Hi Thomas,
On 02.08.2015 13:48, Thomas Douillard wrote:
I also think classes do not have the importance thy deserve in Wikidata
yet. Everything is centered around properties and the property creation
right who entails the editorial process.
This might change in the future depnding on how Querie
It would be very cool to have the data on Wikidata :-)
Extensive info here: http://www.nature.com/ontologies/.
Aubrey
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
Most middle-sized towns in Europe have municipal collections that reach
into the tens of thousands of objects. I am totally on board to allow this,
and also to allow municipality WLM identifiers (so not just country
identifiers for heritage, but also at the local level)
Let's do it!
On Sun, Aug 2
Hoi,
There is only one ID that truly identifies an object uniquely and, that is
the ID of the collection involved. It is an happy occasion when they all
match but they will not always match. Storing IDs is not a big problem, in
the end we will find that having them leads to harmonisation. Consequen
I also think classes do not have the importance thy deserve in Wikidata
yet. Everything is centered around properties and the property creation
right who entails the editorial process.
This might change in the future depnding on how Queries are implemented :)
I'd love that we could use Queries ite
Yes I got the gist of that hint and am still thinking about it. I am still
not sure, but probably yes. It's the same reasoning as for the WLM unique
identifiers btw. I am leaning towards at least one set of identifiers per
country. We can think of these heritage sites after all as objects in the
co
As I hinted on project chat: if we create a property for MoMA IDs, we really
have to be consistent and create property for all art collections that use
persistent IDs and of which we have items on Wikidata.
I think we (will) have hundreds of these.
Are we OK with that - having hundreds of museum
