Hoi,
The questions are:
- would we advance a lot when we adopt the DBpedia schema as it is?
- Would we be open to include substantially more data?
- When we adopt the schema, can we tinker with it to suit our needs?
If the answers to these questions are yes, what is the point in
procrastinating???
One advantage of DBpedia over Freebase is that there is a real close
connection between it and the many languages it retrieves data from (more
than a hundred). If anything, I would really appreciate it when Wikidata is
much richer in data.. I just created a person who was head of state of
Uruguay, there is clear information in the es.wikipedia and we could just
have it when we look for the inclusion of DBpedia data..
Another thing to mention is that a new version based on the April dump is
about to be released (I have been told).
One other big thing of DBpedia is that it is connected to many external
resources. This will make it possible to verify our data against these
other sources. This is imho the more important thing to do with the time of
our volunteers. Doing the things that have already been done is a waste of
time.
Thanks,
Gerard
On 23 August 2013 16:15, Tom Morris <tfmorris(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 5:53 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I have been blogging a lot the last two days with DBpedia in mind. My
understanding is that at DBpedia a lot of effort went into making something
of a cohesive model of properties. Now that the "main type GND" is about to
be deleted, it makes sense to adopt much of the work that has been done at
DBpedia.
The benefits are:
- we will get access to academically reviewed data structures
- we do not have to wait and ponder and get in to thebusiness
enriching the data content of DBpedia
- we can easily compare the data in DBpedia and Wikidata
- more importantly, DBpedia has spend effort in connecting to other
resources
Yes, we can import data from DBpedia and we can import data from
Wikipedia. Actually we can do both. The one thing that needs to be
considered is that we need data before we can curate it. With more data
available it becomes more relevant to invest time in tools that compare
data. We can start doing this now and, over time this will become more
relevant. But now we need more properties and the associated date.
I think reviewing existing ontologies/schemas like DBpedia (or Freebase)
with an eye towards reusing them or incorporating pieces of them makes a
lot of sense. I wouldn't take them wholesale without review though.
Importing data from DBpedia, I'd be much more wary of. It can vary
greatly in quality depending on how it was generated. I'd much rather see
WikiData take Freebase's approach of quality over quantity and let coverage
improve over time.
Tom
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l