On 6 December 2014 at 22:36, Wiki Billinghurst <billinghurstwiki(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
2) if the
schema.org metadata is a preferred means to
progress, what
is the recommended means to progress such an issue
I hesitate to mention it, as I'm aware that this is likely to start a
debate with lots of heat and little light, but you should be aware that
schema.org is (was?) a mostly-failed attempt by the big search engines to
get a new standard for meta-data widely used faster than had it gone
through the existing processes, and declaring it "a preferred means to
progress" is a very good way to start a fight with certain kinds of
techies. :-)
3) presumably some of this fits into the discussion
about Structured
Data discussion, and what means is there to include this into that
discussion?
My personal preference would be for our efforts to focus on using
Wikibase (either on
wikidata.org or in "local" installs) for structured
data and meta-data alike, rather than forking the workload. Emitting RDFa
sourced from Wikibase on related pages sounds like a reasonable way to
achieve more richly-laded pages which is helpful for users (and with the
side-effect, rather than primary intent, of SEO).
Thoughts from others?
J.
--
James D. Forrester
Product Manager, Editing
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
jforrester(a)wikimedia.org | @jdforrester