done this change.
2013/6/20 Denny Vrandečić denny.vrande...@wikimedia.de
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
Hi David,
really thanks for this email.
I'm at OAI8 (conference of Open Access in Geneva), with several fellow
wikimedians,
and I'd like to express some thoughts related to yours.
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 6:47 AM, David Cuenca dacu...@gmail.com wrote:
All this led me to think about the emotional
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 03:59:13PM +0100, Neil Harris wrote:
WordNet does not seem to be under a free license -- see
http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wordnet/license/
Since Wikidata's CC0 licensing allows commercial use, surely
integrating any kind of data from WordNet risks conflict with
Hoi,
Denny, when you look at the data currently in Wikidata, you find what is in
essence more than a basis for a translation dictionary.
The notion that we need something separate is a notion you should reasses.
What we need is some clean-up of the labels currently in use. What we also
need are
It was never intended to create a Wiktionary Database separate from
Wikidata, but have it being a part of Wikidata.
2013/6/21 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
Hoi,
Denny, when you look at the data currently in Wikidata, you find what is
in essence more than a basis for a
Ww do need another wikidata, only separate namespace for items
(words) and some separate properties
JAnD
2013/6/21 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
We do not need another Wikidata for Wiktionary
Thanks,
GerarM
___
Wikidata-l
Did you mean to say We do *not* need another Wikidata? Otherwise I am
confused by your comment.
On Jun 21, 2013 12:08 PM, Jan Dudík jan.du...@gmail.com wrote:
Ww do need another wikidata, only separate namespace for items
(words) and some separate properties
JAnD
2013/6/21 Gerard Meijssen
Am 21.06.2013 14:44, schrieb Gerard Meijssen:
Hoi,
Denny, when you look at the data currently in Wikidata, you find what is in
essence more than a basis for a translation dictionary.
I would say it's excellent as a thesaurus which can be used for cross-lingual
tagging, named entity
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Daniel Kinzler daniel.kinz...@wikimedia.de
wrote:
For literature grade translations, that is, for a true dictionary, I
believe
that you need to full range of nuances attached to each word and each word
sense, which is distinct from the platonic concepts
Heya folks :)
Here's your summary of what happened around Wikidata this week:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Status_updates/2013_06_21
Cheers
Lydia
--
Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
Community Communications for Technical Projects
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
I was thinking about items vs properties and Commons. I am not sure a
F entity is necessary. In theory, each file on Commons can be linked
to another one, and each item on WikiData can be linked to another
one, but those links do not necessarily need to interconnect with
Commons. If a Commons file
11 matches
Mail list logo