3 ms·
Isn't schema.org supposed to be an "industry wide" collaborative effort? In which case we must also remark on the disinterest shown by players like Microsoft, A
by Santosh83 6y ago
Isn't schema.org supposed to be an "industry wide" collaborative effort? In which case we must also remark on the disinterest shown by players like Microsoft, Apple or Google, or even Facebook, Twitter and so on, all of whom benefit by this semantic markup.
- dbish 6y agoMy opinion is the disinterest from bigger players is because of the lack of traction/interest from the broader community. Maybe there's a chicken and egg problem that comes with bootstrapping any new standard
- reaperducer 6y agoIMO, the reason for the lack of interest from the broader community is because it's unnecessarily complicated, and somehow simultaneously incomplete to the point of being almost unusable for some projects. It was clearly designed by bureaucrats who enjoy making rules and sub-rules and sub-sub-rules. It doesn't matter if it works, or is useful, as long as there are plenty of rules. There's a reason nobody wants to play with the jerk dungeonmaster.
- dbish 6y agoThat's fair. I can see that being the issue. Speed and ease of use don't go hand in hand with having a well defined ontology and processes for updating it
- cratermoon 6y agoI think Facebook only cares about OpenGraph