- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2016 13:41:28 +0100
- To: "schema.org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
- Cc: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>
Hi all, Richard Wallis has been busy integrating improved parsers into the schema.org site codebase. We think it is ready to go, and that you should not see anything different from the outside, but there is always the possibility that the new parsers (for RDFa, JSON-LD etc schema definitions) interpret our files differently from the older ones. So we'd appreciate a few more sanity checks before integrating these changes into the live schema.org. You can see a test version of this work at http://sdo-rjwtest1.appspot.com/ (also http://bib.sdo-rjwtest1.appspot.com/ http://auto.sdo-rjwtest1.appspot.com/ etc.). Historically we have defined our schemas using a somewhat unusual file format based on HTML+RDFa1.1, and we have parsed it with a custom (and non-compliant) pseudo-RDFa format. These changes integrate the opensource rdflib parsers which implement RDFa 1.1 much more accurately, as well as opening up the possibility that we might use other notations like JSON-LD for schemas (including extensions) in futre. For now we won't rush into those discussions, but we do want to make sure we haven't broken anything, so thanks for any feedback! Please have a click around and let us know if anything seems suspiciously different to the normal site. The site is running on the materials being put together for our next release candidate so there may be rough edges in the actual content, but that's another matter. We are mainly here looking to sanity check our belief that the new parser is reading the definitions from the data/schema.rdfa file properly.... cheers, Dan
Received on Thursday, 7 April 2016 12:41:57 UTC