Re: [Wikidata-l] Is an ecosystem of Wikidatas possible?
You probably mean Linked Data? On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:41 PM, David Cuenca dacu...@gmail.com wrote: While on the Hackathon I had the opportunity to talk with some people from sister projects about how they view Wikidata and the relationship it should have to sister projects. Probably you are already familiar with the views because they have been presented already several times. The hopes are high, in my opinion too high, about what can be accomplished when Wikidata is deployed to sister projects. There are conflicting needs about what belongs into Wikidata and what sister projects need, and that divide it is far greater to be overcome than just by installing the extension. In fact, I think there is a confusion between the need for Wikidata and the need for structured data. True that Wikidata embodies that technology, but I don't think all problems can be approached by the same centralized tool. At least not from the social side of it. Wikiquote could have one item for each quote, or Wikivoyage an item for each bar, hostel, restaurant, etc..., and the question will always be: are they relevant enough to be created in Wikidata? Considering that Wikidata was initially thought for Wikipedia, that scope wouldn't allow those uses. However, the structured data needs could be covered in other ways. It doesn't need to be a big wikidata addressing it all. It could well be a central Wikidata addressing common issues (like author data, population data, etc), plus other Wikidata installs on each sister project that requires it. For instance there could be a data.wikiquote.org, a data.wikivoyage.org, etc that would cater for the needs of each community, that I predict will increase as soon as the benefits become clear, and of course linked to the central Wikidata whenever needed. Even Commons could be wikidatized with each file becoming an item and having different labels representing the file name depending on the language version being accessed. Could be this the right direction to go? Cheers, Micru ___ 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] Some Wiktionary data in Wikidata
Hi Denny, I've left a message at the Tamil Wiktionary Village Pump. http://ta.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%E0%AE%B5%E0%AE%BF%E0%AE%95%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%9A%E0%AE%A9%E0%AE%B0%E0%AE%BF:%E0%AE%86%E0%AE%B2%E0%AE%AE%E0%AE%B0%E0%AE%A4%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%A4%E0%AE%9F%E0%AE%BFdiff=1194066oldid=1194039 Cheers, Sundar That language is an instrument of human reason, and not merely a medium for the expression of thought, is a truth generally admitted. - George Boole, quoted in Iverson's Turing Award Lecture Original message: Hello, I would like all interested in the interaction of Wikidata and Wiktionary to take a look at the following proposal. It is trying to serve all use cases mentioned so far, and remain still fairly simple to implement. http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Wiktionary To the best of our knowledge, we have checked all discussions on this topic, and also related work like OmegaWiki, Wordnet, etc., and are building on top of that. I would extremely appreciate if some liaison editors could reach out to the Wiktionaries in order to get a wider discussion base. We are currently reading more on related work and trying to improve the proposal. It would be great if we could keep the discussion on the discussion page on the wiki, so to bundle it a bit. Or at least have pointers there. http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:Wiktionary Note that we are giving this proposal early. Implementation has not started yet (obviously, otherwise the discussion would be a bit moot), and this is more a mid-term commitment (i.e. if the discussion goes smoothly, it might be implemented and deployed by the end of the year or so, although this depends on the results of the discussion obviously). Cheers, Denny___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Some Wiktionary data in Wikidata
Thank you, Sundar! 2013/6/20 BalaSundaraRaman sundarbe...@yahoo.com Hi Denny, I've left a message at the Tamil Wiktionary Village Pump. http://ta.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%E0%AE%B5%E0%AE%BF%E0%AE%95%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%9A%E0%AE%A9%E0%AE%B0%E0%AE%BF:%E0%AE%86%E0%AE%B2%E0%AE%AE%E0%AE%B0%E0%AE%A4%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%A4%E0%AE%9F%E0%AE%BFdiff=1194066oldid=1194039 Cheers, Sundar That language is an instrument of human reason, and not merely a medium for the expression of thought, is a truth generally admitted. - George Boole, quoted in Iverson's Turing Award Lecture Original message: Hello, I would like all interested in the interaction of Wikidata and Wiktionary to take a look at the following proposal. It is trying to serve all use cases mentioned so far, and remain still fairly simple to implement. http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Wiktionary To the best of our knowledge, we have checked all discussions on this topic, and also related work like OmegaWiki, Wordnet, etc., and are building on top of that. I would extremely appreciate if some liaison editors could reach out to the Wiktionaries in order to get a wider discussion base. We are currently reading more on related work and trying to improve the proposal. It would be great if we could keep the discussion on the discussion page on the wiki, so to bundle it a bit. Or at least have pointers there. http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:Wiktionary Note that we are giving this proposal early. Implementation has not started yet (obviously, otherwise the discussion would be a bit moot), and this is more a mid-term commitment (i.e. if the discussion goes smoothly, it might be implemented and deployed by the end of the year or so, although this depends on the results of the discussion obviously). Cheers, Denny -- 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] Some Wiktionary data in Wikidata
