Wikispooks talk:Semantic Objects

From Wikispooks
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Other Possible Objects

Group Types

  • Company
  • Nation State

Exactly how to define sub-objects is an open question as yet.

Agreed your last sentence :-)). I guess there's little option but to grow the 'property tree' like categories - but with the benefit of hindsight and thus a tad more thought.
The comparison with the category tree is a good one. I take occasional swipes at that, trim off a branch here and there when it has been replaced by SMW markup. Robin (talk) 16:13, 7 January 2014 (GMT)
I also agree that list with people and events at the top of the priority order. Need to be clear about books too. We currently have maybe 100 full books (Category:EBooks) plus assorted book reviews, extracts and synopses. We probably need 'Sysnopsis' as another sub-property of 'Document' too. Re latest email exchange with Joel van der Reijden, I can see me doing lots of those. --Peter P (talk) 07:19, 7 January 2014 (GMT)
I reckon descriptions are the biggest shortfall at the moment. Well, also some important pages to connect the documents, but that cache is where most of the information is, a good wodge of source material. If you've read the document then making a good description can be very easy, so I recommend you work on that - synopses also good as and when, but I suggest descriptions first, now that there are all those empty boxes in the SMWDocs tables. Robin (talk) 16:13, 7 January 2014 (GMT)

Open question to prompt discussion

What type of object to assign to the "War on terror" page? This is currently has "event", but there is a considerable ideology/dogma behind it, which isn't true of most events. Possibly another object type? Concept? Ideology? Robin (talk) 16:39, 18 March 2014 (GMT)

Approach to defining objects

I'm just eyeballing looking for how this content can easily be represented semantically. I expect there'll be about 8-10 top level objects. Robin (talk) 12:53, 12 January 2014 (GMT)

Semantic Object "Book"

I had come to the view that Book was a valid an useful object on its own. Reason:

The root page should define the book - title, ISNB, author, publisher etc. But the rest of the page should be a description of the book including how it fits into the WS scheme of things, what it sheds light on, etc etc. That sort of content is no different to any other standard page and should be subject to normal editing rules..

Sub pages could then be extracts, chapters, TOC, forword, epilogue, reviews etc and any other document directly concerning it.

I have a lot of very pertinent and largely suppressed books in ebook format. I have permission from several of their authors to put up extended extracts and/or full chapters and - when I get around to it as always - I was going to use precisely the above format. Thoughts? --Peter P (talk) 16:46, 24 May 2014 (IST)

Second thoughts. A book is a document. A page about a book is not. They can both have the same name with the former being in the Document NS and the latter in the Main NS. Too easy to get confused over this (and similar NS/Semantic object issues) though. For example, a pdf file in the Image NS can also be a document and a book, though for the most part the existing ones are also categorised as Category:EBooks --Peter P (talk) 10:42, 25 May 2014 (IST)
DocType={book, book extract, book review ...} Robin (talk) 12:57, 25 May 2014 (IST)