How often do you see that knowledge expressed in the recipes themselves?
Microdata doesn't need to _fully_ describe something. It's not describing to a machine how to perform the recipe, it's just annotating the text with useful metadata. It's metadata, doesn't need to be full data.
Doesn't mean that there aren't users that would desire a GANTT chart for a recipe (or set of them) if given the opportunity from enough data. Getting an entire meal out on time is one of the oldest schools of project management, after all.
Well, it’s often in the steps; stuff like, while the sauce is simmering, prepare the vegetables… just before the sauce has reduced, add the red wine. And some is just implicit knowledge that comes with experience, true.
I also haven’t seen a site that actually turns that into a neat visualisation, but as an amateur chef, properly timing steps of a recipe is definitely important.
I’m inclined to agree with GP though that a good model should be able to capture that.
To me it looks like having the timing for each step is enough (schema.org already supports that).
You can then _decide_ what to paralellize (maybe you want to take it slow, maybe you have another person to help you, etc).
To me, it sounds way simpler. Specially for those writing or annotating the recipes. You're thinking of the reader, but the writing is important too, it's the hidden cost of making super detailed models.
Microdata doesn't need to _fully_ describe something. It's not describing to a machine how to perform the recipe, it's just annotating the text with useful metadata. It's metadata, doesn't need to be full data.