Hi Maarten,

    We are actively mapping to other ontologies using the exact match P2888
property. The disease ontology is one example which is actively
synchronized in Wikidata using the exact match property (P2888). This
property is inspired by the SKOS:exact match property. SKOS it self had
more mapping properties and I think it is a good idea to introduce some of
the other SKOS mapping properties in Wikidata such broad match and narrow
match.

Andra

On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 7:30 AM Maarten Dammers <maar...@mdammers.nl> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Last week I presented Wikidata at the Semantics conference in Vienna (
> https://2018.semantics.cc/ ). One question I asked people was: What is
> keeping you from using Wikidata? One of the common responses is that
> it's quite hard to combine Wikidata with the rest of the semantic web.
> We have our own private ontology that's a bit on an island. Most of our
> triples are in our own private format and not available in a more
> generic, more widely use ontology.
>
> Let's pick an example: Claude Lussan. No clue who he is, but my bot
> seems to have added some links and the item isn't too big. Our URI is
> http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q2977729 and this is equivalent of
> http://viaf.org/viaf/29578396 and
> http://data.bibliotheken.nl/id/thes/p173983111 . If you look at
> http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q2977729.rdf this equivalence is
> represented as:
> <wdtn:P214 rdf:resource="http://viaf.org/viaf/29578396"/>
> <wdtn:P1006 rdf:resource="http://data.bibliotheken.nl/id/thes/p173983111
> "/>
>
> Also outputting it in a more generic way would probably make using it
> easier than it is right now. Last discussion about this was at
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property_talk:P1921 , but no response
> since June.
>
> That's one way of linking up, but another way is using equivalent
> property ( https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1628 ) and equivalent
> class ( https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1709 ). See for example
> sex or gender ( https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P21) how it's
> mapped to other ontologies. This won't produce easier RDF, but some
> smart downstream users have figured out some SPARQL queries. So linking
> up our properties and classes to other ontologies will make using our
> data easier. This is a first step. Maybe it will be used in the future
> to generate more RDF, maybe not and we'll just document the SPARQL
> approach properly.
>
> The equivalent property and equivalent class are used, but not that
> much. Did anyone already try a structured approach with reporting? I'm
> considering parsing popular ontology descriptions and producing reports
> of what is linked to what so it's easy to make missing links, but I
> don't want to do double work here.
>
> What ontologies are important because these are used a lot? Some of the
> ones I came across:
> * https://www.w3.org/2009/08/skos-reference/skos.html
> * http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/
> * http://schema.org/
> * https://creativecommons.org/ns
> * http://dbpedia.org/ontology/
> * http://vocab.org/open/
> Any suggestions?
>
> Maarten
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to