Re: [whatwg] header for JSON-LD ???

2017-07-26 Thread Mark Kaplun
Well, in practice, since it is an SEO signal what google does in practice is more important than any theoretical discussion. Not being in any way affiliated with google, my own impression is that google do not care which format you use as long as it can be parsed by them. The main problem with

Re: [whatwg] header for JSON-LD ???

2017-07-26 Thread Melvin Carvalho
On 26 July 2017 at 15:04, Jonathan Zuckerman wrote: > After reading just a bit more - it seems like JSON-LD and schema.org have > slightly different goals - schema.org suggests conventions for data cues > in > HTML, JSON-LD suggests it for JSON (e.g. API responses for

Re: [whatwg] header for JSON-LD ???

2017-07-26 Thread Jonathan Zuckerman
I agree that reducing the bloat of JSON-LD is a noble goal. Sorry to belabor this point, but can you explain why JSON-LD is needed in the first place? I've tried to point out that HTML is capable of doing it without another spec, which obviates the need for content duplication and bloat that

Re: [whatwg] header for JSON-LD ???

2017-07-26 Thread Jonathan Zuckerman
After reading just a bit more - it seems like JSON-LD and schema.org have slightly different goals - schema.org suggests conventions for data cues in HTML, JSON-LD suggests it for JSON (e.g. API responses for dynamic websites) - exactly how "best practice" is this pattern of stuffing JSON-LD into

Re: [whatwg] header for JSON-LD ???

2017-07-26 Thread Mark Kaplun
hmmm http://blog.schema.org/2013/06/schemaorg-and-json-ld.html If you use a CMS like wordpress for your content, and you are just a content person, it is a big meh to try to add manually the attributes, and it is also a meh to develop software that will need to parse the content to add it as you

Re: [whatwg] header for JSON-LD ???

2017-07-26 Thread Roger Hågensen
On 2017-07-26 07:49, Ian Hickson wrote: Disrespect of fellow members of the list is unacceptable. ... Please peruse our code of conduct if the reasoning behind this action is unclear to you: https://whatwg.org/code-of-conduct Thanks. Thank you. -- Unless specified otherwise, anything I

Re: [whatwg] header for JSON-LD ???

2017-07-26 Thread Mark Kaplun
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Philipp Serafin wrote: > Mark Kaplun schrieb am Mi., 26. Juli 2017 um 15:43 Uhr: > >> [...] >> Basically the HTML is loaded first, and at some point you can have some JS >> that will load the JSON by an AJAX request. google is

Re: [whatwg] header for JSON-LD ???

2017-07-26 Thread Philipp Serafin
Mark Kaplun schrieb am Mi., 26. Juli 2017 um 15:43 Uhr: > [...] > Basically the HTML is loaded first, and at some point you can have some JS > that will load the JSON by an AJAX request. google is happy to get the > JSON-LD this way [...] > This sounds like an interesting

Re: [whatwg] header for JSON-LD ???

2017-07-26 Thread Philipp Serafin
Paving the cowpaths is all well and good, but if it ends up recommending technologies which unilaterally favor some parties, that sounds like a big argument to develop a better technology. Mark Kaplun schrieb am Mi., 26. Juli 2017 um 17:07 Uhr: > > [...] > > As far as I know,

Re: [whatwg] header for JSON-LD ???

2017-07-26 Thread Roger Hågensen
On 2017-07-26 16:52, Philipp Serafin wrote: That sounds like a very expensive solution for a technology that was supposed to enable bots to consume web pages *without* needing to cut through all the bloat. Yeah. As far as I know, content is still king at Google. So extra weight will be given

Re: [whatwg] header for JSON-LD ???

2017-07-26 Thread Melvin Carvalho
On 26 July 2017 at 15:43, Mark Kaplun wrote: > Well, in practice, since it is an SEO signal what google does in practice > is more important than any theoretical discussion. > > Not being in any way affiliated with google, my own impression is that > google do not care which