I do appreciate that Denny Jeroen and Markus cross-fertilize. But the money is flowing now towards _REWRITING SMW FROM SCRATCH_, which worries me as I am fairly sure there will be no good migration path at the inevitable time SMW support is terminated. The fact that one (is said) to be only for small wikis (which I dispute) and the other is not, is hardly a functional difference that will prevent confusion overlap inefficiency. As I've said elsewhere, saying one is capable of multi-lingual support while implying the other is not, is simply wrong -- smw is fine for multilingual support if the implemented data model has appropriate language tags. (note: I am creating a multi-lingual wiki now, based on smw, for a client).
My point is that for maximum success, wikidata should strive to welcome the smw community (back) into the mw community, to have support from those who put their professional faith in smw. By your own admission that there is substantial overlap, Wikidata will consequently and permanently split the SMW community, and this sickens me. John On 13.06.2012 09:04, Lydia Pintscher wrote: > On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 5:36 PM, <jmccl...@hypergrove.com> wrote: > >> Hi Lydia, 'We' are people who committed professionally to the SMW (and Halo) approach to enterprise computing and 'we' are clients who have invested in this approach. We'll want to install wikidata-client along with smw to get at infobox data (if such is the ultimate design). We'll want to install wikidata-host to stay current with where all the investment dollars, the technical interest, etc, are flowing. Yet you assert that smw & wikidata have different target groups (without defining either). > > Ok then let me define it more clearly. Wikidata's clear goal is to > serve the Wikipedias. Use in other contexts will also be possible and > encouraged but Wikipedia is the main target. It is for a project that > values references for all the structured data and it is supposed to > serve a multi-language audience. > SMW is well established and used in professional and non-professional > projects outside of Wikipedia. It usually serves smaller wikis and has > quite some use in companies for their internal knowledge management. > Obviously there is overlap but in the end the projects are distinct > enough to co-exist just fine. Markus wrote a long email about this > here: http://firstname.lastname@example.org/msg03369.html > >> However, I believe they are the SAME because their objectives are the same: to integrate structured data into the MW editing/display environment. There's not room for multiple implementations of tools with the same objective. > > If you define the goal that broadly then yes it might be the same for > both. But this is actually too broad. See above. Links: ------  http://www.wikimedia.de  mailto:Wikidataemail@example.com  https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidatafirstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l