionary of all words of all
languages, including lexical, terminological and ontological
information."
Before defining any structure, we should define what services
we aim to provide with it, what mecanisms we want to provide for
afterthought
extensions, and what services we don't want to provide so we can
exclude
their constraints from our requirement specification.
For example, one of my current project involve phoneme/grapheme
associations,
and it would be convenient for me to have a service which would allow
me
to formulate request like "what grapheme is noting the phoneme '/ʃ/' in
French"
or at least "what French words include the phoneme '/ʃ/'". In an other
study
of phoneme combinations usage, I would be interested to be able to make
queries
like "list all languages where the phoneme combination '/str/' is
used",
"list all English words with this combination".
To my mind it would be really convenient to be able to perform that
within any Mediawiki
project. Of course our primary concern here are Wiktionaries entries,
but the previous
quoted needs come from a research project I'm doing on Wikiversity.
Combined with
Scribunto, such a request service would allow to generate dynamic
auto-updated tables
of phonemes/graphemes associations and combinations in each language.
* a smaller difference is the data model. Wikidata's latest proposal
to support Wiktionary is centered around lexemes, and we do not
assume
that there is such a things as a language-independent defined
meaning.
But no matter what model we end up with, it is important to ensure
that the bulk of the data could freely flow between the projects, and
even though we might disagree on this issue in the modeling, it is
ensured that the exchange of data is widely possible.
We should define what we mean with language in the first place. After
all
sign languages are languages by their own, while British sign language
is
different from French sign language. Do we want to provide a way to get
definitions for this kind of languagelexical entries? While it would
not
be easy, with some image processing you may imagine a solution that
return
gestual lexemes matching a user geasture entry through a webcam.
We tried to keep notes on the discussion we had today:
<http://epl.wikimedia.org/p/WiktionaryAndWikidata [4]>
I added the reference of this work as well as a reference to this
thread
on [[m:Wiktionary Future]].
My major take home message for me is that:
* the proposal needs more visual elements, especially a mock-up or
sketch of how it would look like and how it could be used on the
Wiktionaries
* there is no generally accepted place for a discussion that involves
all Wiktionary projects. Still, my initial decision to have the
discussion on the Wikidata wiki was not a good one, and it should and
will be moved to Meta.
Having said that, the current proposal for the data model of how to
support Wiktionary with Wikidata seems to have garnered a lot of
support so far. So this is what I will continue building upon.
Further
comments are extremely welcomed. You can find it here:
<http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Wiktionary [5]>
As said, it will be moved to Meta, as soon as the requested mockups
and extensions are done.
I will happily help you to do it.
Cheers,
Denny
2013/8/10 Samuel Klein <meta.sj(a)gmail.com>
Hello,
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 6:13 PM, JP Béland
<lebo.beland(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> I agree. We also need to include the
Omegawiki community.
Agreed.
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Laura Hale <laura(a)fanhistory.com>
wrote:
Why? The question of moving them into the WMF
fold was pretty much
no,
because the project has an overlapping purpose
with Wiktionary,
This is not actually the case.
There was overwhelming community support for adopting Omegawiki - at
least simply providing hosting. It stalled because the code needed
a
security and style review, and Kip (the lead developer) was going to
put some time into that. The OW editors and dev were very
interested
in finding a way forward that involved Wikidata and led to a
combined
project with a single repository of terms, meanings, definitions and
translations.
Recap: The page describing the OmegaWiki project satisfies all of
the
criteria for requesting WMF adoption.
* It is well-defined on Meta
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Omegawiki [1]
* It describes an interesting idea clearly aligned with expanding
the
scope of free knowledge
* It is not a 'competing' project to Wiktionaries; it is an idea
that
grew out of the Wiktionary community, has been developed for years
alongside it, and shares many active contributors and linguiaphiles.
* It started an RfC which garnered 85% support for adoption.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Adopt_OmegaWiki
[2]
Even if the current OW code is not used at all for a future
Wiktionary
update -- and this idea was proposed and taken seriously by the OW
devs -- their community of contributors should be part of
discussions
about how to solve the Wiktionary problem that they were the first
to
dedicate themselves to.
Regards,
Sam.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l [3],
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
Project director Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 [6] |
http://wikimedia.de [7]
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens
e.V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts
Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig
anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin,
Steuernummer 27/681/51985 [8].
Links:
------
[1]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Omegawiki
[2]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Adopt_OmegaWiki
[3]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[4]
http://epl.wikimedia.org/p/WiktionaryAndWikidata
[5]
http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Wiktionary
[6] tel:%2B49-30-219%20158%2026-0
[7]
http://wikimedia.de
[8] tel:27%2F681%2F51985
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
--
Association Culture-Libre
http://www.culture-libre.org/