Development previewBrowse and compare a sample of the catalog. Editing and personal features aren’t available here.About this demo
Reference
Current priorities and possible future features.
The main priority is making the catalog more useful to explore: better coverage, clearer sources, and more connections between existing entries.
The longer-term ideas below have no committed release dates. Their scope and priority may change. For available features, see Using the views.
The project is adding sourced connections between existing records and measuring how much of the accepted catalog belongs to a connected group.
The latest snapshot was recorded on October 6, 2026, after a batch of 220 connections was accepted:
| Measure | Recorded result | Target |
|---|---|---|
| Entries in the largest connected group | 248 of 444 accepted entries, or 55.9%. | At least 90%. |
| Entries with no connections | 118. | No unexplained islands. |
| Connections per accepted entry | 1.18. | At least 1.5. |
| Cited machine-written connections in the measurement | 393 of 393. | 100%. |
These are dated measurements of the accepted catalog, not live totals for every record visible on the site. The citation measure applies to machine-written connections in that measurement, not to every fact or connection.
See How connections work for definitions.
The current layouts offer different arrangements of a network. Future layouts could make particular structures easier to read: lineage trees, chronological sequences, cause-and-effect flows, nested parts, or a matrix for densely connected groups.
Compare currently works with individual entries. A future extension could compare groups, such as the cataloged works of two creators. Any totals would describe the available records rather than a complete body of work.
Existing Related suggestions and recorded similarity links provide limited discovery. A planned system would use shared concepts to compare entries more systematically and suggest useful next steps.
An exploratory view could show paths through explicitly causal connections. It would help inspect recorded claims and their context. It would not establish causation simply by finding a path.
Public accounts could make personal favorites, notes, tags, collections, and related features available beyond the local project. Contribution workflows could let people propose records and corrections for review.
Other possibilities include duplicate-resolution tools and feedback on the usefulness of linked sources.
Some records need dated observations, such as statistics that change from season to season. A future approach could retain that history while making the current recorded value easy to find.
Standard data exports may be added if there is demand. Formats and reuse terms would need to be defined before release.
To share a use case or ask about contributing, visit Get involved.