Hot answers tagged

14

Microdata extends HTML5 in a way that link and meta elements can be used in the body, if they contain an itemprop attribute. If the itemprop attribute is present on link or meta, they are flow content and phrasing content. The link and meta elements may be used where phrasing content is expected if the itemprop attribute is present. This extension is ...


12

The three big search engines, Google, Bing and Yahoo (and more recently, Yandex), have agreed to understand 1 single microdata vocabulary. This is Schema.org, which has examples of placement. This formats your results as Rich Snippets, the search engine results which have pictures and fivestar ratings, etc, displayed on the search result page. While this ...


11

schema.org: Article, BlogPosting If something is a schema:BlogPosting, it is an schema:Article, too, isn't it? As schema:BlogPosting is a more specific schema:Article: More specific types BlogPosting NewsArticle ScholarlyArticle So you have an schema:Article, and now you may decide if one of these more specific types applies to your ...


9

W3Schools does not set the industry standards on HTML coding. They are simply a 3rd party reference site that is not affiliated with the W3C in anyway. W3Schools and other sites are often wrong when using cutting edge coding technologies such as Schema and Responsive design. When using fairly new code your one stop shop should be W3C as set the compliance ...


8

Both are solutions for semantically annotating your content, but in very different ways: Microdata extends HTML5 (e.g., by introducing new attributes like itemprop), while Microformats only uses existing HTML mechanisms (like class and rel attributes). With Microdata, you can use almost any vocabulary (a popular one is Schema.org), with Microformats you ...


7

Google recommends using microdata, but it does support three formats: microdata, microformats, and RDFa. A big reason to choose microdata would be that the examples that Google gives on it's website and those on schema.org are in the microdata format. Here is a site that has a huge table of the various advantages and disadvantages of the three formats. ...


7

These are no resources which get usually accessed by the browser but simply a fancy way to declare a name space, i.e. all SVG images share the same XML name space which is defined by the URL and same with xlink. This means you should treat any of these xmlns just as some kind of special string and leave them unchanged.


7

schema.org/BlogPosting image permits ImageObject and URL, however Google only permits ImageObject, hence the error. The intended markup is: <!-- my code --> <div itemprop="image" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject"> <img src="image.jpg" itemprop="url"> </div>                 Another discrepancy is ...


6

Your rich snippet data needs to be visible to users. From Google's rich snippet troubleshooting: Is your marked-up content hidden from users? In general, Google won't display any content in rich snippets that is not visible to human user. It can be tempting to add all the content relevant for a rich snippet in one place on the page, mark it up, and ...


6

You could use the itemref attribute. From the Microdata (W3C Working Group Note) spec: 4.2 The basic syntax: Properties that are not descendants of the element with the itemscope attribute can be associated with the item using the itemref attribute. This attribute takes a list of IDs of elements to crawl in addition to crawling the children of the ...


6

Typically, user agents wouldn’t dereference these URIs. There should be absolutely no problem in using the Schema.org HTTP URIs on a HTTPS site. In fact, many other vocabularies (used for Microdata or RDFa) provide only HTTP URIs, so you have no choice there. I’d even say it’s bad practice to provide multiple vocabulary URIs for the same concept, as ...


6

JSON-LD doesn’t care. Which makes sense, because the data is the same, no matter from where in the document it gets extracted. From the perspective of HTML, you should only include it in the head if the JSON-LD is about your web page or about what your web page represents, because the head element is defined to contain metadata for the document. But it’s ...


5

Your questions seem to be: Can I specify itemprop="url" on li? Can I specify itemprop="name" on a? The answer to both of these questions is: No, you should not do that. Microdata defines special parsing rules for elements like a. Schema.org’s url property expects a URL as value. Microdata defines that you have to use elements like a/area/link/etc. ...


4

You can also check your microdata format against Google Webmaster Tools, rich snippet testing tool at http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets


4

If there is a microformat for the data you have on your website and you wish to optimize your website for the search engines then you should use use microformats in your websites. How much of a difference it will make in your SEO efforts will vary just like every other thing that has to do with SEO. It will depend on lots of other factors. But if you want to ...


