I want to live in a world where schema isn't that important, but right now we need it. If a team at Google recommends it, you should probably use it, because the schema helps us understand page content, and it's used in some search features (but not ranking algorithms). Michelle: Why do you want to depend on it less? Gary: I'm with Sergey and Larry on this. Google should have algorithms that can figure things out without the need for schema, and there really shouldn't be any penalties. Michelle: The schema is used as training data? Gary: No, it's used for rich snippets. Michelle: Finally, the algo will not need the schema? Gary: I hope so. Algorithms should not need the extra data.
Barry: Is there a team actively working on this? Gary: Indirectly, absolutely. It probably involves some kind of machine learning, and if so, the Brain team is working on it. I don't know if they have an active project for this. Barry: How have you obtained entity jewelry retouching service data in the past? Gary: From Freebase and the Knowledge Graph. Panda and thin content Barry: You said pruning content was a bad idea. If you get hit by Panda, how do people do it? Gary: Panda is part of our main ranking algorithm. I don't think anyone in a
responsible position at Google views Panda as a penalty. It is very similar to the other parts of the algorithm. It is a ranking algorithm. If you do something to try to rank yourself higher than you should, it's basically trying to remove the advantage you've gained, not to punish you. Ultimately, you want to have a great site that people love. It's what Google is looking for, and our users are looking for it too. If users leave comments or mention your site on their site and things like that, it will help your rankings.