Hoi,
The interwiki links to Wiktionary are from an interwiki point of view
EXTREMELY easy to do. The problem with those links is that they cannot be
uniquely linked to existing items to Wikidata and thereby it becomes
unrealistic to do it in a meaningful way at this time.
Wiktionary has one
On 2015-05-06 21:34, Lydia Pintscher wrote:
Hey folks :)
When using data from Wikidata on Wikipedia and other sister projects
there is currently a limitation in place which hinders some use cases.
Data can only be accessed from the corresponding item. So for example
the article about Berlin can
Citiranje Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
The interwiki links to Wiktionary are from an interwiki point of view
EXTREMELY easy to do. The problem with those links is that they cannot be
uniquely linked to existing items to Wikidata and thereby it becomes
unrealistic to do it in a
We have a hackathon starting tomorrow morning (California time). It would
be fantastic if we could hack on adding our gene wikidata content to a
Wikipedia instance using this new ability. We too have been anxiously
awaiting this development.
Is there a sandbox environment somewhere that we
Fantastic! You've got it.
FYI, details of the hackathon are at:
https://github.com/Network-of-BioThings/nob-hq/wiki/1st-BD2K-3rd-Network-of-BioThings-Hackathon
Project ideas are being evolved at
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AEzaMaH1NPBIS9Jg7xVPXbnAs4jlCXbmUk-eUAYkb4k/edit#
thanks
-Ben
Citiranje Yair Rand yyairr...@gmail.com:
The Wiktionary communities tend to strongly disagree that splitting entries
per language would be easier for either editors or readers. It has been
discussed before numerous times over the years.
I do not see this strong disagreement. The last
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 9:28 PM, Benjamin Good ben.mcgee.g...@gmail.com wrote:
We have a hackathon starting tomorrow morning (California time). It would
be fantastic if we could hack on adding our gene wikidata content to a
Wikipedia instance using this new ability. We too have been anxiously
Hoi,
The practice makes sense for Wiktionary. As a matter of fact I think I
added quite a few with my bot. My point is not that it would not make
sense, my point is that it does NOT easily connect to Wikidata. When a
separate Wikibase is used for this ... fine. That makes sense.
Thanks,
Hi Denny,
I would strongly advise against connecting Wiktionary to Wikidata in the
status quo, mainly for the reasons Gerard summarized.
While wikt's 'data model' probably makes sense for a spelling-based
dictionary, it does not for a concept-based knowledge base like ours.
Even turning
Task 1 as described on the proposal page isn't completely clear on how it
would work. Would the generated items have Q-ids? Would it be possible to
link Wiktionary entries to non-Wiktionary pages in the very rare situations
that make sense (articles on particular series of
What you get on a Wiktionary page is a description of words in several
languages with that particular spelling. Of course 1 spelling can also be
several words in 1 language already.
It's at the level of the definition that one can link to the current
Wikidata. Provided Wikidata wants to have
Forgive me, but at the 2014 WikiCon in Cologne, I saw a talk that would see
Wiktionary converted to a separate wikibase installation, collapsing all
the wikitionary languages into items. THAT could reasonably be linked to
Wikidata, or just cross-references via properties.
Trying to wedge the
On 7 May 2015 at 11:57, Ricordisamoa ricordisa...@openmailbox.org wrote:
Let's focus on Commons, OpenStreetMap, queries, arbitrary access, new
datatypes?
OSM in what context?
Also, we should throw WikiSpecies into the mix.
--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
hi!
I have been offered to do a presentation of inventaire.io and how it
uses Wikidata, possibly followed by a workshop on Wikidata at the
OuiShare Labs Camp http://camp.ouisharelabs.net/2015, 18-19 May,
Paris. Any one wanting to help animating the workshop?
It's just a few days before the
I am not sure I understand what you are saying. The lexical data in
Wikidata does allow for statements on Lexemes and Forms, as the proposal
states explicitly.
