It's really important that the Wikisource community starts engaging Wikidata issues, especially because it will soon be needed a decision regarding the relation between Wikidata and Wikisource.

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Ed Summers <ehs(a)pobox.com> wrote: I will try, and hopefully Micru (who knows Wikidata much better than me) will follow up. Wikidata right know is integrated with Wikipedia only. Sister projects (as Wikisource) are now not taken in consideration, because each one is different and must be taken iin consideration indipendently. This is at least the opinion of the development tem (whom we speak to several times). One of the main issue is that, right know, Wikidata will store books metadata for Wikipedia pages, and that, in FRBR jargon, are "work" metadata (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_Requirements_for_Bibliographic_Reco… ) Wikipedia articles, in most cases, talk about "books in general" ("The Hamlet", "Don Quixote", etc.). Wikisource, on the other end, works with "editions" ("manifestation" in FRBR), which need more metadata (edition, year of the edition, language, translator, etc.) This is the very same issues of djvu files on Commons, which store metadata into the Book template. Now, the problem is that, as I said before, Wikidata doen't talk with Commons and Wikisource (yet). And it's a duty of the community to decide *how*, for example, store "edition metadata" in Wikidata. We, for example, could create an item for every book edition we use in Wikisource/Commons. Or we could use *qualifiers*, and add these data in the main item related to the book. The latter is Micru's proposal, and he made a mockup: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q4115189&oldid=35796153 I think it's the best proposal, as today, and if you agree you can support it: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_comment/References_and_… I hope this clarification helped a bit. Aubrey _______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l

If I can add a comment, I suggest that Commons should be included into wikidata net as soon as possible, since it shares with wikidata its

of being "a unique container" and book metadata are already shared

all wikisource projects and Commons for a central group of works (the "proofread" ones). I suggest too to keep wikidata staff in contact with Jarekt, who works hardly into Commons and is particularly interested

books and "creators" (i.e. authors). In my opinion, the fast inclusion of Commons into Wikidata net will

most issues of wikisource projects too. Alex 2013/5/17 Andrea Zanni <zanni.andrea84(a)gmail.com> > > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Ed Summers <ehs(a)pobox.com> wrote: > >> Can you provide more information about what decision needs to be made >> about the relationship between Wikidata and Wikisource? >> > > I will try, and hopefully Micru (who knows Wikidata much better than

> will follow up. > > Wikidata right know is integrated with Wikipedia only. > Sister projects (as Wikisource) are now not taken in consideration, > because each one is different and must be taken iin consideration > indipendently. > This is at least the opinion of the development tem (whom we speak to > several times). > > One of the main issue is that, right know, > Wikidata will store books metadata for Wikipedia pages, and that, in

> jargon, are "work" metadata (see >

> ) > Wikipedia articles, in most cases, talk about "books in general" ("The > Hamlet", "Don Quixote", etc.). > > Wikisource, on the other end, works with "editions" ("manifestation" in > FRBR), which need more metadata > (edition, year of the edition, language, translator, etc.) > This is the very same issues of djvu files on Commons, which store > metadata into the Book template. > > Now, > the problem is that, as I said before, Wikidata doen't talk with

> and Wikisource (yet). > And it's a duty of the community to decide *how*, for example, store > "edition metadata" in Wikidata. > > We, for example, could create an item for every book edition we use in > Wikisource/Commons. > Or we could use *qualifiers*, and add these data in the main item

> to the book. > The latter is Micru's proposal, and he made a mockup: > https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q4115189&oldid=35796153 > > I think it's the best proposal, as today, > and if you agree you can support it: > >

> > > I hope this clarification helped a bit. > > Aubrey > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikisource-l mailing list > Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l > >