W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > November 2011

Re: Need for a new type Activity

From: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 09:40:35 +0100
Cc: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, Roy Lachica <roy@webnodes.com>, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1A255BB3-1AF9-45EB-A24A-27FAE0575B62@ebusiness-unibw.org>
To: Aaron Bradley <aaranged@yahoo.com>
Hi Aaran, all:

> Having said all of this, webmasters are most likely to incorporate schema.org microdata when the vocabulary is sufficient for their needs, and to use extensions where those extensions are accessibly warehoused (as per Roy's original point).
> The stated purpose of schema.org is not to describe everything, but to provide "a collection of schemas, i.e., html tags, that
> 	      webmasters can use to markup their pages in ways recognized by major 
> 	      search providers."  And I think it's important to focus on this when discussing schema.org from an "ordinary" webmaster perspective.  That there are other vocabularies available doesn't really matter to webmasters that are contemplating using schema.org to improve their search visibility.

Yes - but one important point to make: While schema.org should avoid all unnecessary difficulties, it is clear that modeling you products and services - or your value proposition as a whole - is inherently more complex that marking up visual content.

In a few years time, one of the core skills for Web developers and SEO experts will be to clearly articulate the details of a companies value proposition in the form of structured data so that I can be understood by the digital devices used by potential customers to search the market, i.e. search engines.

If you talk to an average HTML Web developer, many will find the current schema.org schema already way to complex.

If you ask seasoned middleware experts, familiar with B2B XML schemas for products etc., they will find schema.org pretty simple.

The future of Web development will be in the middle between the two extremes.

So yes, keep things simple, but don't fight against the inevitable growth in complexity caused by the fundamental shift from HTML as a means for talking to browsers to a means for articulating your message in the form of data for the digital devices used by your potential customers.

Here is a video explaining this in more detail: http://vimeo.com/29600112

Received on Friday, 4 November 2011 08:41:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:48:43 UTC