[state]

A large part of the value of the web is in creating _structured_ data. I would be amenable to a proposition that gave people more creative tools for publishing on those terms, but I think you're missing the point of the medium.

[sdoering]

I believe, that this is the view of a lot of persons/companies, that make money of the web. And I have to disagree, because of my experience with a lot of "not so savvy"-users.

For them, they like good information (or entertainment) and they really like the personal touch to things. If the information is interesting, they like to know more about the individual behind these pages. and a lot of these people like the handcrafted touch of "older" websites, that do not look all alike (wp, svbtle, octopress, et al).

So maybe the product is interesting for some of the people, who are not skilled in designing individual pages, but want non the less to publish on the web.

Just my experience with the 99% of people, that are not hackers, professional bloggers or net-savvy-people. Me, I'm going to stay with nanoc [http://nanoc.stoneship.org/] and jekyll [https://github.com/mojombo/jekyll] and for the time being (until redesigns are finished) wordpress.

[state]

I didn't mean to imply that anyone has made the activity of creating structured data sufficiently interesting or worthwhile for "not so savvy" users, but that this project doesn't seem to advance to cause.

A lot of people and companies do make money on this, but I see the creation of rich structured data as good for everyone. We can better learn from and engage with well structured collective knowledge.

[kateray]

structured data is actually something i'm really into. what sort of metadata or tags do you think might be useful to add in automatically? i don't want to make the user do any more work than necessary.