Hello Vincent, We identified the problem and added back a lot of missing coordinates. The problem will be 100% fixed in the next release which is due soon.
We apologize for any inconvenience. Cheers, Dimitris Sent from my mobile, please excuse my brevity. Hello Vincent, I ran the GeoExtractor for the English dump files again, as a first test. This resulted in the same geo-coordinates files as produced by the main extraction. The problem seems not to be near the surface. We will have a closer look at this in the coming weeks. Regards, Markus 2015-08-05 16:47 GMT+02:00 Vincent Malic <vma...@indiana.edu>: > Dear Dimitris, > > Thanks for the info, I really appreciate you looking into this. I've been > working with the MilitaryConflict data so that's the window through which I > noticed the missing triples, but since you mentioned there weren't any > changes to the conflict mapping I poked around a little more and I'm lead > to believe this isn't an issue with dbpedia extracting conflict data and > may have to do with geographic coordinates in general. As way of > illustration I took a look at the geographic coordinates dataset from the > 3.9 downloads, which has 1,987,961 triples, while the corresponding > geographic dataset on the 4.0 downloads page has only 2284 triples, which > seems like a significant drop for geographic data across the whole dbpedia > dataset. Perhaps there were some changes made to the extraction framework > for the general extraction of the Wikipedia "coord" tag? Hope this > information helps. > > Once again, thanks for looking into this issue. > > Best, > Vincent > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 3:25 AM Dimitris Kontokostas <jimk...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Thank you for the report Vincent, >> >> The online data are based on the new to-be-announced release 2015-04 >> >> What you found is indeed quite strange as there were no changes in >> - >> http://mappings.dbpedia.org/index.php/Mapping_en:Infobox_military_conflict >> >> - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_military_conflict >> - and from a sample of pages with missing coords I checked there were no >> substantial changes >> >> On the other hand, running a sample extraction of a page returns correct >> coordinates which complies with the DBpedia Live data >> >> http://mappings.dbpedia.org/server/extraction/en/extract?title=Battle_of_Augusta&revid=&format=trix&extractors=custom >> >> We will look further into this >> >> Best, >> Dimitris >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 10:08 PM, Vincent Malic <vma...@indiana.edu> >> wrote: >> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> I've only recently started working with dbpedia as a research resource, >>> so I apologize in advance if I'm asking a silly question with an obvious >>> answer. Dbpedia is a wonderful resource, a huge thanks to all of you on the >>> list who are putting hard work into it. >>> >>> It seems to me that there was a recent change to dbpedia that caused a >>> good chunk of information I've been working with to go missing. I've been >>> working with the geographical locations of military conflicts over the past >>> few months, stitching together a dataset from dbpedia triples that linked >>> several thousand battles to their locations via the georss:point predicate. >>> >>> I started rebuilding this dataset this week and it seems that much of >>> that information I saw before is missing. To illustrate, the following >>> query to the SPARQL endpoint at http://dbpedia.org/sparql produces only >>> 11 hits: >>> >>> select COUNT(?battle) as ?count >>> where { >>> ?battle rdf:type dbo:MilitaryConflict . >>> ?battle georss:point ?location . >>> } >>> >>> Just to make sure I wasn't going crazy I decided to do essentially the >>> same query to the dbpedia live SPARQL endpoint ( >>> http://live.dbpedia.org/sparql): >>> >>> select COUNT(?battle) as ?count >>> where { >>> ?battle rdf:type dbpedia-owl:MilitaryConflict . >>> ?battle georss:point ?location . >>> } >>> >>> This returns 4225 hits, which is more reminiscent of the amount of >>> results I got working with non-live dbpedia a few months ago. So, a few >>> months ago, vanilla dbpedia gave me several thousand results, and dbpedia >>> live right now does the same, but as of recently dbpedia vanilla only >>> returns 11 results. Any reason that this may be the case? Perhaps I'm >>> missing something quite simple? I appreciate any feed back. >>> >>> Thank you and best regards, >>> Vincent Malic >>> Ph.D Student in Information Science >>> School of Informatics and Computing >>> Indiana University, Bloomington >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Dbpedia-discussion mailing list >>> Dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Kontokostas Dimitris >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Dbpedia-discussion mailing list > Dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion > >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Dbpedia-discussion mailing list Dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion
