Hi Martynas and all,
Thanks for this engaging Wikidata RDF conversation.
Wikidata RDF developments are exciting especially for
eventually coding with IBM's Watson and related AI. See this related
conversation, for example -
Poster Title: Not Elementary, My Dear Watson - Extending Watson for
Hi Phillip,
Are you aware of the Wikidata RDF exports at
http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-exports/rdf/ ? Do they meet your
requirements for now or do you need something different? If you have
specific plans for the RDF, I would be curious to learn about them.
Cheers,
Markus
On 29.10.2014
2014-10-29 22:59 GMT+01:00 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de:
Help with this would be awesome and totally welcome. The tracking bug
is at https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48143
Speaking of totally awesome (aehm :D):
* see: http://wikidataldf.com
* see this other thread:
On 10/29/14 5:59 PM, Lydia Pintscher wrote:
Hey Phillip:)
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 7:41 PM, Phillip Rhodes
motley.crue@gmail.com wrote:
FWIW, put me in the camp of people who want to see wikidata available
via RDF as well. I won't argue that RDF needs to be the*native*
format for
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:42 AM, Markus Krötzsch
mar...@semantic-mediawiki.org wrote:
Hi Phillip,
Are you aware of the Wikidata RDF exports at
http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-exports/rdf/ ? Do they meet your
requirements for now or do you need something different? If you have
specific
On 30.10.2014 11:49, Cristian Consonni wrote:
2014-10-29 22:59 GMT+01:00 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de:
Help with this would be awesome and totally welcome. The tracking bug
is at https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48143
Speaking of totally awesome (aehm :D):
* see:
Hi,
I am running the Wikidata query tool (WDQ) at http://wdq.wmflabs.org/
WDQ can run many advanced queries, but I am using my bespoke query language.
I could try to write a wrapper around it, but have not had much (aka
none) experience with SPARQL. Are there some common use case examples
(even
Here's my take.
RDF standards, in themselves, don't address all of the issues needed in a
data wiki. I've been thinking about the math for data wikis and it seems
to me you could have a bipartite system where you have the fact and then
the operational metadata about the fact and these are
Martynas,
Denny is right. You could set up a Virtuoso endpoint based on our RDF
exports. This would be quite nice to have. That's one important reason
why we created the exports, and I really hope we will soon see this
happening. We are dealing here with a very large project, and the
FWIW, put me in the camp of people who want to see wikidata available
via RDF as well. I won't argue that RDF needs to be the *native*
format for Wikidata, but I think it would be a crying shame for such a
large knowledgebase to be cut off from seamless integration with the
rest of the LinkedData
Hey Phillip :)
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 7:41 PM, Phillip Rhodes
motley.crue@gmail.com wrote:
FWIW, put me in the camp of people who want to see wikidata available
via RDF as well. I won't argue that RDF needs to be the *native*
format for Wikidata, but I think it would be a crying shame
The data model is close to RDF, but not quite. Statements in items are
reified statements, etc. Technically it is semantic data, where RDF is
one possible representaton.
There was a decision choice to keep Mediawiki to ease reuse within the
Wikimedia sites, mostly so users could reuse their
Gerard,
what about query functionality for example? This has been long
promised but shows no real progress.
And why do you think practical cases cannot be implemented using RDF?
What is the justification for ignoring the whole standard and
implementation stack? What makes you think Wikidata can
John, please see inline:
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 8:39 AM, John Erling Blad jeb...@gmail.com wrote:
The data model is close to RDF, but not quite. Statements in items are
reified statements, etc. Technically it is semantic data, where RDF is
one possible representaton.
Well it has been shown
Hoi,
Query has been promised and unofficially we have it for a VERY long time..
It is called WDQ. it is used in many tools. The official query will only
provide a subset of functionality for quite some time as I understand it.
Practical cases in RDF for what by whom ? Wikidata is first and
Gerard,
what is there practical about having a query language that 1) is not a
standard and never will be 2) is not supported by any other tool or
project and never will be?
