Am 09.02.2015 um 13:26 schrieb Magnus Manske: > > > On Mon Feb 09 2015 at 11:27:06 Daniel Kinzler <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Am 09.02.2015 um 12:17 schrieb Magnus Manske: > > My autodesc API serves both at the moment, so the consumer can decide > which one > > they want to use. Automatic descriptions can "miss the point" sometimes, > but are > > generally more up-to-date. > > Can you post a link for us to play with? > > > Interface at > https://tools.wmflabs.org/autodesc/ > > Example JSONFM: > https://tools.wmflabs.org/autodesc/?q=Q3184929&lang=&mode=short&links=text&redlinks=&format=jsonfm
Thanks! > Just put them into wb_terms and not into the JSON. They could be displayed, > added to search results, and put into "description dumps". Maybe these could > even be sqlite databases, as there is little point analysing automatic > descriptions for wording; you'd need these descriptions to display with an > item, > so sqlite could be a way of getting them quickly. Since wb_terms has one row per term, and a field for the term type, it would be simple enough to inject "auto-descriptions". The only issue is that wb_terms is already pretty huge, and adding automatic descriptions in *all* languages would likely bloat it a lot more. Language variants could be omitted, but still - that's a lot of data... -- Daniel Kinzler Senior Software Developer Wikimedia Deutschland Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V. _______________________________________________ Wikidata-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