Thanks, I did, and did now again. As far as I can tell, it seems compatible (and even would be compatible with the simpler current Wikidata model, actually). Cheers, Denny 2013/6/19 Tom Morris tfmor...@gmail.com If you haven't already, it might be worth looking at the Freebase schema for Wordnet, especially how it connects synsets to Freebase topics: https://www.freebase.com/base/wordnet/synset?schema= Tom On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Denny Vrandečić denny.vrande...@wikimedia.de wrote: Hello, I would like all interested in the interaction of Wikidata and Wiktionary to take a look at the following proposal. It is trying to serve all use cases mentioned so far, and remain still fairly simple to implement. http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Wiktionary To the best of our knowledge, we have checked all discussions on this topic, and also related work like OmegaWiki, Wordnet, etc., and are building on top of that. I would extremely appreciate if some liaison editors could reach out to the Wiktionaries in order to get a wider discussion base. We are currently reading more on related work and trying to improve the proposal. It would be great if we could keep the discussion on the discussion page on the wiki, so to bundle it a bit. Or at least have pointers there. http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:Wiktionary Note that we are giving this proposal early. Implementation has not started yet (obviously, otherwise the discussion would be a bit moot), and this is more a mid-term commitment (i.e. if the discussion goes smoothly, it might be implemented and deployed by the end of the year or so, although this depends on the results of the discussion obviously). Cheers, Denny -- 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 -- 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] Some Wiktionary data in Wikidata
The current proposal does not cover grammar rules explicitly. If at all, I would regard that as a later extension once the lexical information is in place. Also, my limited understanding of the topic does not even allow for coming up with a data model to cover grammar rules, or to know whether there is something like sufficiently widely accepted models to represent grammar, or if there are still discussions whether Chomsky or Systemic Functional Grammars or whatever else would make the cut... Regarding word vs expression - I do not care much about the actual term, and it seems that both seem valid. With the suggested change from meaning to word sense though, it might make more sense to keep word here. But as said, no strong opinion here. I definitively see that saying that http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/carry_coals_to_Newcastle is a word is kinda weird. expression would fix that. Any further opinions? Cheers, Denny 2013/6/19 David Cuenca dacu...@gmail.com Hi Denny, Thank you very much for this fantastic update about the intentions of supporting a semantic dictionary in Wikidata :) Just a minor correction: I think instead of word, it should be expression because some languages don't follow the same logic. On the other hand, do you think it would be possible to accommodate grammar rules too? I have added some people from Apertium that might have some insights about it. Cheers, Micru On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Denny Vrandečić denny.vrande...@wikimedia.de wrote: Hello, I would like all interested in the interaction of Wikidata and Wiktionary to take a look at the following proposal. It is trying to serve all use cases mentioned so far, and remain still fairly simple to implement. http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Wiktionary To the best of our knowledge, we have checked all discussions on this topic, and also related work like OmegaWiki, Wordnet, etc., and are building on top of that. I would extremely appreciate if some liaison editors could reach out to the Wiktionaries in order to get a wider discussion base. We are currently reading more on related work and trying to improve the proposal. It would be great if we could keep the discussion on the discussion page on the wiki, so to bundle it a bit. Or at least have pointers there. http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:Wiktionary Note that we are giving this proposal early. Implementation has not started yet (obviously, otherwise the discussion would be a bit moot), and this is more a mid-term commitment (i.e. if the discussion goes smoothly, it might be implemented and deployed by the end of the year or so, although this depends on the results of the discussion obviously). Cheers, Denny -- 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 -- Etiamsi omnes, ego non -- 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] Some Wiktionary data in Wikidata
