Re: Article use cases

On 11/22/13 9:39 AM, Dan Scott wrote:
>
>
> I do take issue with the following statement in the use cases: "As
> individual articles it is not clear that more than one will be
> recognized by search engines (as reported on public-vocabs, the search
> engines will only pick up one "thing" from each page). To make this a
> single thing, it may be necessary to create a bibliography type, with
> article members."

>
> While I agree that an explicit bibliography type might be useful in
> and of itself, I don't agree with basing vocabulary proposals on
> trying to satisfy what appear to be current constraints of the search
> engines. Their behaviour may change entirely tomorrow. And the search
> engines currently don't seem to display rich snippets for most
> schema.org types, whether they are a single item on the page or not.

That was merely a bit of information and a mild suggestion ... you 
should feel free to ignore it. It's not a big deal.

kc

>

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet

Received on Friday, 22 November 2013 18:11:57 UTC