Open projects in open music

– Cross reference artists, albums, and tracks in Discogs, Musicbrainz and Wikipedia, so that an entry in each one is linked to the corresponding entry in the others.

– Finish the genre graph implied in DBPedia. Extract the graph and QA it as a whole. Enable multiple distinct genre graphs, so that multiple cultures are supported. Create graphs for non-EU/US cultures, e.g. for use in China.

– Cross reference Encyclopaedia Metallum with Discogs, Musicbrainz and Wikipedia.

5 thoughts on “Open projects in open music

      1. Both. Much more inclusive, but starting point largely extracts from Wikipedia infoboxes (like DBpedia). Increasingly Wikidata is where Wikimedia projects including Wikipedias pull data from, which allows for more intensive collaboration around data, again, rather than as fallout of things like Wikipedia categories and infoboxes.

        1. How are Wikipedia and dbpedia different?

          Of course I will RTFG on that the second I’m done with this reply, so no need to LMGTFY.

          1. https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Notes/DBpedia_and_Wikidata

            DBpedia, among many other things, extracts structured data from the infoboxes in Wikipedia, and publishes them in RDF and a few other formats. But it also hosts a community effort to define extractors for the data, that can be used well beyond Wikipedia. It provides a number of services around the extracted data, like DBpedia mobile, a SPARQL endpoint, a faceted browser, a number of mappings to external ontologies, an ontology itself, etc. A lot of research is being done on DBpedia.

            Wikidata on the other hand will provide a secondary and tertiary database of structured data that everyone can edit. It turns the extraction process of DBpedia on its head: instead of extracting structured data from infoboxes, it will allow infoboxes to be created from structured data.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.