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 9:25 PM Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hoi,
Given the opposition to having statements on the
I mean, the lexical data in Wikidata according to the proposal would allow
for statements on Lexemes and Forms. I slipped into the future for a moment
;)
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 9:32 PM Denny Vrandečić vrande...@gmail.com wrote:
I am not sure I understand what you are saying. The lexical data in
I would disagree with requiring the Wiktionary communities to change their
ways. Instead we should adapt our plans to fit into the way they are set up.
Even if the English Wiktionary community would change to have per-language
pages instead of the current system, it would be rather unlikely that
Hoi,
Again I do not care for lexemes and forms when they are distinct from
labels. I hate redundancy.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 8 May 2015 at 06:32, Denny Vrandečić vrande...@gmail.com wrote:
I am not sure I understand what you are saying. The lexical data in
Wikidata does allow for statements
Hoi,
Given the opposition to having statements on the level of the label, it
does not make sense to have Wiktionary included in Wikidata.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 8 May 2015 at 06:19, Denny Vrandečić vrande...@gmail.com wrote:
I would disagree with requiring the Wiktionary communities to change
Hi!
I do not think a separate Wikibase instance would be needed to provide
the data for Wiktionary. I think this can and should be done on
Wikidata. But as said by Milos and pointed out by Gerard, lexical
I am worried that having two different data sets within the same
instance would be a
Am 07.05.2015 um 14:56 schrieb Yair Rand:
Task 1 as described on the proposal page isn't completely clear on how it
would
work. Would the generated items have Q-ids? Would it be possible to link
Wiktionary entries to non-Wiktionary pages in the very rare situations that
make
sense
It is of limited value (as Gerard explained) to do major work on
Wiktionary. Wiktionary articles could be transferred to the structured data
in the similar way like Wikipedia articles, with a lot of trouble. Thus not
the most optimal solution.
What makes sense is to incorporate OmegaWiki logic
On 7 May 2015 at 18:27, Yair Rand yyairr...@gmail.com wrote:
The Wiktionary communities tend to strongly disagree that splitting entries
per language would be easier for either editors or readers.
How many languages are currently used? How will this scale to ~300 languages?
--
Andy Mabbett
Andy Mabbett, 07/05/2015 22:53:
The Wiktionary communities tend to strongly disagree that splitting entries
per language would be easier for either editors or readers.
How many languages are currently used? How will this scale to ~300 languages?
Hm? Last time I counted, the English Wiktionary
2015-05-07 14:28 GMT+02:00 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de:
However we also need to look into
the future. Wiktionary support needs a lot of input to make sure we're
doing the right thing. And it's good to give that time.
Totally agree with that. There's plenty of work to do for
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi,
Would it not make sense to FIRST finish a few things.. Like Commons and
Query ?
One of the primary things Wikidata was supposed to do is manage
interlanguage links for Wikimedia projects. That isnt finished
Hey folks :)
You're absolutely right that we need to focus on a few other things
first (UI redesign, units, queries, arbitrary access, data quality
tools incl watchlist improvements). However we also need to look into
the future. Wiktionary support needs a lot of input to make sure we're
doing
Citiranje Jo winfi...@gmail.com:
What you get on a Wiktionary page is a description of words in several
languages with that particular spelling. Of course 1 spelling can also be
several words in 1 language already.
And why? Why not having a separate page for every language, while the spelling
The Wiktionary communities tend to strongly disagree that splitting entries
per language would be easier for either editors or readers. It has been
discussed before numerous times over the years.
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Smolenski Nikola smole...@eunet.rs wrote:
Citiranje Jo
Il 07/05/2015 16:03, Daniel Kinzler ha scritto:
Am 07.05.2015 um 14:56 schrieb Yair Rand:
Task 1 as described on the proposal page isn't completely clear on how it would
work. Would the generated items have Q-ids? Would it be possible to link
Wiktionary entries to non-Wiktionary pages in the
BTW, Daniel, there are standardized templates for real interwiki links
(links to the entries with the same meaning in other languages on the same
Wiktionary). It makes sense that Wikidata creates a db for that. Though, it
isn't trivial and assumes meanings. Though, it seems to me reasonably
31 matches
Mail list logo
