- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 15:30:17 +0100
- To: Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin@chromium.org>
- Cc: WHAT Working Group <whatwg@whatwg.org>, "Michael A. Peters" <mpeters@domblogger.net>
Hypothetically, if search engines were to start picking up JSON-LD from linked files, which link rel type would this group consider most appropriate? Dan On 23 July 2017 at 06:12, Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin@chromium.org> wrote: > 2ยข: This list tends to disapprove of JSON-LD, so you should probably first > run your proposal by a group that likes JSON-LD. Maybe > public-rdf-comments@w3.org referenced from https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/? > Or an issue against https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org? > > Jeffrey > > On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Michael A. Peters <mpeters@domblogger.net > > > wrote: > > > I am (finally) starting to implement JSON-LD on a site, it generates a > lot > > of data that is useless to the non-bot typical user. > > > > I'd prefer to only stick it in the head when the client is a crawler that > > wants it. > > > > Wouldn't it be prudent if agents that want JSON-LD can send a > standardized > > header as part of their request so web apps can optionally choose to only > > send the JSON-LD data to clients that want it? Seems it would be kinder > to > > mobile users on limited bandwidth if they didn't have to download a bunch > > of JSON that is meaningless to them. > > > > Is this the right group to suggest that? > > >
Received on Sunday, 23 July 2017 14:30:45 UTC