Is there a benefit to Microdata vs. RDFa Lite?

[kongregate]

Is there any community consensus about whether Microdata or RDFa Lite is the superior rich-snippet format?

I work as a design/front-end-developer and in terms of pure coding, RDFa Lite seems the superior method. It looks to be more flexible and more extensible. The W3C spec is also more mature—it's a W3C Recommendation where Microdata is only a W3C Working Draft—so it's more likely to reach full standardization sooner. Also, because it's a Recommendation it's less likely to change.

However, I hear Google "strongly recommends" the use of Microdata. Do they not support RDFa/RDFa Lite?

There doesn't seem to be a great deal of discussion on this anywhere so I'm tempted to think it's sort of irrelevant. I am aware that Schema.org is, supposedly, now supporting RDFa Lite.

[MattAntonino]

Google does support RDFa.  However, on their own site (which is notoriously bad at giving us info) it says "Google suggests using microdata" - that's enough for me.  I have a few clients still on RDFa and from what I've seen, as long as you can get results through the Structured Data test link, you're usually good to go either way.

http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets