Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote:
> So if this "hidden div / span" approach is not feasible, we got a 
> problem.
> The reason is that, as beautiful the idea is of using RDFa to make a) 
> the human-readable presentation and b) the machine-readable meta-data 
> link to the same literals, the problematic is it in reality once the 
> structure of a) and b) are very different.
> For very simple property-value pairs, embedding RDFa markup is no 
> problem. But if you have a bit more complexity at the conceptual level 
> and in particular if there are significant differences to the 
> structure of the presentation (e.g. in terms of granularity, ordering 
> of elements, etc.), it gets very, very messy and hard to maintain.
> And you give up the clear separation of concerns between the 
> conceptual level and the presentation level that XML brought about.
> Maybe one should tell Google that this is not cloaking if SW meta-data 
> is embedded...

Ideally, they should figure that out from the self-describing nature of 
the RDF based metadata exposed by the embedded RDFa -- assuming they are 
doing real RDFa processing :-)

> But the snippet basically indicates that we should not recommend this 
> practice.

> Martin
> Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> Mark Birbeck wrote:
>>> Hi Martin,
>>>> b) download RDFa snippet that just represents the RDF/XML content 
>>>> (i.e. such
>>>> that it does not have to be consolidated with the "presentation 
>>>> level" part
>>>> of the Web page.
>>> By coincidence, I just read this:
>>>   Hidden div's -- don't do it!
>>>   It can be tempting to add all the content relevant for a rich snippet
>>>   in one place on the page, mark it up, and then hide the entire block
>>>   of text using CSS or other techniques. Don't do this! Mark up the
>>>   content where it already exists. Google will not show content from
>>>   hidden div's in Rich Snippets, and worse, this can be considered
>>>   cloaking by Google's spam detection systems. [1]
>>> Regards,
>>> Mark
>>> [1] 
>>> <> 
>> Martin/Mark,
>> Time to make a sample RDFa doc that includes very detailed GR based 
>> metadata.
>> Mark: Should we be describing our docs for Google, fundamentally? I 
>> really think Google should actually recalibrate back to the Web etc..



Kingsley Idehen	      Weblog:
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     Web:

Received on Saturday, 27 June 2009 14:16:40 UTC