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 (in the paper I referenced) that Wikidata can be modeled as RDF. And there is no reason why it couldn't be, because in RDF anyone can say anything about anything. > There was a decision choice to keep Mediawiki to ease reuse within the > Wikimedia sites, mostly so users could reuse their knowledge, but also > for devs to reuse existing infrastructure. This is exactly the decision that I question. I think it was completely misguided. If the goal was to reuse knowledge and infrastructure, then Wikidata has failed completely, as there is more infrastructure and knowledge of RDF than there ever will be for Mediawiki, or any structured/semantic data model for that matter. > > Some of the problems with Wd comes from the fact that the similarities > isn't clear enough for the users, and possibly the devs, which have > resulted in a slightly introvert community and a technical structure > that is slightly more Wikipedia-centric than necessary. Here I can only agree with you. That is not an RDF problem though. > > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Gerard Meijssen > <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> wrote: >> 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 like >> currently for the Wikidata statistics really hurt. >> >> So lets not spend time at this time on RDF, Lets ensure that what we have >> works, works well and plan carefully for a better RDF but lets only have it >> go in production AFTER we know that it works well. >> Thanks, >> GerardM >> >> On 28 October 2014 02:46, Martynas Jusevičius <marty...@graphity.org> wrote: >>> >>> 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 >>> scratch? >>> >>> Is it just me or was this decision really a colossal waste of resources? >>> >>> >>> [1] http://korrekt.org/papers/Wikidata-RDF-export-2014.pdf >>> >>> Martynas >>> http://graphityhq.com >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
