I am with Ryan here, and I believe that is Magnus idea too, the autodescription should not be a field in the database, it should be queried on the fly from the statements.
*Med vänliga hälsningar,Jan Ainali* Verksamhetschef, Wikimedia Sverige <http://wikimedia.se> 0729 - 67 29 48 *Tänk dig en värld där varje människa har fri tillgång till mänsklighetens samlade kunskap. Det är det vi gör.* Bli medlem. <http://blimedlem.wikimedia.se> 2015-08-21 21:26 GMT+02:00 Ryan Kaldari <[email protected]>: > If the way to 'edit' the autodescription is by changing the claims for the > item, I support the idea. I would oppose, however, the autodescription > being another text field you can edit directly as I think this would be > very confusing for Wikidata editors, as each item would effectively just > have 2 interchangable description fields. > > On Aug 21, 2015, at 11:21 AM, Jon Katz <[email protected]> wrote: > > This is a really interesting discussion and it seems that there is > near-consensus that an automated description for entities without a manual > description is not a bad idea, particularly if they are kept in a separate > field. Speak now if you feel that is not correct. > > To S's suggestion: what steps do we need to take to put autodesc into > wiki's? > > - establish consensus with stakeholders outside this thread? > - create new field? > - rule out/protect against edge cases (are their length limits, for > instance) > - ways to edit (explaining to a user how they can edit or override is > going to be important) > > > Who should own it and create an epic to track? Wikidata, Search, > Reading?.... > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:27 AM, Monte Hurd <[email protected]> wrote: > >> This is why the automatic description cache and the manual description >>> need to be kept separate; just "pasting" the autodesc into the manual >>> description field would mean it could never be updated automatically. That >>> would be very bad indeed. >> >> >> +1000!!!! Exactly! I was operating under the assumption we were talking >> about the existing "description" field. Separate auto and manual >> description fields completely avoids *all* of the issues/concerns I raised >> :) >> >> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 2:48 AM, Magnus Manske < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> So it turns out that ValterVBot alone has created over 1.8 MILLION >>> "manual" descriptions. And there are other bots that do this. We already >>> HAVE automatic descriptions, we just store them in the "manual" field. >>> >>> The worst of both worlds. >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:24 AM Magnus Manske < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 1:43 AM Monte Hurd <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> True about algorithms never being finished, but aren't we essentially >>>>> "stuck" with the first run output, unless I misunderstand how you envision >>>>> this working? >>>>> >>>>> (assuming you don't want to over-write non-blank descriptions the next >>>>> time you improve and re-run the process) >>>>> >>>> >>>> Of course we're not "stuck" with the initial automatic descriptions! >>>> Whatever gave you that idea? Ideally, each description would be computed >>>> on-the-fly, but that won't scale; output needs to be cached, and >>>> invalidated when necessary. >>>> >>>> Possible reasons for cache invalidation: >>>> * The item statements have changed >>>> * Items referenced in the description (e.g. country for nationality) >>>> have changed >>>> * The algorithm has been improved >>>> * After cache reached a certain age, just to make sure >>>> >>>> This is why the automatic description cache and the manual description >>>> need to be kept separate; just "pasting" the autodesc into the manual >>>> description field would mean it could never be updated automatically. That >>>> would be very bad indeed. >>>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mobile-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Mobile-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l > > > _______________________________________________ > Mobile-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l > >
_______________________________________________ Mobile-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
