Things about the issue work/edition are simpler for projects like fr.source, bn.source and other projects with a very high proofread/total ratio, since there's usually an unique Index page linked with an unique Commons djvu/pdf page and very often an unique source of that image. Things are much more confused with "naked" works. I suggest - for simplicity - that by now any effort should be focused on proofread works/editions ignoring the case of naked works.
I don't know in detail the work flow into de.source, German language being a hard obstacle - what's a pity! Alex 2017-10-23 14:04 GMT+02:00 Thomas Pellissier Tanon < [email protected]>: > Hi, > > I am also going to be at Wikidata Con. > > In the French Wikisource we started a Wikidata project. > https://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Aide:Wikidata We plan to do a small > hackathon soon to start uploading our book data to Wikidata (I already have > a prototype of tools that extract data from Wikisource to upload them to > Wikidata but it still needs some work to do the job well). > > > > Still my biggest issues/hurdles for good data are > > • capture of information from WS to WD — it just is hard work, WEF > tool is still not sufficiently aligned > > Yes, we need some specific tools. > > > • the ever problematic inability to link WP book to WS edition > through Wikidata > What we could do is use the new Wikisource MediaWiki extension to add a > piece of code to add links to Wikipedia from Wikisource and to the other > Wikisources. We could start prototyping it using lua modules. > > > • that cannot capture information for Wikidata at archive.org, > and relate that through to the file at Commons, and then the edition at > Wikisource (or pick another starting point and interrelate0 > > In Wikidata you can point to the commons file and to IA [1] > > > • the inability to create an edition from a book/work, the > inability to create a work from an edition > > Yes, we should create a UI on top of Wikidata to do such task. > > Thomas > > [1] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P724 > > > Le 23 oct. 2017 à 13:48, Gerard Meijssen <[email protected]> a > écrit : > > > > Hoi, > > A Wikipedia matra is be bold and another is that things are a work in > progress. In my opinion, what we need is the name of a book, its author and > the fact that people can read it. All the other stuff like what "version" > is a particular book pales in comparison. We should not let the quest for > perfection be the enemy of the good. > > > > Also Archive.org and Open Library are two different entities. Both the > Open Library and the Internet Archive have their own identifiers for > authors and they are not necessarily linked. We are talking about books > from the Open Library and they are available as an E-book or a PDF. > > > > My problem is not with Open Library, my problem is that we do not know > what is available from Wikisource as a finished good ready for reading. In > the end what we advertise is the author the book, versions are secondary. > > Thanks, > > GerardM > > > > On 23 October 2017 at 12:36, billinghurst <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Nicolas, > > > > Still my biggest issues/hurdles for good data are > > • capture of information from WS to WD — it just is hard work, WEF > tool is still not sufficiently aligned > > • the ever problematic inability to link WP book to WS edition > through Wikidata > > • that cannot capture information for Wikidata at archive.org, > and relate that through to the file at Commons, and then the edition at > Wikisource (or pick another starting point and interrelate0 > > • the inability to create an edition from a book/work, the > inability to create a work from an edition > > Maybe you can even ask what we need to improve to get bots to run > through and autocapture, is our meta-data in headers not suitable? What is > it that is problematic? > > > > Thanks for asking. > > > > -- billinghurst (being so remote for the action <sigh>) > > > > > > ------ Original Message ------ > > From: "Nicolas VIGNERON" <[email protected]> > > To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the free library" < > [email protected]> > > Sent: 23/10/2017 7:30:44 PM > > Subject: [Wikisource-l] WikidataCon 2017 > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> For information, the WikidataCon is this week-end in Berlin. While > there is no talk nominatively around Wikisource, there is some intervention > on relation subjects (inventaire.io, WikiCite, German National Library, > FRBR, and so on). > >> > >> The event is sold out, but you can follow remotely some of the > presentation (link will be added here : https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/ > Wikidata:WikidataCon_2017/Program/Remote ). > >> > >> I'll be there and I'll be happy to talk about Wikisource, who else will > be there? > >> > >> Cdlt, ~nicolas > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikisource-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikisource-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikisource-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l > >
_______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