Thinking about it again, and discussing it internally, maybe we should replace word with expression and meaning with sense? Any +1's or differing opinions? 2013/6/20 Denny Vrandečić denny.vrande...@wikimedia.de The current proposal does not cover grammar rules explicitly. If at all, I would regard that as a later extension once the lexical information is in place. Also, my limited understanding of the topic does not even allow for coming up with a data model to cover grammar rules, or to know whether there is something like sufficiently widely accepted models to represent grammar, or if there are still discussions whether Chomsky or Systemic Functional Grammars or whatever else would make the cut... Regarding word vs expression - I do not care much about the actual term, and it seems that both seem valid. With the suggested change from meaning to word sense though, it might make more sense to keep word here. But as said, no strong opinion here. I definitively see that saying that http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/carry_coals_to_Newcastle is a word is kinda weird. expression would fix that. Any further opinions? Cheers, Denny 2013/6/19 David Cuenca dacu...@gmail.com Hi Denny, Thank you very much for this fantastic update about the intentions of supporting a semantic dictionary in Wikidata :) Just a minor correction: I think instead of word, it should be expression because some languages don't follow the same logic. On the other hand, do you think it would be possible to accommodate grammar rules too? I have added some people from Apertium that might have some insights about it. Cheers, Micru On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Denny Vrandečić denny.vrande...@wikimedia.de wrote: Hello, I would like all interested in the interaction of Wikidata and Wiktionary to take a look at the following proposal. It is trying to serve all use cases mentioned so far, and remain still fairly simple to implement. http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Wiktionary To the best of our knowledge, we have checked all discussions on this topic, and also related work like OmegaWiki, Wordnet, etc., and are building on top of that. I would extremely appreciate if some liaison editors could reach out to the Wiktionaries in order to get a wider discussion base. We are currently reading more on related work and trying to improve the proposal. It would be great if we could keep the discussion on the discussion page on the wiki, so to bundle it a bit. Or at least have pointers there. http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:Wiktionary Note that we are giving this proposal early. Implementation has not started yet (obviously, otherwise the discussion would be a bit moot), and this is more a mid-term commitment (i.e. if the discussion goes smoothly, it might be implemented and deployed by the end of the year or so, although this depends on the results of the discussion obviously). Cheers, Denny -- 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 -- Etiamsi omnes, ego non -- 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. -- 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] Is an ecosystem of Wikidatas possible?
I don't see each file on Commons having its own WikiData item, but I do think each subject of files should have their own item (and some, but not all of them, may also have their own wikipedia pages). These files on Commons could make use of properties on wikidata like is designed by, is a copy of, is an example of, is the best image of or something like that. When the work is a sculpture or a garden and there are many photos, it would be nice to promote one of them to best choice image for some works, this way you can easily replace photos across many Wikipedia's for some of the great pictures coming in with efforts like Wiki Loves Monuments. Similarly, I don't think each poem or each book should have its own WikiData item, but I think each first edition should have its own item, and all other editions should be able to link to it, regardless of translated versions and so on. I see WikiSource and WikiBooks as the same in this respect. 2013/6/20, Martynas Jusevičius marty...@graphity.org: You probably mean Linked Data? On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:41 PM, David Cuenca dacu...@gmail.com wrote: While on the Hackathon I had the opportunity to talk with some people from sister projects about how they view Wikidata and the relationship it should have to sister projects. Probably you are already familiar with the views because they have been presented already several times. The hopes are high, in my opinion too high, about what can be accomplished when Wikidata is deployed to sister projects. There are conflicting needs about what belongs into Wikidata and what sister projects need, and that divide it is far greater to be overcome than just by installing the extension. In fact, I think there is a confusion between the need for Wikidata and the need for structured data. True that Wikidata embodies that technology, but I don't think all problems can be approached by the same centralized tool. At least not from the social side of it. Wikiquote could have one item for each quote, or Wikivoyage an item for each bar, hostel, restaurant, etc..., and the question will always be: are they relevant enough to be created in Wikidata? Considering that Wikidata was initially thought for Wikipedia, that scope