I would understand this kind of reasoning coming from a hobbyist
project, but not from one claiming to be a global free
Hoi,
I find it funny that you ask EXACTLY the right question but you get the
opposite answer; I do not care for the query language I care for it being
available. As a consequence millions of edits have been made. Consequently
this query tool is practical. I have been told that a layer on top of it
Am 28.10.2014 11:26, schrieb Martynas Jusevičius:
And why do you think practical cases cannot be implemented using RDF?
What is the justification for ignoring the whole standard and
implementation stack? What makes you think Wikidata can do better than
RDF?
We don't ignore the standard, but,
Hey all,
so I see there is some work being done on mapping Wikidata data model
to RDF [1].
Just a thought: what if you actually used RDF and Wikidata's concepts
modeled in it right from the start? And used standard RDF tools, APIs,
query language (SPARQL) instead of building the whole thing from
Hoi,
Hell no. Wikidata is first and foremost a product that is actually used. It
has that way from the start. Prioritising RDF over actual practical use
cases is imho wrong. If anything the continuous tinkering on the format of
dumps has mostly brought us grieve. Dumps that can no longer be read
Eric,
Two general remarks first:
(1) Protege is for small and medium ontologies, but not really for such
large datasets. To get SPARQL support for the whole data, you could to
install Virtuoso. It also comes with a simple Web query UI. Virtuoso
does not do much reasoning, but you can use
Markus,
Thanks for the thorough reply!
you can use SPARQL 1.1 transitive closure in queries (using * after
properties), so you can find all subclasses there too. (You could also
try this in Protege ...)
I had a feeling I was missing something basic. (I'm also new to SPARQL.)
Using * after
Hoi,
When you leave out qualifiers, you will find that Ronald Reagan was never
president of the United States and only an actor. Yes, omitting the
statements with qualifiers is wrong but as a consequence the total of the
information is wrong as well.
I do not see the point of this functionality.
Hi Gerard,
On 13/06/14 11:08, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
When you leave out qualifiers, you will find that Ronald Reagan was
never president of the United States and only an actor. Yes, omitting
the statements with qualifiers is wrong but as a consequence the total
of the information is wrong
Hoi,
There is a huge difference between being complete and leaving out essential
information. When you consider Ronald Reagan [1], it is essential
information that he was a president of the USA and a governor of
California. When you only make him an actor and a politician, the
information you are
I think it is a reasonable ambition that the 'preferred' statement should
always provide accurate information even when the qualifiers are missing.
For example, if we have population figures for various years and 'applies
to part' figures for males, females, under 20's etc. then the most recent
Hoi,
Not really. What is being discussed is a tool that is external to Wikidata.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 13 June 2014 12:37, Joe Filceolaire filceola...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it is a reasonable ambition that the 'preferred' statement should
always provide accurate information even when the
Never forget that even the full data, with all the qualifiers included, is,
in most cases, little more information than what is contained in the lead
paragraph of a complete wikipedia article.
Wikidata will be useful but it will never replace the encyclopedia articles
and will, I believe, be most
Hi Gerard,
As I said, I don't follow your arguments. Wikidata Query, for example,
has also started without any qualifiers at all, and yet it was a useful
tool from the beginning.
Your feedback is always welcome, but there is a point when critique is
no longer constructive, and when it is
Hoi,
Joe, plain vanilla Wikidata is not informative. It provides statements in
no particular order and it does it in a way where you have to scroll-a-lot
to see it all. It takes tools like Reasonator to organise the data so that
it becomes informative. With a little code it is possible to provide
Am 13.06.2014 11:08, schrieb Gerard Meijssen:
Hoi,
When you leave out qualifiers, you will find that Ronald Reagan was
never president of the United States and only an actor. Yes, omitting
the statements with qualifiers is wrong but as a consequence the total
of the information is wrong as
On 13/06/14 15:52, Bene* wrote:
...
