If you are going to use a computer to automatically generate new facts using an
ontology then you have to do fairly sophisticated filtering of the results. If
you start with just a few axioms for logic and Euclidean geometry you could
have a computer automatically prove new theorems using them
-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikidata-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Tom Morris
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 10:12 AM
To: Discussion list for the Wikidata project.
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Question about wikipedia categories.
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Patrick Cassidy p
] Question about wikipedia categories.
Yes, there is and should be more than one ontology, and that is
already the case with categories, which are so flexible they can loop
around and become their own grandfather.
Dbpedia complaints should be discussed on that list, I am not a dbpedia
user, though
Hi Patrick,
Op 8-5-2013 17:19, Patrick Cassidy schreef:
Should we have more than one ontology?
Back in 2001 when I was doing some artificial intelligence courses, the
semantic web was the next big thing. What I remember about ontology is
that an ontology of all is next to impossible. Most
908-561-3416
-Original Message-
From: wikidata-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikidata-l-
boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Jane Darnell
Sent: Monday, May 06, 2013 12:14 PM
To: Discussion list for the Wikidata project.
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Question about
Le 2013-05-06 18:13, Jane Darnell a écrit :
Yes, there is and should be more than one ontology, and that is
already the case with categories, which are so flexible they can loop
around and become their own grandfather.
To my mind, categories indeed feet better how we think. I'm not sure
Le 2013-05-06 20:08, Paul A. Houle a écrit :
From my viewpoint, biases are an issue of statistical sampling.
It's not just the sampling which matter, how you process them to infer
conclusions is just as important. Except in the case of an hypotetical
clone army where each clone lived
different ranks to two categories that are
equally important.
Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 16:41:45 +0200
From: hellm...@informatik.uni-leipzig.de
To: wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Question about wikipedia categories.
Am 07.05.2013 14:01, schrieb emw
: [Wikidata-l] Question about wikipedia categories.
I spoke too soon. That is the only loop at two steps. But if you go out
three steps (25000 categories) you find another 23 loops. Organizational
studies - organizations, housing - household behavior and family
economics - home - housing, religious
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Question about wikipedia categories.
I don't know if these are useful, but if we go two steps from the
fundamental categories on the English Wikipedia we find several loops.
Knowledge contains information and information contains knowledge, for
example. Not allowing loops
, but it is only 2000 categories. Four steps would be
25000.
From: hale.michael...@live.com
To: wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 12:10:51 -0400
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Question about wikipedia categories.
I spoke too soon. That is the only loop at two steps. But if you go
project.
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Question about wikipedia categories.
Hi Pat,
I've been involved with DBpedia for several years, so these are
interesting thoughts.
On 5 May 2013 01:25, Patrick Cassidy p...@micra.com wrote:
If one is interested in a functional “category” system, it would
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Mathieu Stumpf
psychosl...@culture-libre.org wrote:
Now to give my own opinion of the representation/ontology you are building,
I would say that it's based on exactly the opposite premisses I would use.
Wikidata Q1 is universe, then you have earth, life, death
Le 2013-05-06 11:14, Lydia Pintscher a écrit :
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Mathieu Stumpf
psychosl...@culture-libre.org wrote:
Now to give my own opinion of the representation/ontology you are
building,
I would say that it's based on exactly the opposite premisses I
would use.
Wikidata Q1
Hi Mathieu,
I think the DBpedia mailing list is a better place for discussing the
DBpedia ontology:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion
Drop us a message if you have questions or concerns. I'm sure someone
will answer your questions. I am not an ontology expert, so
Yes, there is and should be more than one ontology, and that is already the
case with categories, which are so flexible they can loop around and become
their own grandfather.
Dbpedia complaints should be discussed on that list, I am not a dbpedia user,
though I think it's a useful project to
...@ontology2.com
To: wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 18:08:04 +
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Question about wikipedia categories.
From my viewpoint, biases are an issue of statistical sampling.
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia by humans for humans so of course it has
requirement. Then you are looking at
Americans that are actors and politicians, which you can't do in the
category system.
From: p...@ontology2.com
To: wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 18:08:04 +
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Question about wikipedia categories.
From
query and want to
modify it.
Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 15:21:23 -0400
From: voldr...@gmail.com
To: wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Question about wikipedia categories.
Michael, that's really closely in line with what I was thinking. Why
don't you take a crack
To: wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 19:25:25 -0400
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Question about wikipedia categories.
If one is interested in a functional “category”
system, it would be very helpful to have a good logic-based ontology as the
backbone.
I haven’t looked
...@micra.com
To: wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 19:25:25 -0400
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Question about wikipedia categories.
If one is interested in a functional “category” system, it would be very
helpful to have a good logic-based ontology as the backbone.
I haven’t
Hale
Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2013 2:57 AM
To: Discussion list for the Wikidata project.
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Question about wikipedia categories.
I think it's important to consider the distinction between a category system
and semantic queries. I think it's very likely that DBpedia
Date: Sun, 5 May 2013 16:28:14 +0200
To: wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Question about wikipedia categories.
Hi Pat,
I've been involved with DBpedia for several years, so these are
interesting thoughts.
On 5 May 2013 01:25, Patrick Cassidy p
2013/5/5 Michael Hale hale.michael...@live.com:
As far as checking the import progress of Wikidata, the category American
women writers has 1479 articles. 651 of them currently have a main type
(GND), 328 have a sex, 162 have an occupation, 111 have a country of
citizenship, 49 have a sexual
14:45:05 -0400
From: emw.w...@gmail.com
To: wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Question about wikipedia categories.
There's a related essay on Wikimedia Commons:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Multichill/Next_generation_categories.
The Wikidata properties instance
On 5 May 2013 20:48, Mathieu Stumpf psychosl...@culture-libre.org wrote:
Le dimanche 05 mai 2013 à 16:28 +0200, Jona Christopher Sahnwaldt a
The ontology is maintained by a community that everyone can join at
http://mappings.dbpedia.org/ . An overview of the current class
hierarchy is here:
Wondering exactly the same thing - my frustrations with categories
began about three years ago and it seems I am surprised monthly by
severe limitations to this outdated apparatus. I am a heavy category
user, but I would love to be able to kick it out the door in favour of
a more structured
/User:Wakebrdkid/Popular_category_browsing I'm
currently multiplying the Chinese traffic by 30 to try and account for Baidu
Baike.
Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 08:14:54 +0200
From: jane...@gmail.com
To: wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Question about wikipedia categories
28 matches
Mail list logo