wouldn't allow those uses. However, the structured data needs could be covered in other ways. It doesn't need to be a big wikidata addressing it all. It could well be a central Wikidata addressing common issues (like author data, population data, etc), plus other Wikidata installs on each sister project that requires it. For instance there could be a data.wikiquote.org, a data.wikivoyage.org, etc that would cater for the needs of each community, that I predict will increase as soon as the benefits become clear, and of course linked to the central Wikidata whenever needed. Even Commons could be wikidatized with each file becoming an item and having different labels representing the file name depending on the language version being accessed. Could be this the right direction to go? Cheers, Micru ___ 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
[Wikidata-l] Impressions from LODLAM 2013
I'm just back from the LODLAM summit in Montreal, Canada and here there is a short report. ==About LODLAM and why I was there== LODLAM (http://lodlam.net) is a gathering of people interested in LOD (linked open data) and LAM (Libraries, Archives, and Museums), so I thought it would be interesting to find partners and raise awareness about the Wikisource revitalization effort, all this thanks to the Grants:IEG support. The audience was very diverse, not only from cultural institutions, but also from some research centers and private companies. OKFN, Europeana, DPLA, and other big players had representatives there. AFIK, I was the only person from the Wikimedia movement, so I ended up representing all things wiki, specially Wikidata. These spontaneous activities are briefly described here [1]. The format of the event was that of an [[open-space technology]] gathering, similar to unconferences. Some information and reflexions to share: == Rewards contributor retention == During a talk about licenses (which dealt about the difficulties of having content with different licenses), there were some mention about Datahub [2], a recently launched project to share datasets, formerly known as ckan. The discussion revolved around the reward that contributors get for releasing their datasets. There was some consensus that the use of the released data is the reward, which lead to another debate about how to convey data use to contributors. It can be complicated or simplified to just leave a gratitude comment by the person using the dataset. All this led me to think about the emotional vs rational rewards that users (or institutions) obtain from contributing content to Wikipedia, Commons, Wikisource, etc. Are really active thanks, as currently implemented, suistainable and scalable? Will all the contributors who deserve it get a thanks some day? Could personalized view counts/ratings reports about uploaded pictures, major contributions to WP articles, etc. have some impact on contributor satisfaction/retention? Would automated personal impact reports free collaborators from the duty of thanking one another, or would that mean less personal interactions? These are some questions that I leave open here. ==Semantic annotations == As you might know there is a GSoC [3] which aims to convert the OKFN Annotator [4] into a Mediawiki extension. That is a great project that will enable inline comments in mediawiki projects, but it shouldn't be seen as the end, but only an step in the direction of semantic annotations. What could semantic annotations mean for Wikipedia? More precise answers to questions. Instead of just having millions of articles there would be the possibility of answering trillions of questions (or at least pointing to the text fragment(s) that has/have the answer). This kind of paradigm shift might need some pondering and broad community discussion. What could semantic annotations mean for Wikisource? Text interconectedness. Be able to relate concepts, authors, fragments... and then be able to query those relationships. ==Input interfaces for linked data== The best linked data it is the one that is invisible to the user, but then, how to enable end users to write linked data? From the several approaches, the most convincing seemed to use a text symbol (#, +, !, or others) to indicate that the text following it represents a linked entity. In the case of the VisualEditor in Wikipedia, one could write #article_name, and right after entering the # and the first letters, a list of options (from Wikidata) would show up to autocomplete/disambiguate. After selecting the right item, one could continue writing or type a dot to select a property (like in some object-oriented programming languages do). This approach simplifies the interlinking and also the data inclusion. ==Other news== - The Getty vocabularies will be published as linked open data (late 2013, ODC_BY 1.0 license) [6] - Pund.it [5] - open source semantic annotation project that won the lodlam challenge award - Karma, tools for mapping data to ontologies [7] Cheers, Micru [1] http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikidata-l/2013-June/002388.html [2] http://datahub.io/ [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Rjain/Proposal-Prototyping-inline-comments [4] http://okfnlabs.org/annotator/ [5] http://www.thepund.it/ [6] http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabularies/index.html [7] http://summit2013.lodlam.net/2013/06/20/karma-tools-for-mapping-data-to-ontologies/ ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
