/Development/RDF
[5] http://linkedgeodata
On 05/04/2013 11:47 AM, Andrew Gray wrote:
On 4 May 2013 00:49, Claus Stadler cstad...@informatik.uni-leipzig.de wrote:
Hi,
Shouldn't OSM use Wikipedia URLs as UUIDs where applicable rather than
Wikipedia referring to database identifiers? (The answer is a clear
Claus Stadler cstad...@informatik.uni-leipzig.de
mailto:cstad...@informatik.uni-leipzig.de
Hi,
Shouldn't OSM use Wikipedia URLs as UUIDs where applicable rather
than Wikipedia referring to database identifiers? (The answer is a
clear 'yes' from my side.)
In fact
Hi,
I must say wow, as I did not expect my mail to trigger such a long
discussion, that even already brings up proposals. I was busy with some
tasks and therefore did not reply in the past three days.
But its great to see such response ;)
So as it was pointed out multiple times already,
Hi,
Thank you for your response.
I believe Richard F has made comments in the past that we shouldn't
do this
Well, I don't know about the discussion yet, maybe you could give me a
hint for which subject to search for?
I just want to mention, that for Wikipedia there exists an analysis
Hi,
Is anyone aware of
1) any analysis/research about the stability of OSM ids?
2) any tool(s) that attempts to figure out whether
a) the meaning of an entity (node, way, relation) changed between
two versions (e.g. using the id of pub and marking it as a cafe).
b) a new id is the same
,
Claus Stadler
[1] http://aksw.org
[2] http://linkedgeodata.org
[3] http://openstreetmap.org
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web
[5] http://dbpedia.org
[6] http://geonames.org
[7] http://translatewiki.net/wiki/Translating:OpenStreetMap
[8] http://www.sjjb.co.uk/mapicons/
[9 ]http
6 matches
Mail list logo