Difference between revisions of "Project talk:Vocabulary/GDPR"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(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...") |
|||
| (7 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | ||
| + | |||
| + | == 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. | ||
| + | |||
| + | 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. | ||
| + | |||
| + | : {{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|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) | ||
Latest revision as of 21:30, 10 February 2020
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.
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.