Timeline for itemprop for canonical link and meta description in the head
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 11, 2017 at 1:12 | comment | added | unor |
@Mike: There are several ways how terms can be specified in RDFa. I gave three examples in another answer. In this answer here I made use of the RDFa Core Initial Context (not necessarily the best practice; if you are comfortable with RDFa and don’t mind the additional markup, I would always explicitly specify the vocabulary with prefix).
|
|
| Mar 10, 2017 at 22:25 | comment | added | Mike | And in your RDFa example the url property doesn't recognized by Google Structure Tool, even though it's valid, yeah. But it works only if I add second link with this property. | |
| Mar 10, 2017 at 21:49 | comment | added | Mike | Excuse me, can you point me to the education material, please, where I can read about usage of prefix inside the typeof property? I see it's working, but I've just read RDFa Lite spec at W3C and they say I can use predefined prefixes when I assign second vocabulary via prefixes but they didn't mention that I can omit vocab property and use the prefixes right inside the typeof. So I'm a bit lost and don't know what's is the right way - should I use vocab or prefixes like you did in the example above? Thank you. | |
| Mar 10, 2017 at 0:35 | comment | added | unor | @Mike: I prefer RDFa, and I typically recommend RDFa -- but without knowing more about your case, such a recommendation wouldn’t mean much, of course. -- See my answer to our question Microdata vs RFDa (or the more detailed version on Stack Overflow) | |
| Mar 9, 2017 at 22:47 | comment | added | Mike | This helps, thank you! Advice me please, do you recommend to use Microdata or RDFa? | |
| Mar 9, 2017 at 22:46 | vote | accept | Mike | ||
| Mar 9, 2017 at 16:16 | history | answered | unor | CC BY-SA 3.0 |