Hi,
Is the 'template' word so bad? Paraphrasing Daniel's definition of the
MediaWiki template, one could see a 'WikiData template' as
a set of of properties that can be re-used, e.g. to make create statements
about a certain class. (the 'parameter' bit could be understood as adding or
removing properties from the templates, e.g. using twice a property or adding a
new one when it's needed).
What we're after seems to exist already, described as 'item structure':
http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Item_structure
Or 'list of properties':
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:List_of_properties/Works
'schema convention' matches the idea, but the wording may be too abstract. I
come from a community that calls such things 'description set profiles'; such
expressions have a hard time being adopted in less technical communities...
About the text values. A big +1 to Daniel at not trying to represent
semi-structured text, which is meant to piggyback structured data in legacy
systems that can't handle it. The matter is rather the availability in Wikidata
of text-like summaries like the dbpedia-owl:abstract at
http://dbpedia.org/page/Castle . Having things like this together with the
Wikidata data would be great for data-reusers like us, instead of having to
fetch it from elsewhere!
Antoine
---
Antoine Isaac
R&D Manager, Europeana.eu
On 4/7/15 3:21 PM, Valentine Charles 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
<mailto: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
>
athttp://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>
> <mailto: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.
>
> --
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
