![[Main Page]](/GikiCLEF/images/logoGikiCLEF.png)
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
* some of the pages became void during the conversion. Examples are the pages of Augsburg, contrasted with Berlin: | * some of the pages became void during the conversion. Examples are the pages of Augsburg, contrasted with Berlin: | ||
| - | ** original format [http://www.linguateca.pt/GikiCLEF/Augsburg.wikipedia Augsburg] and [http://www.linguateca.pt/GikiCLEF/Berlin.wikipedia Berlin] | + | ** original format [http://www.linguateca.pt/GikiCLEF/ExampleTopics/Augsburg.wikipedia Augsburg] and [http://www.linguateca.pt/GikiCLEF/ExampleTopics/Berlin.wikipedia Berlin] |
| - | ** XML result [http://www.linguateca.pt/GikiCLEF/Augsburg.xml Augsburg] and [http://www.linguateca.pt/GikiCLEF/Berlin.xml Berlin] | + | ** XML result [http://www.linguateca.pt/GikiCLEF/ExampleTopics/Augsburg.xml Augsburg] and [http://www.linguateca.pt/GikiCLEF/ExampleTopics/Berlin.xml Berlin] |
* finally, some pages, although apparently correct XML, do not get displayed in the browsers (tested with Firefox and IE), so before complaining that they are void, check the View source. Current suspect is a style with ''display:none'' | * finally, some pages, although apparently correct XML, do not get displayed in the browsers (tested with Firefox and IE), so before complaining that they are void, check the View source. Current suspect is a style with ''display:none'' | ||
Revision as of 12:13, 20 March 2009
In this page we provide information on the problems found with the XML version of the GikiCLEF collection, in order to both fully inform GikiCLEF participants and help other possible future users of it.
Our use of the WikiXML tool made us aware of the following problems
- it was developed with and for the Wikipedia 2006 versions, so the current (2008) SQL dumps had to be converted to an older 2006 format
- some of the pages became void during the conversion. Examples are the pages of Augsburg, contrasted with Berlin:
- finally, some pages, although apparently correct XML, do not get displayed in the browsers (tested with Firefox and IE), so before complaining that they are void, check the View source. Current suspect is a style with display:none