Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Introducing schema.org: Search engines come together for a richer web

googleblog.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 80 posts

Re: Introducing schema.org: Search engines come together for a richer web

#41

Post by famfamfam »

jeromec wrote: post #33
ryanisinallofus wrote: post #17

This is going to sound curmudgeonry but it is seems like one more way search engines want to use your data without giving you the page view. It makes allot of technical sense and I can imagine some really great ways to use this data but in the end I guess I would just need to ask "what's in it for us- the content providers?"

I think that's shortsighted thinking. This is about improving the user's search experience. If that happens I think everyone wins. Most mainstream users are not tech savvy. Imagine a traveling person arrives in a city and spontaneously decides to see a movie. They enter the search 'good movie playing in nowheresville'. As it stands now their query will likely be matched by the keywords 'movie', 'playing', and 'nowher…

Information in specific types — including reviews — exposed using microformats, RDFa or microdata has already been used by Google for over 2 years, they call it "Rich Snippets", and it does improve the quality of experience for users, assuming that you equate an increase in clickthroughs to mean that the user percieves that page to be more useful compared to other SERPs results (and anecdotally I always go for results which include rich snippet information gleaned from pages with the required semantic enhancements).

This announcement is not the proposal of a new technique, but rather the extension of one which is already working and is a good thing for the web.

Re: Introducing schema.org: Search engines come together for a richer web

#42

Post by jarin »

rauljara wrote: post #3

All I could think while reading through the getting started was: that is an awful lot of added text. After a little more thought: that is an awful lot of added work. And while it won't be hard to have tools that make the process easier, the sort of work that goes into adding that data can never be completely automated (otherwise, we would have no need for it). Given that all the search engines will be using it, all m…

Adding a few tags to your HTML templates is "expensive"? With Google, Bing, and Yahoo all supporting this, I don't think it will be long before formtastic-like plugins start popping up to make this really easy.

Re: Introducing schema.org: Search engines come together for a richer web

#43

Post by blauwbilgorgel »

netgineer wrote: post #8

For a site put together by search engines, the URL structure for the site search is atrocious. "#q=Product" and not "?q=Product"? Who thought that was a good idea? Site also looks a bit like spam. Needs more Firefox-esk awesome graphics, imo.

As an SEO that site search structure is a good idea, especially since they don´t employ canonical or noindex/follow on the search pages.

Let us say we both link to http://schema.org/docs/search_results.html#q=test and http://schema.org/docs/search_results.html#q=product .

Since it is a hashtag we link to, all the link juice will get consolidated in the search page, which passes it on to the rest of the site.

If we had linked to http://schema.org/docs/search_results.html?q=test and http://schema.org/docs/search_results.html?q=product we would have created two (low-quality and near-duplicate) pages in the google index.

The same principle applies to pagination. If you can do javascript pagination #page=2 vs. dynamic pagination ?page=2 you are nearly always better of with the hash pagination. If you do it right, you get the benefit of a single page, with the added bonus of being able to bookmark a certain page and having browser history working.

Re: Introducing schema.org: Search engines come together for a richer web

#45

Post by irickt »

andresmh wrote: post #30

I am wondering why they didn't go for something that allows for richer semantics like XHTML+RDFa http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/

From http://schema.org/docs/datamodel.html "... In fact, all of Schema.org can be used with the RDFa 1.1 syntax as is. ..."

Re: Introducing schema.org: Search engines come together for a richer web

#47

Post by hoppipolla »

andresmh wrote: post #30

I am wondering why they didn't go for something that allows for richer semantics like XHTML+RDFa http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/

http://schema.org/docs/faq.html#14

It seems that they chose Microdata over RDFa because the latter's syntax was deemed to be unwieldy.

It's not really true that RDFa is more extensible than microdata, there are a small number of missing features related to XML data, but nothing too significant for these use cases; see, for example, [1]

[1] http://bnode.org/blog/2010/01/26/microdata-semantic-markup-f...

Re: Introducing schema.org: Search engines come together for a richer web

#49

Post by ehutch79 »

c4urself wrote: post #21
juiceandjuice wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was just thinking about how I could actually see this being really awesome with something like Django.

Won't take long for someone to make a list of django models for each type

no point really, it's just a few extra attributes in the template.

Re: Introducing schema.org: Search engines come together for a richer web

#50

Post by takinola »

This sounds rather similar to the Facebooks OpenGraph protocol (http://developers.facebook.com/docs/opengraph). I wonder if this is related to Google's planned entry into social. It would help if they knew the context of search terms so they could match it up to ads in Gmail for example. or use your gmail conversations to help reorder search results...
Post reply on HN