W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > January 2012

Re: Microdata for products: weight, height, length, depth

From: François <francois.x.hetu@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 23:37:44 -0500
Message-ID: <CAPeSRMwPj7X9HLcnOtjOCdqXagzEGTiMdkZ-TZPH7efvJRk-rg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Cc: public-vocabs@w3.org
Thank you Dr. Hepp,

Quite impressive set of semantic tools...  Feel a bit like a newbie (I am!)
for not even have heard of GoodRelations.

I will be instantly off topic, but I'm a bit confused.  You came out very
strongly in disfavor of
Microdata<http://ebusiness-unibw.org/pipermail/goodrelations/2011-June/000363.html>.
 At the same time, I have read a lot of comments about Microformat (which
introduced me to the world of the semantic web) and RDFa's propable
long-term demise in the face of a fresh new upstart, Microdata, backed by
all 3 major search engines. A week back, I decided to go for Microdata, but
after visiting purl.org, I'm not so sure anymore.

I'm all about standards, and after all I decided to discuss a Microdata
difficulty on a W3C forum described on schema.org as the *Schema.org
Discussion Group*...  So Microdata seemed like a very good bet!

Nobody knows what the future holds, but it seems to me that Google will
continue its support of Microformat and RDFa as some sort of deprecated
technologies (absolutely no disrespect meant).

As Alice said many times when visiting Wonderland: What should I do now?

Thanks again for your help.

-- 

François
Received on Tuesday, 24 January 2012 04:38:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 06:48:59 GMT