>>> [!note] Migrated issue <!-- Drupal.org comment --> <!-- Migrated from issue #2152459. --> Reported by: [linclark](https://www.drupal.org/user/396253) >>> <h3 id="summary-problem-motivation">Problem/Motivation</h3> <p>RDF relies on embedding markup inline with objects on the page. This was extremely challenging to implement in the first place, does not have good coverage in contrib, and is getting outdated.</p> <p>There are various contrib alternatives:</p> <p><a href="https://www.drupal.org/project/schema_metatag">https://www.drupal.org/project/schema_metatag</a> - 25,000 users (depends on metatag)<br> <a href="https://www.drupal.org/project/jsonld">https://www.drupal.org/project/jsonld</a><br> <a href="https://www.drupal.org/project/json_ld_schema">https://www.drupal.org/project/json_ld_schema</a><br> <a href="https://www.drupal.org/project/jsld">https://www.drupal.org/project/jsld</a></p> <p>However, those projects don't have exact parity with RDF module. For example, schema_metatag requires configuration, and its current config model requires altering other config objects rather than being able to ship default config that would provide parity with the default RDF config that's currently in the Standard profile.</p> <h3 id="summary-proposed-resolution">Proposed resolution</h3> <ul> <li>Deprecate RDF in Drupal 9.4 core. Remove it from Drupal 10.0 core.</li> <li>Move RDF to contrib, thereby making it easy for existing sites to keep using it in the short to medium term.</li> <li>Create a Change Record that mentions both the RDF contrib module and alternatives, such as schema_metatag.</li> </ul> <h3 id="summary-remaining-tasks">Remaining tasks</h3> <ul> <li>A maintainer is needed for the RDF contrib module.</li> <li>Once we have that maintainer, create an implementation issue to do what's in the proposed resolution.</li> </ul> <h3 id="summary-ui-changes">User interface changes</h3> <h3 id="summary-api-changes">API changes</h3> <h3 id="summary-data-model-changes">Data model changes</h3> <h3 id="summary-release-notes">Release notes snippet</h3> <h3>Original issue summary</h3> <p>As a maintainer of RDF module, I don't have much confidence that the module provides the reliability we need for Drupal 8. We don't have a solution for <a href="https://drupal.org/node/1778194">compound fields</a> (such as addressfield). Not all core field formatters are tested, to say much less of contrib field formatters. And we have criticals that haven't seen any major movement in many months.</p> <p>In the meantime, Google has announced that it will consume JSON that is embedded in pages using <code>&lt;script&gt;</code> tags, and other search engines have followed suit. As I outline in my <a href="http://lin-clark.com/blog/2013/12/08/drop-rdfa-drupal-8/">companion blog post</a>, this is preferable to HTML data formats (RDFa, microdata) for a number of reasons. The ones relevant to this issue are:</p> <ol> <li>It would mean we could use the same pipeline for REST&rsquo;s serialization and HTML data</li> <li>It removes complexity from the field formatters and theme layer</li> <li>It makes it easier to replace the implementation from contrib</li> </ol> <p>While this is a large change in terms of the description on the Drupal 8 box, I'm fairly certain it will actually require less work than getting our RDFa up to snuff and has a better chance of being reviewable by other people, which this work hasn't really been in the past.</p> > Related issue: [Issue #3090017](https://www.drupal.org/node/3090017) > Related issue: [Issue #2826669](https://www.drupal.org/node/2826669) > Related issue: [Issue #3118154](https://www.drupal.org/node/3118154)