We’ve moved away from XHTML for OJS 3.0 and broadly speaking it’s safe to say that XHTML didn’t see the acceptance its proponents hoped for. I think sacrificing XHTML validation is OK at this point.
Regards,
Alec Smecher
Public Knowledge Project Team
Thanks @asmecher, I would love to help with schema.org implementation - if I am able. (unfortunately I am not able to set up a test environment with OJS 3.0 at this time)
I’m really have doubts if academic journals need to be very worried about this…
On one hand, schema is mainly for SEO it’s not the focus of journals (we have repositories/harvesters and specific searchers) and we are now offering our data in a rich set of structured formats (OAI, COinS, DOAJ, CrossRef, etc.) so I don’t think PKP need to be been running to every tech somebody points.
But in the other hand, I like the idea of adding “generic” semantics to OJS. It will make the tool even more reachable (open), visible and who is against a good SEO?
Yes, Google is a black box and there are no studies about real impact in Scholar, but the implementation as JSON-LD is less obtrusive than microdata (and today is google’s recommendation) and technically looks feasible so I think is a good idea adding this as a plugin you can enable.
I can’t work on this now, but I think a modification of COinS plugin will do the job: