Re: [Wikidata-l] Expiration date for data
So is the question whether there should be strong types for qualifiers as opposed to just a string with custom logic for each type of template box that will be displayed in articles? My opinion is that it is too difficult to know in advance how many and what types of qualifiers the data will have to add much specificity in the database right now. Maybe date ranges will be very frequent, maybe they won't. Maybe precision and uncertainty ranges will be frequent, maybe they won't. Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 08:00:46 +0100 From: wikipo...@gmail.com To: wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Expiration date for data Such an old topic, and was unread in my mailbox by now. :-) Although having validity intervals in Data would be great, I think now, as we have Lua, there is a client-side approach at least for such specific data as DB's timetable that is interesting mostly for dewiki. -- Bináris ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Expiration date for data
Hi Dario, two or three features are still missing to enable that (sorted in order we are probably going to deploy them): * qualifiers * the time datatype * statement ranks As soon as they are available, this can be modeled in a way that it can be useful for projects accessing the data. So, progress yet, but it's not there yet :) Cheers, Denny 2013/3/14 Dario Taraborelli dtarabore...@wikimedia.org Has there been any progress on time-based qualifiers since this thread? If so, can someone point me to relevant discussions/proposals? Thanks Dario On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:28 AM, Marco Fleckinger marco.fleckin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On 11.10.2012 16:12, Lydia Pintscher wrote: On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 11:13 AM,bene...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: Is there something like VALID_FROM and VALID_TO in your Database? LB This is basically what the qualifiers do. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Notes/Data_model_primer has more details. Hm, sorry I didn't remember this. Thank you for reminding! Marco ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l -- Project director Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 | http://wikimedia.de 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. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Expiration date for data
Hoi, The qualifiers, would that be something like ... if the language is English, the string can be a noun, a verb, an adjective When the sting is a Dutch noun, it can be masculine, feminine or neuter ?? When a qualifier allows for such constructs, we are halfway there to implementing a structure that allows for importing OmegaWiki data.. Thanks, Gerard On 14 March 2013 11:57, Denny Vrandečić denny.vrande...@wikimedia.dewrote: Hi Dario, two or three features are still missing to enable that (sorted in order we are probably going to deploy them): * qualifiers * the time datatype * statement ranks As soon as they are available, this can be modeled in a way that it can be useful for projects accessing the data. So, progress yet, but it's not there yet :) Cheers, Denny 2013/3/14 Dario Taraborelli dtarabore...@wikimedia.org Has there been any progress on time-based qualifiers since this thread? If so, can someone point me to relevant discussions/proposals? Thanks Dario On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:28 AM, Marco Fleckinger marco.fleckin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On 11.10.2012 16:12, Lydia Pintscher wrote: On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 11:13 AM,bene...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: Is there something like VALID_FROM and VALID_TO in your Database? LB This is basically what the qualifiers do. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Notes/Data_model_primer has more details. Hm, sorry I didn't remember this. Thank you for reminding! Marco ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l -- Project director Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 | http://wikimedia.de 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. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] question about Inclusion policy discussion
Le 2013-03-14 02:09, Michael Hale a écrit : I think of Wikidata as the symbiotic version of Freebase. I won't say Freebase is a parasite, but I think a core aspect of Wikidata is that edits to the database will often feed back into the encyclopedia in various places. I haven't looked too much at the technical implementation of Wikidata yet, but databases with billions of items aren't that rare anymore. In this connection, I would like to take advantage to ask if we should include references in wikidata, and —what would be even more awesome– relations between statements/theses and a particular author. I think this could benefit wikipedia with the no-original work goal, and making references cross-chapters consistent. Moreover this could also be used to associate a statement attribution reliability and a statement relevancy reliability. Let's say I read an article on some foreign antiquity culture. This article report some statements which are, at first glanced, well sourced. But one reference happened to be a book that I can't get. A research prove me that the book indeed exists, but is no longer publicly available. So I can't check if what is claimed in the wikipedia article is what is claimed in the book. But other people may have a copy, so they could give feedback to the community confirming or invaliding that the statement can indeed be found in the book. Now an other case may be that a reference is readable directly on the internet, but the text is written in a forreign dead language that you don't know, nor find an automatic translator. So despite having the source right before your eyes, you can't check that the text make the statement. You may of course ask a validation in discussion page, or check if someone let feedback on the topic. But it would be far better if knowledgeable people feedback could be gathered whatever the chapter they use, and redistributed in all chapters. What do you think of that ? -- Association Culture-Libre http://www.culture-libre.org/ ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Expiration date for data
A topic I've been involved in recently regards statistics for gun violence in the US. The government publishes a big report every year, but it takes them most of the year to collect the information from all of the local police agencies and compile the results. Several English Wikipedia articles use this information, and it would be awesome if the tables in the articles could be generated automatically from data in Wikidata. It seems like ideally I would have some code I would run whenever they release the new report that would automatically import all of the data into Wikidata and add the appropriate references. I suppose the information would go in the item for each city. Say for the Atlanta item, there would be a statement for murders and the value would be a number and the qualifier for these statements would just be 2011 or whatever. Then I would want to be able to have a template that automatically makes a table to show the 5 most recent years somewhere in the Atlanta article for example. Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 16:37:01 +0100 From: jeb...@gmail.com To: wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Expiration date for data This has also been aired in other discussions. Outdated entries can both be something that is only valid within a set timeframe, but can also be dependent on something else. One special case is when an external source do not support a specific statement anymore. On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Marco Fleckinger marco.fleckin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, regarding an actual topic in Germany about publication of the timetable-data of Deutsche Bahn (German national railway company) and their willingness of a discussion with other Open-Data-Supporters it may be a good idea of providing an expiration dates for Wikidata-records. In their open letter to Mr. Kreil [1] they announced that it may cause problems providing the timetable-data in an open way if e.g. anybody uses old data. Marco [1] http://www.db-vertrieb.com/db_vertrieb/view/service/open_plan_b.shtml ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] question about Inclusion policy discussion
That is a tough question. We are pretty sure that we technically scale quite well, and there is no reason that the community should restrict itself out of technical reasons. If the number of item suddenly increases by one or two orders of magnitudes, we would probably meet a few hiccups on the way, but the architecture should be able to deal with that. What I am much more worried about is, is the scaling of the community though. One of my statements from my Wikidata talks is we do not want to become the biggest data heap out there, but rather aim for an organic community, that is strong and resilient enough to maintain the data that is being collected. See also Wikidata requirement #6 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Notes/Requirements (a page worth re-reading). Sometimes it might sense for Wikidata to bridge and connect to external data sources that have their own way of maintenance and curation. Should the dataset really be merged into Wikidata? Is the data wikilike? Is it used in the Wikimedia projects? Or could it be also provided as a linked open dataset, which is referenced from Wikidata? Just to give an example: sure, one could theoretically start to collect temperature data of a city in hourly measurements*, but it could maybe make more sense to point to an external site that collects this data in a more efficient format, provide the mapping identifiers, and allow for a bot to go there and discover the data. Wikidata in turn could provide an aggregation of the data, which indeed would be used on e.g. Wikipedia and Wikivoyage, but leave the full dataset on the external site. (Which, by the way, would also be a viable solutions for datasets which have incompatible licenses). I hope this makes sense, Cheers, Denny * Actually, this kind of data would probably kill us faster than creating many items, as it would make a single item be ginormous. We scale not that well in that direction. 2013/3/14 Benjamin Good ben.mcgee.g...@gmail.com I've been struggling to understand what should go into wikidata and what should not. I see that this is because it hasn't been decided yet ;) http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:Notability In helping the community to make this decision I think it would be really helpful for the developers to weigh in on the technical capacity of the envisioned/realized wikidata infrastructure. If we know how big the system could realistically be and continue to work well technically, it might help discussions about how much and what kind of content we should put into it. If the plan is to cope with only a few tens of millions of subjects that is quite different than if the plan allows for the potential creation of billions of items. (Suggesting less inclusive versus more inclusive policies). ? -Ben ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l -- Project director Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 | http://wikimedia.de 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. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Expiration date for data
Thanks Denny for the update and everybody else for the feedback. The cases I am particularly interested in are those of qualifiers to express that Elizabeth I was Queen of England between 1558 and 1603, or that the city of Vibo Valentia was in the Province of Catanzaro up to 1996, in the Province of Vibo Valentia until 2014 and in the Province of Catanzaro-Crotone-Vibo Valentia after 2014. Until these qualifiers become available, the only way to represent that a region has changed its governor is to overwrite the old value of head of local government with the current one. Dario On Mar 14, 2013, at 3:57 AM, Denny Vrandečić denny.vrande...@wikimedia.de wrote: Hi Dario, two or three features are still missing to enable that (sorted in order we are probably going to deploy them): * qualifiers * the time datatype * statement ranks As soon as they are available, this can be modeled in a way that it can be useful for projects accessing the data. So, progress yet, but it's not there yet :) Cheers, Denny 2013/3/14 Dario Taraborelli dtarabore...@wikimedia.org Has there been any progress on time-based qualifiers since this thread? If so, can someone point me to relevant discussions/proposals? Thanks Dario On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:28 AM, Marco Fleckinger marco.fleckin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On 11.10.2012 16:12, Lydia Pintscher wrote: On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 11:13 AM,bene...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: Is there something like VALID_FROM and VALID_TO in your Database? LB This is basically what the qualifiers do. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Notes/Data_model_primer has more details. Hm, sorry I didn't remember this. Thank you for reminding! Marco ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l -- Project director Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 | http://wikimedia.de 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. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
[Wikidata-l] is there a schema for the claims of a libraries collection ?
hi, i am not even sure if i use the right vocabulary here, but is there some schema for claims or statements of a libraries collection? i wanted to add a type, and ended up linking it to collection. the translation then revealed that it is from horses dressage http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2567666 - wickiana , which is not http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q361873 - such a collection i am a little confused. how would i best find that i should have set the type to collection (museum) (if one takes the english language article title), and how i am expected to find or add properties to a that type? rupert. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Expiration date for data
Yes, I think once qualifiers are enabled you would just have something like:...Property(head of local government)...Value(Elizabeth I) - Qualifier(1558-1603) - Sources()Value(James VI and I) - Qualifier(1603-1625) - Sources().. There was a discussion about whether qualifiers should have specific datatypes other than just string, but I think we should only do that if needed. From: dtarabore...@wikimedia.org Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 21:27:32 -0700 To: wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Expiration date for data Thanks Denny for the update and everybody else for the feedback. The cases I am particularly interested in are those of qualifiers to express that Elizabeth I was Queen of England between 1558 and 1603, or that the city of Vibo Valentia was in the Province of Catanzaro up to 1996, in the Province of Vibo Valentia until 2014 and in the Province of Catanzaro-Crotone-Vibo Valentia after 2014. Until these qualifiers become available, the only way to represent that a region has changed its governor is to overwrite the old value of head of local government with the current one. Dario On Mar 14, 2013, at 3:57 AM, Denny Vrandečić denny.vrande...@wikimedia.de wrote:Hi Dario, two or three features are still missing to enable that (sorted in order we are probably going to deploy them):* qualifiers* the time datatype * statement ranks As soon as they are available, this can be modeled in a way that it can be useful for projects accessing the data. So, progress yet, but it's not there yet :) Cheers,Denny 2013/3/14 Dario Taraborelli dtarabore...@wikimedia.org Has there been any progress on time-based qualifiers since this thread? If so, can someone point me to relevant discussions/proposals? Thanks Dario On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:28 AM, Marco Fleckinger marco.fleckin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On 11.10.2012 16:12, Lydia Pintscher wrote: On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 11:13 AM,bene...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: Is there something like VALID_FROM and VALID_TO in your Database? LB This is basically what the qualifiers do. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Notes/Data_model_primer has more details. Hm, sorry I didn't remember this. Thank you for reminding! Marco ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l -- Project director Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 | http://wikimedia.de 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. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
