
The Downward Spiral of Microdata - AliCollins
http://manu.sporny.org/2013/microdata-downward-spiral/
======
kator
We've all been talking about "The Semantic Web" for a very long time. I would
love to be proven wrong but it all reminds me of EDI[1] which for more then 30
years has tried to develop standards around data formats. I think all of these
efforts so far have been doomed to die a horrible death because they don't
have an obvious benefit for those involved in the massive investment required
to get it right. I think theoretically it's wonderful to imagine a world of
infinitely parseable machine consumable information. If anything the robots
will appreciate it when they take over the world. Meanwhile I'm not convinced
that Humans can attach enough value to the effort to make it worthwhile. But I
could be wrong, this wouldn't be the first time and I hope not the last time.
:-)

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_data_interchange](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_data_interchange)

~~~
forkandwait
I believe any "universal ontology" like this is theoretically impossible in
the same way that finding an isomorphism between integers and reals is
impossible. I am also struck by how appealing everyone finds such
classifications.

But then i am something of an existentialist and doubt the transcendent
reality of logic and reason.

~~~
thanatropism
While having nothing to do with "existentialism", you might appreciate this.
It's the introduction to a book originally published in France in the late
70s, but that might just serve as a world wide web manifesto...

[http://interconnected.org/home/more/2005/06/1000Plateaus00Rh...](http://interconnected.org/home/more/2005/06/1000Plateaus00Rhizome.pdf)

(You seem philosophically-minded)

------
cordite
For anyone interested in the alternative, check out RDFa[0]. They seem to be
functionally equivalent and are supported by all major search providers. [1]
(if down, see web archive version [2])

[0]: [http://rdfa.info/](http://rdfa.info/)

[1]: [http://manu.sporny.org/2012/mythical-
differences/](http://manu.sporny.org/2012/mythical-differences/)

[2]:
[http://web.archive.org/web/20140719161748/http://manu.sporny...](http://web.archive.org/web/20140719161748/http://manu.sporny.org/2012/mythical-
differences/)

------
snomad
To be clear, is this stating the format as outlined on Schema
([http://schema.org/](http://schema.org/)) is dead?

~~~
misterbwong
This article is saying the Microdata spec for semantic markup is dying
(schema.org shows Microdata, RDFa and JSON-LD). RDFa/RDFa Lite is still
active.

Having worked with both Microdata and RDFa formats, I'm glad Microdata is
dying-RDFa Lite is much simpler to implement. The Microdata spec is
unnecessarily verbose and, as the article said, RDFa Lite can do everything
Microdata can do & more.

Hopefully having a single spec in the future can cut down the confusion and
increase adoption of semantic markup.

------
elchief
"Google suggests using microdata"
[https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/99170?hl=en&ref...](https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/99170?hl=en&ref_topic=4600154)

I have no horse in this race, but isn't Google the search engine kinda the
deciding factor here?

~~~
philbo
Not necessarily. Google search is one application for metadata, definitely,
but it is by no means the only one and nor is it the most interesting imho.

The same page also points out that microformats and RDFa are supported by
Google too. I wonder whether the recommended status of microdata on that page
is because it was proposed and edited at the W3C by a Google employee (that's
pure speculation on my part btw).

------
ColinCera
Alternative site: [http://archive.today/v9fQO](http://archive.today/v9fQO)

------
csdrane
Site is down for me. Anyone have a mirror?

~~~
profil
Down for me too.

Found this:
[http://web.archive.org/web/20140719161748/http://manu.sporny...](http://web.archive.org/web/20140719161748/http://manu.sporny.org/2013/microdata-
downward-spiral/)

~~~
agumonkey
Thanks.

@pg do you think having automatic archived mirrors linked on all submission
would be detrimental to linked articles ?

~~~
kator
The slashdot[1] effect has been around for a long time.

Auto mirroring would be nice but at the same time it leaves a lot of open
questions about content ownership, ability of the content owner to edit,
monetize etc. The New York Times would not be happy if HN links were
automatically mirrored and I imagine they'd be quick to protect their rights
on that front.

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slashdotted](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slashdotted)

~~~
VLM
Even just a summary? We've got nothing. The site is down and even the
archive.org link above isn't responding.

My guess just based on title is something along the lines of silos are bad so
lets make a better silo. But, our silo will be a really nice silo. Forgetting
that's what everyone has been doing forever. The wheel of IT rotates forever
and this is a very old idea that fits the title.

~~~
sp332
Nope, it actually says that this silo is empty, let's go to that other one
that's more popular and about to be standardized instead of making 2
standards.

