Project talk:Vocabulary/GDPR - Revision history

Podehaye: /* Q988 as example */

2020-02-10T21:30:22Z

Q988 as example

Hanz0mon: /* Q988 as example */

2020-02-10T21:27:44Z

Q988 as example

Podehaye at 22:48, 9 February 2020

2020-02-09T22:48:08Z

Podehaye: Podehaye moved page Project talk:Ontology/GDPR to Project talk:Vocabulary/GDPR

2020-02-09T22:46:26Z

Podehaye moved page Project talk:Ontology/GDPR to Project talk:Vocabulary/GDPR

Hanz0mon at 13:37, 9 February 2020

2020-02-09T13:37:56Z

Hanz0mon at 13:33, 9 February 2020

2020-02-09T13:33:42Z

Hanz0mon: /* Q988 as example */ new section

2020-02-09T13:33:22Z

Q988 as example: new section

Hanz0mon at 13:32, 9 February 2020

2020-02-09T13:32:48Z

Hanz0mon: Created page with "comment from @Hanzomon on Q988: IMO not a good example, because this is not part of the vocabulary ("classes" and properties), but an individual item. We should clarify some b..."

2020-02-09T13:32:12Z

Created page with "comment from @Hanzomon on Q988: IMO not a good example, because this is not part of the vocabulary ("classes" and properties), but an individual item. We should clarify some b..."

New page

comment from @Hanzomon on Q988: IMO not a good example, because this is not part of the vocabulary ("classes" and properties), but an individual item. We should clarify some basics, otherwise the whole exercise looks very confusing to newcomers. Can we activate the wikidata index tab for discussions? This inline comment style is not good. Otherwise we can agree to keep discussions to slack.

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:30, 10 February 2020
Line 12:		Line 12:
	: {{reply_to\|Hanz0mon}} Renamed the project to be about Vocabulary [[User:Podehaye\|Podehaye]] ([[User talk:Podehaye\|talk]]) 22:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC)		: {{reply_to\|Hanz0mon}} Renamed the project to be about Vocabulary [[User:Podehaye\|Podehaye]] ([[User talk:Podehaye\|talk]]) 22:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
	: {{reply_to\|Podehaye}} Is there a button for replies or is it just wiki syntax I need to learn? --[[User:Hanz0mon\|Hanz0mon]] ([[User talk:Hanz0mon\|talk]]) 21:27, 10 February 2020 (UTC)		: {{reply_to\|Podehaye}} Is there a button for replies or is it just wiki syntax I need to learn? --[[User:Hanz0mon\|Hanz0mon]] ([[User talk:Hanz0mon\|talk]]) 21:27, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
		+	:: {{reply_to\|Hanz0mon}} Wikisyntax, but you seem to be doing just fine... The signature is a quadruple tilde, see [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Signatures] [[User:Podehaye\|Podehaye]] ([[User talk:Podehaye\|talk]]) 21:30, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:27, 10 February 2020
Line 11:		Line 11:

	: {{reply_to\|Hanz0mon}} Renamed the project to be about Vocabulary [[User:Podehaye\|Podehaye]] ([[User talk:Podehaye\|talk]]) 22:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC)		: {{reply_to\|Hanz0mon}} Renamed the project to be about Vocabulary [[User:Podehaye\|Podehaye]] ([[User talk:Podehaye\|talk]]) 22:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
		+	: {{reply_to\|Podehaye}} Is there a button for replies or is it just wiki syntax I need to learn? --[[User:Hanz0mon\|Hanz0mon]] ([[User talk:Hanz0mon\|talk]]) 21:27, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:48, 9 February 2020
Line 9:		Line 9:

	Vocabulary + data = knowledge base. Even though the mechanism is the same in wikidata ("item") it helps everybody to understand what this is about, when we separate classes and other resources conceptually.		Vocabulary + data = knowledge base. Even though the mechanism is the same in wikidata ("item") it helps everybody to understand what this is about, when we separate classes and other resources conceptually.
		+
		+	: {{reply_to\|Hanz0mon}} Renamed the project to be about Vocabulary [[User:Podehaye\|Podehaye]] ([[User talk:Podehaye\|talk]]) 22:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:37, 9 February 2020
Line 4:		Line 4:

	IMO not a good example, because this is not part of the vocabulary ("classes" and properties), but an individual item. We should clarify some basics, otherwise the whole exercise looks very confusing to newcomers.		IMO not a good example, because this is not part of the vocabulary ("classes" and properties), but an individual item. We should clarify some basics, otherwise the whole exercise looks very confusing to newcomers.
		+
		+	I don't want to be too picky, but we could clarify what we do by talking about a data vocabulary instead of ontology. This is not an ontology what we are doing here.
		+	So better we do not use the wrong terminology.
		+
		+	Vocabulary + data = knowledge base. Even though the mechanism is the same in wikidata ("item") it helps everybody to understand what this is about, when we separate classes and other resources conceptually.

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:33, 9 February 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
	comment from @Hanzomon on Q988: IMO not a good example, because this is not part of the vocabulary ("classes" and properties), but an individual item. We should clarify some basics, otherwise the whole exercise looks very confusing to newcomers.		comment from @Hanzomon on Q988: IMO not a good example, because this is not part of the vocabulary ("classes" and properties), but an individual item. We should clarify some basics, otherwise the whole exercise looks very confusing to newcomers.
		+
		+	== Q988 as example ==
		+
		+	x

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-comment from @Hanzomon on Q988: IMO not a good example, because this is not part of the vocabulary ("classes" and properties), but an individual item. We should clarify some basics, otherwise the whole exercise looks very confusing to newcomers.
 == Q988 as example ==
+IMO not a good example, because this is not part of the vocabulary ("classes" and properties), but an individual item. We should clarify some basics, otherwise the whole exercise looks very confusing to newcomers.

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:32, 9 February 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	comment from @Hanzomon on Q988: IMO not a good example, because this is not part of the vocabulary ("classes" and properties), but an individual item. We should clarify some basics, otherwise the whole exercise looks very confusing to newcomers~~. Can we activate the wikidata index tab for discussions? This inline comment style is not good. Otherwise we can agree to keep discussions to slack~~.	+	comment from @Hanzomon on Q988: IMO not a good example, because this is not part of the vocabulary ("classes" and properties), but an individual item. We should clarify some basics, otherwise the whole exercise looks very confusing to newcomers.