I guess there is no reason to assume that Google wouldn’t handle SVGs as value of the image property:

1. Schema.org’s image property expects an image URL (or an ImageObject).

2. SVG is an image format (image/svg+xml).

3. Google does index SVG images.

(Of course, we can never be sure; and things might change always.)

Generally, the syntax shouldn’t matter, as long as it is one of the syntaxes Google supports (currently: Microdata, JSON-LD, and RDFa), and your case is not one of the rare ones where only specific syntaxes are supported.
It would not make sense if Google would, say, support SVG within RDFa but not within JSON-LD.

That said, in the documentation of some (but not all) Rich Snippets, Google recommends the use of ".jpg, .png, or. gif formats". But that that really seems to be a recommendation, not a requirement.

I guess there is no reason to assume that Google wouldn’t handle SVGs as value of the image property:

1. Schema.org’s image property expects an image URL (or an ImageObject).

2. SVG is an image format (image/svg+xml).

3. Google does index SVG images.

(Of course, we can never be sure; and things might change always.)

Generally, the syntax shouldn’t matter, as long as it is one of the syntaxes Google supports (currently: Microdata, JSON-LD, and RDFa), and your case is not one of the rare ones where only specific syntaxes are supported.
It would not make sense if Google would, say, support SVG within RDFa but not within JSON-LD.

That said, in the documentation of some (but not all) Rich Snippets, Google recommends the use of ".jpg, .png, or. gif formats". But that that really seems to be a recommendation, not a requirement.

I guess there is no reason to assume that Google wouldn’t handle SVGs as value of the image property:

1. Schema.org’s image property expects an image URL (or an ImageObject).

2. SVG is an image format (image/svg+xml).

3. Google does index SVG images.

(Of course, we can never be sure; and things might change always.)

Generally, the syntax shouldn’t matter, as long as it is one of the syntaxes Google supports (currently: Microdata, JSON-LD, and RDFa), and your case is not one of the rare ones where only specific syntaxes are supported.
It would not make sense if Google would, say, support SVG within RDFa but not within JSON-LD.

I guess there is no reason to assume that Google wouldn’t handle SVGs as value of the image property:

1. Schema.org’s image property expects an image URL (or an ImageObject).

2. SVG is an image format (image/svg+xml).

3. Google does index SVG images.

(Of course, we can never be sure; and things might change always.)

Generally, the syntax shouldn’t matter, as long as it is one of the syntaxes Google supports (currently: Microdata, JSON-LD, and RDFa), and your case is not one of the rare ones where only specific syntaxes are supported.
It would not make sense if Google would, say, support SVG within RDFa but not within JSON-LD.

That said, in the documentation of some (but not all) Rich Snippets, Google recommends the use of ".jpg, .png, or. gif formats". But that that really seems to be a recommendation, not a requirement.