4

Microdata doesn’t have a concept of "site"; each page is separate. So you should include all relevant metadata on every page where the corresponding content is visible (but only one time per page). Think of a browser-add on that displays all Microdata name-value pairs in a sidebar: why should the user have to visit a specific page of your site to see the ...


4

Google won't pick up on any markup that isn't visible to users. Because of this policy, they are unlikely to recognize any structured data that is in <script> tags. In general, Google won't display any content in rich snippets that is not visible to human user. Don't hide the content that you have marked up for rich snippets using techniques like ...


4

Note that syntaxes like Microdata and RDFa don’t annotate the HTML, they use the HTML just as a carrier. After parsing the Microdata/RDFa, it doesn’t matter anymore which markup was used. If your two properties with the same content belong to the same item, it’s not useful to have the additional one, as it doesn’t add anything new (but it’s not forbidden ...


3

You should use <meta itemprop="image" content="/uploads/images/medium/product_img.jpg"> Since src="" is associated with embedding content on the page and content="" is associated with embedding items off the page so to speak. This is the same method as used with the Facebook Open Graph meta as well, take a look: <meta property='og:image' ...


3

The basic direction is correct, but you must use <link> and href=... instead of meta, since the value is a URL/URI, not a string: <link itemprop="acceptedPaymentMethod" href="http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#PayPal" /> <link itemprop="acceptedPaymentMethod" href=" http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#PaymentMethodCreditCard" /> The rest ...


3

No, you don't need to duplicate the HTML exactly: microdata schemas are based on the microdata attributes. It doesn't matter (usually; e.g. links are an exception) what HTML tag those attributes are applied to. You may want to start by reading "Getting started with schema.org", if you haven't already.


3

From schema.org: This site provides a collection of schemas, i.e., html tags, that webmasters can use to markup their pages in ways recognized by major search providers. Search engines including Bing, Google and Yahoo! rely on this markup to improve the display of search results, making it easier for people to find the right web pages. Many ...


3

In my view and experience, blog post schema should be used for posts on a blog. It contains all the properties you may require on a blog posts (albeit, so does article schema). The more a search engine utilises information provided via Schema, the more relevant your content becomes if it can be correctly identified (is marked up). I'd associate Articles ...


3

Yes, avoid Schema for now and use Data Vocabulary, for exactly the reason you cite. I've used the latter, and it works. John Mueller from Google has said that he expects Schema will have to change, and the discussion around it seems to suggest that Schema needs to be more like the current Data Vocabulary syntax, so any future adaptations you need to make ...


3

Including the current page in the breadcrumbs is not required by Google: Each breadcrumb item should appear in order, with the first item representing the top-level page, and the final item representing the parent of the current page. Therefore, it should not matter if it is marked up at all. However, the effects of marking it up with everything ...


3

This is a bit subjective, but I don't believe Schema.org dicatates in anyway what tags the itemprop attributes can be added to, so I don't see any problem with your <h1><span itemprop="name">Cut and Blow</span> Devon</h1> approach. You could quite conceivably have something like this: <h1>New for 2013: <span ...


3

Microdata can only be used on HTML elements as defined by HTML5. According to HTML5, the svg element is not in the HTML namespace. WHATWG’s HTML spec explicitly mentions that Microdata doesn’t work for svg (quoted on 2014-01-02): Currently, the itemscope, itemprop, and other microdata attributes are only defined for HTML elements. This means that ...


3

Being strict while keeping things simple, and without mixing vocabularies, you can use the image property, which is generic but specific enough about the content you are marking up. A logo is not normally associated with a person, it's associated with a product, a company, or things like that. So for practical purposes, the image she uses is going to define ...


3

If the code is validated, no. The following is: <div itemscope itemtype="http://data-vocabulary.org/Breadcrumb"> <a href="http://www.example.com/" itemprop="url"> <span itemprop="title">Dresses</span> </a> </div> Gets validated with any of those tags (<span>, <li>, <div>) and many ...


3

They're using microformats, specifically hCard and hCalendar. Along with RDFa and JSON-LD, this is an alternative to microdata. See Google's Rich Snippet spec for people here, and here's my public LinkedIn page viewed with Google's structured data testing tool, showing a preview Rich Snippet and the extracted structured data.



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible