But there's the question of who is responsible for it and who sets the standards. These days the consortium behind HTML 5 is fairly quick and responsive compared to the W3C's HTML activity in the day (e.g. fight with a standards process for a few months as opposed to "talk to the hand") but schema.org can evolve without any of that.
If there's anything that sucks today it is that people feel they have to add all kinds of markup for different vendors (such as Facebook's Open Graph) I remember the Semweb folks who didn't think it was a problem that my pages had about 20k of visible markup and 150k of repeated semantic markup. It's like the folks who don't mind that an article with 5k worth of text has 50M worth of Javascript, ads, trackers and other junk.
On the other hand I have no trouble turning
<meta name="description" content="A brief description of your webpage content.">
into
@prefix meta: <http://example.com/my/name/space> .
<http://example.com/some/web/page> meta:description "A brief description of your webpage content." .
where meta: is some namespace I made up if I want to access it with RDF tools without making you do anything
If there's anything that sucks today it is that people feel they have to add all kinds of markup for different vendors (such as Facebook's Open Graph) I remember the Semweb folks who didn't think it was a problem that my pages had about 20k of visible markup and 150k of repeated semantic markup. It's like the folks who don't mind that an article with 5k worth of text has 50M worth of Javascript, ads, trackers and other junk.
On the other hand I have no trouble turning
into where meta: is some namespace I made up if I want to access it with RDF tools without making you do anything