Re: Google preferring JSON LD

Thought: why are other RDF serializations not supported?

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Melvin Carvalho
<melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
> "
> I will try to get some more detailed statistics published from Google, but
> as a first approximation I think I can reasonably share that we are seeing
> JSON-LD on several million sites. Prior to
> https://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/improved-sitelinks-search-box.html
> it was relatively obscure, except for use in email e.g. see
> https://developers.google.com/schemas/formats/json-ld . Since JSON-LD only
> became a W3C Recommendation in January 2014 this is pretty healthy adoption.
>
> I should also mention that while JSON-LD is increasingly favoured as a
> preferred syntax (over microdata/rdfa) for many Google features/products,
> there are some for which Microdata continues to be the preferred format.
> Since schema.org is defined in a syntax-neutral manner this is a relatively
> minor complication.
>
> See also https://developers.google.com/structured-data/ ->
> https://developers.google.com/structured-data/rich-snippets/products ->
> https://support.google.com/merchants/answer/6069143?hl=en
>
> danbri@google.com
> "
>
> https://github.com/w3c/webpayments/issues/27#issuecomment-179207196
>
> I would like to offer this as new information Tanek's comment "JSON LD is a
> non starter"
>
> IMHO, this is strong evidence that this group should be standarizing around
> this W3C REC, and push alternatives further towards a note.
>
> Thoughts?

Received on Tuesday, 9 February 2016 18:55:52 UTC