1195Re: [semweb-dev] Introducing schema.org: Search engines come together for a richer web ...
- Jun 3, 2011That's exactly the right question --- one that each implementor of rNews
needs to answer for her/himself.
That's why I believe it's important for us to continue on a path that
leads to the (ideally generally accepted) rNews Schema and then one or
more suggested implementations.
Truthfully, if someone needs better content management in their own
website, I don't see how rNews is going to help them. But we did set out
with the idea to make our content better for search engines (be they GBY
or Facebook & Twitter) to understand in order to link to it in a more
An rNews implementation in RDFa holds the inherent promise that it could
also facilitate exchange between websites pretty well. That's not clear
with Microdata. But if (and that can be interpreted in many ways, as
Raphaël pointed out below) GBY say they only want to see Microdata and GBY
are an implementor's main concern, then it seems to be a prudent choice
for us (as an organization concerned with the success of our industry) to
offer an rNews implementation in Microdata.
On 6/3/11 04:57 , "Jarred McGinnis" <jarred.mcginnis@...>
> What does rNews want to achieve? Is it for better content
>management on our own websites? Is it to facilitate exchange between each
>other's websites? Or is it to improve google-juice and SEO in general?
>Jarred McGinnis, PhD
>Research Manager, Semantic Technologies
>T: +44 (0) 2079 637 198
>M: +44 (0) 7816 286 852
>Registered Address: The Press Association Limited, 292 Vauxhall Bridge
>Road, London, SW1V 1AE. Registered in England No. 5946902
><mailto:iptc-semweb-dev%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Raphaël Troncy
>Sent: 02 June 2011 20:14
>Cc: Stuart Myles; email@example.com
>Subject: Re: [semweb-dev] Introducing schema.org: Search engines come
>together for a richer web ...
>> This is essentially semantic markup - but it doesn't use RDFa or
>> microformats but HTML5 microdata. So, a natural question is - what does
>> this mean for the IPTC's work on rNews?
>Not exactly. See http://schema.org/docs/datamodel.html for the mapping
>in RDFa 1.1. The post acks the fact that you have 3 technologies
>available (microformats, rdfa and microdata) and that search engines use
>to handle those three. This will not stop. Microdata is not a
>recommendation, and it is very controversial in HTML5. RDFa is much more
>stable from my point of view, and more importantly, _extensible_.
>> If you look at http://www.schema.org/NewsArticle you'll see that the
>> schema.org <http://schema.org> model is essentially a subset of the
>> current rNews model. We have been working on an RDFa markup
>> implementation of the rNews model, and we still see that as valuable.
>> However, even before today's schema.org <http://schema.org>
>> announcement, we've been getting feedback that other markup
>> implementations of rNews would be important for the most widespread
>> adoption of rNews. This is consistent with the original charter for the
>> IPTC's Semantic Web work and so it is natural for us to support
>> microdata alongside other ways to represent rNews. The key is for us to
>> ensure that the rNews model itself remain neutral so that publishers can
>> select the markup technologies that work best for them.
>I personally see schema.org as another vocab to establish mappings to do
>... and I have started to do so.
>EURECOM, Multimedia Communications Department
>2229, route des Crêtes, 06560 Sophia Antipolis, France.
>e-mail: raphael.troncy@... <mailto:raphael.troncy%40eurecom.fr> &
>Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8242
>Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>This email is from the Press Association. For more information, see
>This email may contain confidential information.
>Only the addressee is permitted to read, copy, distribute or otherwise
>use this email or any attachments.
>If you have received it in error, please contact the sender immediately.
>Any opinion expressed in this email is personal to the sender and may not
>reflect the opinion of the Press Association.
>Any email reply to this address may be subject to interception or
>monitoring for operational reasons or for lawful business practices.
- << Previous post in topic