Collecting information about current users of this library.

[danbri]

I am now looking after this library, and would like to understand better who is using it, what value you are finding, what things it does well for you, or any frustrations.

The most obvious limitation is that, by being code-generator based, it is tied to a specific version of Schema.org. I'd like to here perspectives on that, but also any other experiences that can help in planning next steps.

Also: is anyone else interested in helping to maintain or improve it?

[robertvazan]

I would venture to guess that mostly nobody uses the library, because it is not on Maven Central. Currently, the only way to use it is to copy sources or compiled JAR into one's project, which is not particularly palatable for people accustomed to maven. Just publishing the current version of the library as is, however outdated or incomplete, on Maven Central as an official release would increase usage by an order of magnitude.

The main use case is quite predictably to generate schema.org data on java-based websites for SEO purposes. The library is an attractive alternative to generating JSON-LD directly via some dynamic API or implementing an internal schema.org library.

You have my encouragement to work on it. Just getting it to Maven Central would be highly valuable. And then regenerating the code on the highest version of schema.org, on which it doesn't break, would be another easy and highly valuable task.

[keesvandieren]

We have published it in JCenter, which is almost the same as Maven Central (as described here: #2 )

I can also sync it to Bintray in Maven Central; just tried that but it fails because some details are missing in pom.xml. Is having an unofficial fork in JCenter good enough, or is Maven Central really needed?

[robertvazan]

There are security implications of using 3rd party binaries. Many people shy away from such binaries. Official release by library maintainer, ideally under com.google.* groupID, appears more trustworthy. Also, Maven Central is the default under maven, so it's much easier to use.

On a side note, default jcenter setup instructions encourage people to replace Maven Central in their POM rather than list jcenter as the second source after Maven Central.

[morphine9]

I'd very much like for this library to be maintained and be up-to-date with latest schema.org release and the google schema proposals as seen here.
Specifically the builder pattern here for creating structured data (mandatory and optional fields) is very helpful for developers using java library.

[aeromac]

I too would like to see this maintained - I'm kind of surprised it's not given Google's desire for websites to include structured data.

[ghost]

Roy Want suggested the aforementioned for leveraging its data formats to achieve structured data between the Web and IoT devices.

"Schema.org and others let user agents and cloud services act intelligently, parsing data for events, organizations ... acting on them either interactively or proactively." - Enabling the Internet of Things, 2015.

I think this makes the case that there's still untapped potential in response to the evolving Web.

[amdnaseer]

I came to this issue while trying to find out if it is being maintained. I would certainly want it to be maintained.

[davitp]

It would be nice to have this maintained. At least, published to maven. It is too many problems because it is not in Maven, so I will likely Fork and Publish to maven for my case.

[Thorben91]

@danbri
This is a great library and I use it for my cookbook web application. It would be really nice to have it maintained again soon. And I think it would be very helpful for everyone if the code generator, with a short explanation, is provided. And feel free to write me a message if I can help you maintain the library.

Thank you and best regards
Thorben

[sruest]

We are looking for something like this to do dataset discovery. I would gladly contribute. My top priority would be to update the generated code to the latest version of Schema.org. Can you provide some explanation of how we can do that?

[marcocamacho]

2020 and you have one more vote up. Wanted to use the library for defining CMS types, it would be really useful if it was in maven

[mszajowskiwr]

Some of the new schemas are missing here, we'd greatly benefit from having e.g. FAQPage

[githubuser100007]

Another vote for me. Really like to see this updated!

[fastforwardit]

+1 please update

[YTN01]

+1 I too would appreciate an update on this.

[andreistroe]

+1 I could really use a workable up-to-date version of this. There is no other library that does the same.