Did I understand you right, Markus, that you leave out all statements
which have at least one qualifier? Wouldn't it make more sense to leave
out the qualifiers only but add the statements without qualifiers
anyway? Because this would solve eg. Gerard's
Gerard,
You sometimes sound as if everything is lost just because somebody put
an RDF file on the Web ;-)
If you don't like the simplified export, why don't you just use our main
export which contains all the data? Can't we all be happy -- the people
who want simple and the people who want
Hoi,
I do not mind RDF. I do not mind OWL. What I do mind is that people assume
that everyone assumes that others know what it means and appreciate it as
being good. When people use an RDF tool that produces obviously
incomplete and therefore incorrect information, it is beyond me that an
Markus,
Thank you very much for this. Translating Wikidata into the language of
the Semantic Web is important. Being able to explore the Wikidata taxonomy
[1] by doing SPARQL queries in Protege [2] (even primitive queries) is
really neat, e.g.
SELECT ?subject
WHERE
{
?subject
On 10/06/14 22:50, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
It is stated that there are no qualifiers included. In one of the
articles you write that it is to be understood that the vailidity of the
information is dependent on the existing qualifiers.
What is the value of these RDF exports with the
Hi all,
We are now offering regular RDF dumps for the content of Wikidata:
http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-exports/rdf/
RDF is the Resource Description Framework of the W3C that can be used to
exchange data on the Web. The Wikidata RDF exports consist of several
files that contain
Hoi,
It is stated that there are no qualifiers included. In one of the articles
you write that it is to be understood that the vailidity of the information
is dependent on the existing qualifiers.
What is the value of these RDF exports with the qualifiers missing?
Thanks,
GerardM
On 10
All,
We've just commissioned the latest edition of the Linked Open Data (LOD)
Cloud cache that we maintain [1]. As part of this effort, we included
Wikidata's RDF dumps and Freebase cross references. Thus far, I am not
convinced that we've actually loaded all of data out there, so I am
Am 21.10.2013 23:43, schrieb Kingsley Idehen:
Kingsley, do you think having two 303s (from /entity/Q$1 to
/wiki/Special:EntityData/$1 and another one to
wiki/Special:EntityData/$1.xxx)
would be appropriate or at least better than what we have now?
Yes.
303 is what you want. Also note
Am 17.10.2013 20:16, schrieb Kingsley Idehen:
On 10/17/13 12:46 PM, Daniel Kinzler wrote:
I've run it through our variant of Vapour re. Linked Data verification:
http://bit.ly/1gM7oYa .
Nearly there. Your use of 302 is what's going to trip up existing Linked
Data
clients. Why aren't you
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
Daniel,
Being interoperable with the Linked Open Data cloud via DBpedia is a low
cost high-impact affair for Wikidata. I don't know of anything of higher
impact in the grand scheme of thing bearing in mind we all
On 10/21/13 8:58 AM, Lydia Pintscher wrote:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
Daniel,
Being interoperable with the Linked Open Data cloud via DBpedia is a low
cost high-impact affair for Wikidata. I don't know of anything of higher
impact in the
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
If you can share the existing re-write rules file via a URL or github
project, I'll have get someone (should I not get round to it) to fix them
accordingly. Ball back in your court, so to speak :-)
Hehe. Here you
On 10/21/13 9:59 AM, Lydia Pintscher wrote:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
If you can share the existing re-write rules file via a URL or github
project, I'll have get someone (should I not get round to it) to fix them
accordingly. Ball back in
From 'temporary redirect' to 'see other' ?
Addshore
On 21 October 2013 16:48, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
On 10/21/13 9:59 AM, Lydia Pintscher wrote:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com
wrote:
If you can share the existing re-write
Am 21.10.2013 16:48, schrieb Kingsley Idehen:
Can someone not change 302 to 303 re: RewriteRule ^/entity/(.*)$
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:EntityData/$1 [R=302,QSA] ?
The thing is that we intended this to be an internal apache rewrite, not a HTTP
redirect at all. Because
On 10/21/13 4:52 PM, Daniel Kinzler wrote:
Am 21.10.2013 16:48, schrieb Kingsley Idehen:
Can someone not change 302 to 303 re: RewriteRule ^/entity/(.*)$
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:EntityData/$1 [R=302,QSA] ?
