- From: Michael A. Peters <mpeters@domblogger.net>
- Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 11:12:05 -0700
- To: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Interesting. It's a beautiful way to create structured data separate from the content, just like layout (CSS) is best kept separate from the content. I wonder why people on this list don't like it. Reading about it was an epiphany for me, it's (in my opinion) the right way to do structured data, and far superior to sticking a bunch of attributes in tags - just like CSS selectors are far superior to sticking style attributes in tags. Not meaning to start a holy war, it's just I didn't come across anything negative about it during my initial research on JSON-LD. Other than my own observation that it bloats the content sent to every client, hence the desire for a header specifying it is actually wanted before it is stuffed in the document head node. On 07/22/2017 10:12 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin 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 18:12:31 UTC