As I am just in the middle of trying to put together a high-quality
information base using DBpedia 2016-10, I'll vote strongly for more-frequent
extractions at the expense of dropping some of the datasets.
The problem that I have run into is that there are some major errors in at
least the Italian
On 9/25/17 12:31 PM, Sebastian Hellmann wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> we are currently having quite a discussion about a stretch at DBpedia.
>
> The main point is that we spent a lot of time maintaining the current
> way DBpedia is done, i.e. bi-annual releases. Personally, I feel that
> our time would be
Hi all,
we are currently having quite a discussion about a stretch at DBpedia.
The main point is that we spent a lot of time maintaining the current
way DBpedia is done, i.e. bi-annual releases. Personally, I feel that
our time would be spent better on innovating it, i.e.
- having links, map