The thing is that we intended this to be an internal apache rewrite, not
On 10/2/13 1:09 PM, Daniel Kinzler wrote:
Am 02.10.2013 17:00, schrieb Kingsley Idehen:
Daniel,
When will the fixed data be generated and published?
October 14, if all goes well.
-- daniel
___
Wikidata-l mailing list
-
From: Kingsley Idehen
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 9:11 AM
To: wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Wikidata RDF Issues
___
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Wikidata RDF Issues
___
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
___
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l
Am 16.10.2013 15:11, schrieb Kingsley Idehen:
On 10/2/13 1:09 PM, Daniel Kinzler wrote:
Am 02.10.2013 17:00, schrieb Kingsley Idehen:
Daniel,
When will the fixed data be generated and published?
October 14, if all goes well.
-- daniel
___
On 10/16/13 4:43 PM, Daniel Kinzler wrote:
Am 16.10.2013 15:11, schrieb Kingsley Idehen:
On 10/2/13 1:09 PM, Daniel Kinzler wrote:
Am 02.10.2013 17:00, schrieb Kingsley Idehen:
Daniel,
When will the fixed data be generated and published?
October 14, if all goes well.
-- daniel
Am 01.10.2013 20:14, schrieb Tom Morris:
How about not creating a fork just so you can delete a couple of
directories? The full download is a whopping 260KB. Is that really too
big/complex to include in its entirety and just ignore the parts you don't
use?
Not deploying code we do not use,
On 10/2/13 10:42 AM, Daniel Kinzler wrote:
Am 01.10.2013 20:14, schrieb Tom Morris:
How about not creating a fork just so you can delete a couple of
directories? The full download is a whopping 260KB. Is that really too
big/complex to include in its entirety and just ignore the parts you don't
On 02/10/2013 15:42, Daniel Kinzler daniel.kinz...@wikimedia.de wrote:
Am 01.10.2013 20:14, schrieb Tom Morris:
How about not creating a fork just so you can delete a couple of
directories? The full download is a whopping 260KB. Is that really too
big/complex to include in its entirety and
Am 02.10.2013 17:00, schrieb Kingsley Idehen:
Daniel,
When will the fixed data be generated and published?
October 14, if all goes well.
-- daniel
___
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
On 10/2/13 1:09 PM, Daniel Kinzler wrote:
Am 02.10.2013 17:00, schrieb Kingsley Idehen:
Daniel,
When will the fixed data be generated and published?
October 14, if all goes well.
-- daniel
___
Wikidata-l mailing list
Ok, I have now found and tackled the issue.
This was indeed a bug in EasyRDF that got fixed since we forked half a year ago.
I have updated easyrdf_lite now:
https://github.com/Wikidata/easyrdf_lite/commit/025c32da17d82a51950230b80c254be5b3dc20d6.
The respective patch for Wikibase is in review,
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Daniel Kinzler
daniel.kinz...@wikimedia.dewrote:
Ok, I have now found and tackled the issue.
This was indeed a bug in EasyRDF that got fixed since we forked half a
year ago.
[]
Having to maintain the fork is really a pain, I wish there was a better
way
All,
See: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q76
The resource to which the URI above resolves contains:
schema:version 72358096^^xsd:integer .
It should be:
schema:version 72358096^^xsd:integer .
Who is responsible for RDF resource publication and issue report handling?
--
Regards,
Kingsley
There was a long discussion not so long ago about using established
RDF tools for Wikipedia dumps instead of home-brewed ones, but I guess
someone hasn't learnt the lesson yet.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
All,
See:
Wikidata uses a fork of EasyRdf:
https://github.com/Wikidata/easyrdf_lite
Which should handle this correctly.
However I don't seem to be able to content negotiate for Turtle today.
This is returning HTML for me now:
curl -H 'Accept: text/turtle' http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q76
Does anyone have
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
All,
See: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q76
The resource to which the URI above resolves contains:
schema:version 72358096^^xsd:integer .
It should be:
schema:version 72358096^^xsd:integer .
Who is
Am 26.09.2013 14:54, schrieb Nicholas Humfrey:
Wikidata uses a fork of EasyRdf:
https://github.com/Wikidata/easyrdf_lite
Which should handle this correctly.
