Please, any one let me know about Wikidata project because I dont know about this.
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 5:29 PM, James Heald <jpm.he...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 with Magnus on years of birth and death > (but perhaps /only/ years of birth and death, or close surrogates eg years > of baptism and burial, and inception or publication date for things, > otherwise the search specificity would become useless with too many other > 'significant event' dates) > > I have found in the last few weeks I have been using the External ID value > search a lot, from its search-box on the talk page of the main page for a > property. > > I'm finding this works very well, so I wonder whether people think that > the ability to search for one of these strings directly in the general > search box would actually add anything, or is the custom search eg via the > talk-page search box already enough? > > -- James. > > > > On 27/07/2018 12:49, Magnus Manske wrote: > >> Hi, and thanks for working on this! >> >> My subjective view: >> * We don't need P2860/P1433 indexed, at least not at the moment >> * I would really like dates (mainly, born/died), especially if they work >> for "greater units", that is, I search for a year and get an item back, >> even though the statament is month- or day-precise >> >> Cheers, >> Magnus >> >> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:48 PM Stas Malyshev <smalys...@wikimedia.org> >> wrote: >> >> Hi! >>> >>> Today we are indexing in ElasticSearch almost all string properties >>> (except a few) and select item properties (P31 and P279). We've been >>> asked to extend this set and index more item properties >>> (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T199884). We did not do it from the >>> start because we did not want to add too much data to the index at once, >>> and wanted to see how the index behaves. To evaluate what this change >>> would mean, some statistics: >>> >>> All usage of item properties in statements is about 231 million uses >>> (according to sqid tool database). Of those, about 50M uses are >>> "instance of" which we are already indexing. Another 98M uses belong to >>> two properties - published in (P1433) and cites (P2860). Leaving about >>> 86M for the rest of the properties. >>> >>> So, if we index all the item properties except P2860 and P1433, we'll be >>> a little more than doubling the amount of data we're storing for this >>> field, which seems OK. But if we index those too, we'll be essentially >>> quadrupling it - which may be OK too, but is bigger jump and one that >>> may potentially cause some issues. >>> >>> So, we have two questions: >>> 1. Do we want to enable indexing for all item properties? Note that if >>> you just want to find items with certain statement values, Wikidata >>> Query Service matches this use case best. It's only in combination with >>> actual fulltext search where on-wiki search is better. >>> >>> 2. Do we need to index P2860 and P1433 at all, and if so, would it be ok >>> if we omit indexing for now? >>> >>> Would be glad to hear thoughts on the matter. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> -- >>> Stas Malyshev >>> smalys...@wikimedia.org >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikidata mailing list >>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikidata mailing list >> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >> >> > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. > https://www.avg.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata mailing list > Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata > -- Regards, Sushil Dutt 8800911840
_______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
