Well probably not, as it is an ongoing project. You can post questions there however on the talk page that are more likely to generate useful answers for you than this list. Most Wikidatans involved there don't speak English as a first language and I don't think they are frequent readers of this mailing list. For specific questions on properties for paintings, I believe you can best look at the Wikidata items for the Mona Lisa and Vermeer's "Milkmaid" aka "The Yellow Kitchenmaid"
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Valentine Charles <valentine...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Yes I might not use the right term here especially if you use it already > in a different context. What I mean is that it would be good to have list > of properties that can be used for a given thing. For instance if you want > to describe a painting here the list of properties you can use. > https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_sum_of_all_paintings points > to a page listing some properties that can be used for painting but not all > of them. > > Best, > Valentine > > 2015-04-07 15:15 GMT+02:00 Daniel Kinzler <daniel.kinz...@wikimedia.de>: > >> >> I'm confused by your use of the term "template" here. In the context of >> MediaWiki, "template" refers to a bit of wikitext that can be >> parametrized and >> re-used, e.g. to make info-boxes. >> >> If I understand correctly, what you mean is a kind of schema saying which >> properties can and should be present on items of which type. The Wikibase >> software has no concept of such schemas, on Wikidata such schemas are >> defined >> and enforced by convention only. >> >> For the sake of clarity, I suggest to use the term "schema convention" >> for this, >> to avoid confusion with wikitext templates. >> >> Am 07.04.2015 um 13:12 schrieb Valentine Charles: >> > Hello, >> > >> > I wanted to get an overview of all the properties used boy the instance >> Painting >> > (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3305213) for further mapping with the >> Europeana >> > Data Model. >> > My initial thought that I would find a representative list >> > at >> http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Item_structure >> > but in fact I have found much more properties used in association with >> painting. >> > So I was wondering whether it would be a good idea to update the >> template >> > mentioned above with the additional properties. >> > I think it would be really interesting for GLAMs to have access to to >> > representative templates listing all the properties used for a given >> type of >> > objects. It would help them to understand Wikidata and to compare it >> with their >> > own data. I think it would also help mappings activities. I on behalf of >> > Europeana would be happy to help in this task and also facilitate the >> > discussions with GLAMs around Wikidata. >> > >> > What do you think? >> > >> > Best wishes, >> > Valentine >> > >> > 2015-04-04 23:45 GMT+02:00 Stas Malyshev <smalys...@wikimedia.org >> > <mailto:smalys...@wikimedia.org>>: >> > >> > Hi! >> > >> > > For things that actually *are* free text, and not terribly long, >> a monolongual >> > > (or, in the future, multilingual) text property could be used. >> "quote" already >> > > exists, "abstract" could be added, pending community discussion. >> Length >> > > limitations can be adjusted if need be. >> > >> > Maybe if the need of bigger texts arises we can have separate field >> > type? Right now the storage model is not very good for storing >> texts of >> > non-negligible sizes, especially multilingual ones (x800 languages). >> > OTOH, we have a type that allows us to use multimedia by integrating >> > with Commons. So maybe the same idea with using some other wiki - >> > quotes? sources? for bigger text snippets would work too? Just >> > brainstorming here :) >> > >> > > What I was warning against is continuing the misuse of text >> fields for >> > > semi-structured or even fully structured data that I have often >> seen in GLAM >> > > meta-data. That kind of thing should not be copied to Wikidata. >> > >> > Right. I think it may be useful here to understand which kinds of >> text >> > we're talking about which can't be structured but are big enough to >> > cause concern. I.e. if it's quotes - we already have wikiquote, >> right? Etc. >> > >> > -- >> > Stas Malyshev >> > smalys...@wikimedia.org <mailto:smalys...@wikimedia.org> >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wikidata-l mailing list >> > Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto: >> 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 >> > >> >> >> -- >> Daniel Kinzler >> Senior Software Developer >> >> Wikimedia Deutschland >> Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