Looks like it doesn't, but I'll investigate.
However I don't seem to be able to content negotiate for Turtle today.
This is
On 26/09/2013 15:33, Daniel Kinzler daniel.kinz...@wikimedia.de wrote:
Am 26.09.2013 14:54, schrieb Nicholas Humfrey:
Wikidata uses a fork of EasyRdf:
https://github.com/Wikidata/easyrdf_lite
Which should handle this correctly.
Looks like it doesn't, but I'll investigate.
However I don't
On 9/26/13 10:27 AM, Lydia Pintscher wrote:
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
All,
See: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q76
The resource to which the URI above resolves contains:
schema:version 72358096^^xsd:integer .
It should be:
schema:version
On 8/12/13 12:56 PM, Nicolas Torzec wrote:
With respect to the RDF export I'd advocate for:
1) an RDF format with one fact per line.
2) the use of a mature/proven RDF generation framework.
Yes, keep it simple, use Turtle.
The additional benefit of Turtle is that is addresses a wide data
With respect to the RDF export I'd advocate for:
1) an RDF format with one fact per line.
2) the use of a mature/proven RDF generation framework.
Optimizing too early based on a limited and/or biased view of the
potential use cases may not be a good idea in the long run.
I'd rather keep it simple
On 12/08/13 17:56, Nicolas Torzec wrote:
With respect to the RDF export I'd advocate for:
1) an RDF format with one fact per line.
2) the use of a mature/proven RDF generation framework.
Optimizing too early based on a limited and/or biased view of the
potential use cases may not be a good idea
Good morning. I just found a bug that was caused by a bug in the
Wikidata dumps (a value that should be a URI was not). This led to a few
dozen lines with illegal qnames of the form w: . The updated script
fixes this.
Cheers,
Markus
On 09/08/13 18:15, Markus Krötzsch wrote:
Hi Sebastian,
Hi Markus!
Thank you very much.
Regarding your last email:
Of course, I am aware of your arguments in your last email, that the
dump is not official. Nevertheless, I am expecting you and others to
code (or supervise) similar RDF dumping projects in the future.
Here are two really important
Hi Markus,
we just had a look at your python code and created a dump. We are still
getting a syntax error for the turtle dump.
I saw, that you did not use a mature framework for serializing the
turtle. Let me explain the problem:
Over the last 4 years, I have seen about two dozen people
Hi Sebastian,
On 09/08/13 15:44, Sebastian Hellmann wrote:
Hi Markus,
we just had a look at your python code and created a dump. We are still
getting a syntax error for the turtle dump.
You mean just as in at around 15:30 today ;-)? The code is under
heavy development, so changes are quite
Markus Krötzsch, 04/08/2013 12:32:
* Wikidata uses be-x-old as a code, but MediaWiki messages for this
language seem to use be-tarask as a language code. So there must be a
mapping somewhere. Where?
Where I linked it.
* MediaWiki's http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgDummyLanguageCodes
On 04/08/13 13:17, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
Markus Krötzsch, 04/08/2013 12:32:
* Wikidata uses be-x-old as a code, but MediaWiki messages for this
language seem to use be-tarask as a language code. So there must be a
mapping somewhere. Where?
Where I linked it.
Are you sure? The file you
Markus Krötzsch, 04/08/2013 17:35:
Are you sure? The file you linked has mappings from site ids to language
codes, not from language codes to language codes. Do you mean to say:
If you take only the entries of the form 'XXXwiki' in the list, and
extract a language code from the XXX, then you get
Hi,
I am happy to report that an initial, yet fully functional RDF export
for Wikidata is now available. The exports can be created using the
wda-export-data.py script of the wda toolkit [1]. This script downloads
recent Wikidata database dumps and processes them to create RDF/Turtle
files.
Markus Krötzsch, 03/08/2013 15:48:
(3) Limited language support. The script uses Wikidata's internal
language codes for string literals in RDF. In some cases, this might not
be correct. It would be great if somebody could create a mapping from
Wikidata language codes to BCP47 language codes (let
79 matches
Mail list logo
