Re: [Wikitech-l] Wikidata Infoboxes
On Jul 10, 2012, at 10:29 PM, jmccl...@hypergrove.com wrote: In short it is either * no wikipedias can be considered part of the semantic web * or all wikipedias stand at the center of the semantic web No. A conclusion like that seems to be conflicting with what wikidata is. Whether some Wikipedia's output is semantically correct is important, but (afaik) has *zero* relationship with Wikidata. And as such is not relevant here. Centralizing infobox designs is a good idea. Centralizing only the html output for infoboxes but doing the style locally, that sounds good too (as in, better than what we have now). But neither of those is or should be put in relation with wikidata. This sounds like one of the many things a template repository wiki will be doing. But wikidata is not a template repository and is explicitly designed to disallow anything even like it. -- Krinkle ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Wikidata Infoboxes
Krinkle, When you say Whether some Wikipedia's output is semantically correct is important, but (afaik) has *zero* relationship with Wikidata. And as such is not relevant here then I feel compelled to point out that an ontology is most certainly envisioned -- wikidata is implementing the SMW Property namespace! Undoubtedly it will use Category: for owl:Class representations, just like SMW. And builtin Datatypes, just like SMW. So, wikidata actually is *100%* concerned with the semantic web. Then your discussion turns to templates: Centralizing infobox designs is a good idea ... But neither (styling nor templates) is or should be put in relation with wikidata. Sorry but this unsupported assertion is irrelevant to whether wikipedias' requests to the wikidata server are for rdf triples or for html/a objects. Finally you note that This sounds like one of the many things a template repository wiki will be doing. But wikidata is not a template repository and is explicitly designed to disallow anything even like it. Apart from whether wikidata can play the role of a [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Template_repository] with regard to Infobox templates is totally beside the point here as the issue now is about what is being retrieved from wikidata -- is it rdf triples or html/a objects. In the former case, wikidata is the de facto designated hub for the entire constellation of wikipedias. In the other, each wikipedia is a source of reusable, annotated information, with a distinct possibility of retrieving information beyond the infobox from within the body of the article. I've earlier sketched the scenario of an author on a wikipedia who would log into wikidata, build an infobox for a topic, save it, and then transclude its page. Obviously wikidata will at some point provide that author a list of available templates -- **keyed by the type of topic named by the author**. So yes I think wikidata will over time naturally play the role of a language-sensitive repository of infobox templates (and queries and maps and charts and so forth - see [[mw:extension:semantic result format]]. Thanks - john ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Wikidata Infoboxes
Replies inline.
On Jul 11, 2012, at 6:23 AM, jmccl...@hypergrove.com wrote:
When you say Whether some Wikipedia's output is
semantically correct is important, but (afaik) has *zero* relationship
with Wikidata. And as such is not relevant here then I feel compelled
to point out that an ontology is most certainly envisioned -- wikidata
is implementing the SMW Property namespace! Undoubtedly it will use
Category: for owl:Class representations, just like SMW. And builtin
Datatypes, just like SMW. So, wikidata actually is *100%* concerned with
the semantic web.
I agree completely :). Wikidata will most certainly allow MediaWiki sites to
more easily output good and properly organized semantic data that is machine
readable and follows standards.
I am merely pointing out that, from what I've seen so far (note I am just
observing Wikidata, I'm not on their team or actively participate in its
development by other means) ..so far, that it is intended to allow including
data from a repository. And to allow that free of format constraints.
For example, one popular example used is the population of Berlin. I may want to
retrieve the raw number, of formatted according to the user language. Or perhaps
I want to output a table in an article with the yearly population numbers of the
last 20 years and then add ref invocations for the sources as known to
Wikidata.
Or perhaps I want an estimate of different sources (some source may indicate the
population at 2011-01-01 to be number X, another organization may have a
different method and came up with a different number at a different date in
2011). Or a range. Etc. Many variations possible.
And I might add that having semantic output does not require any form or
centralization. One can output semantic html with data attributes or whatever
microformat right from wikitext (like done on Wikipedia right through the
{{Persondata}} template[1]).
And likewise one will be able to output data from Wikidata without having to use
a particular format.
That's not to say that there shouldn't be any html view of wikidata by default,
that could be a very useful feature. I'll leave that up to someone else more
involved to comment about.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Persondata
-- Krinkle
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
