Wikidata talk:Comparison of Projects and Proposals for Wiktionary

Some changes

I made some changes to your text. You should check I haven't messed anything up. Filceolaire (talk) 15:57, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Yep, thanks. SaskWa (talk)

Library of Congress Subject Headings and similar

How about looking at one of the worlds most comprehensive thesauri for the classification of literature and similar by subject matter, the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) in this context as well? Even if it may not be usable by directly copying it into WikiData, I assume it would be helpful to at least link some WikiData entry types to LCSH entries. Possibly more is possible.

• htp://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects.html‎
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Congress_Subject_Headings

On a more general scale, there are several notable thesauri or controlled vocabularies that possibly could be worth to look at with the question of using or linking then in mind. Does it make sense to assess them together with this comparison? --Purodha Blissenbach Discussion  23:45, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I believe linking information from other sources is kind of a different task that may be taken into account at a later stage. But I will still have a look at the project. Thank you. SaskWa 11:41, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Overview - The Scope of an Entry

In the section Overview - The Scope of an Entry, we currently read:

However, only Wiktionary allows for structural flexibility in respect of storing information that holds for more than one sense.

That is in part ignoring the ability of Omegawiki to have annotations both on the syntrans level and on the definedMeaning level. While this is not as flexible as Wiktionary, where you just type something into existing Wiki pages at an approprioate place, I believe adding annotations on any level where it makes sense would be pretty easy in Omegawiki as well, but needs to be done by a developer since it requires additions to both the data base schema and the data entry routine. --Purodha Blissenbach Discussion  22:33, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Word missing?

I am having a hard time understanding this sentence:

EuroWordNet also ensures the “definition” rather language specific due to links between synsets in different languages.

Is a word missing? Thanks! Nicolas1981 (talk) 11:31, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Translation

Hi,

Pamputt discovered this page recently and we are willing to translate it in French, as a way to imply more our community in this discussion. Is this comparison still accurate? -- Noé (talk) 16:13, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

One year later, there is still no reply. It seems that the author of this page, SaskWa, is not active anymore. Maybe Lea Lacroix (WMDE), Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) or Denny may have some ideas about this question. Is it useful to translate this page? Pamputt (talk) 20:42, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed this. It was the groundwork for the technical data model we have now. If people want to translate it please feel free to go ahead. But imho the resulting technical data model is more important and meaningful. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 09:05, 29 August 2017 (UTC)