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 ...
Google Search doesn’t seem to support Rich Snippets for homepages.
This is currently not documented, but confirmed by the Google employee @methode (on SO):
We (Google) don't accept rich snippets for homepages; rich snippet annotations should be placed on leaf pages.
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 ...
I've come across similar issue, Google will display rich snippets if they are correctly implemented using "site:" but they wont display it on normal results if they are not sure about the quality.
John Muller discussed about this in his Office Hangouts
Usually if you do a site: query for a site we will show the rich
snippets if its implemented ...
In my experience, changes to microdata have often taken a week or more to show up in GWT, even after manually re-submitting affected pages. Assuming the Testing Tool reports correctly functioning code, I wouldn't worry; GWT will show it eventually.
Unix time starts on January 1st, 1970. That time is called the "unix time epoch".
It seems likely that Google is storing the dates as unix time stamps internally and is therefore unable to handle dates before 1970.
Update 2016: The documentation got updated and it no longer contains the note. So now JSON-LD seems to be supported for the Products Rich Snippet.
Google’s documentation for the Products Rich Snippet says for the single product page:
We are in the process of implementing JSON-LD support for this Rich Snippet type. At the current time, we recommend using ...
Not a Schema issue, it's a website and Google issue
The problem you are experiencing is pretty common and a side effect of GEO IP detection. The issue that your encountering is occurring due to the fact that your site is using some type of IP Geolocation service, often known as GEOIP.
In short your site is automatically detecting where a site visitor is ...
I think this is a (long-standing) bug in Google’s SDTT.
Relevant Stack Overflow question:
Why does Google Testing Tool use the “id” attribute to generate a URL for the Microdata item?
In Microdata, only the itemid attribute should be able to give a URI for the item, while the id attribute is only used for referencing elements on the same page (with the ...
I think each value should represent a single area.
If you were using the more expressive AdministrativeArea/GeoShape/Place values, you would (by definition) use one type per area (a Place always represents a single place etc.), so there is no reason to assume that a Text value would be handled in a different manner. Furthermore, the definition of areaServed ...
Of course it should be possible to use any kind of URL design. It wouldn’t make sense for Google to exclude many sites just because they don’t use the URL’s query component for the search function.
Did you check Google’s documentation? For the target property it says:
"This must be a URL that points to an address on the same domain as the content being ...
As with just about everything Google, setting up the information isn't necessarily a guarantee they're going to use it. If you've set up the code and the testing tools say everything's fine, that's about all you can do.
For what it's worth, I don't see author snippets for anybody using your link above. Also, the author snippets are still being "piloted" and ...
The vocabulary Schema.org can be used:
A specific question - e.g. from a user seeking answers online, or collected in a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document.
An answer offered to a question; perhaps correct, perhaps opinionated or wrong.
You can specify the accepted answer with the acceptedAnswer property.
By the ...
Yes, markup can be spread all over the page. In fact, you can try it out with Google's own Structured Data Markup Helper, which will allow you to highlight items on a page and see suggested marked-up HTML.
Here is a relevant article:
...don’t be discouraged if your Rich Snippets do a disappearing act. Google is constantly testing and modifying its algorithms. Here’s the best way to react:
Leave your markup code as is for at least 8 weeks and just monitor the ups and downs of your Rich Snippets. They mean Google is continually analyzing your site.
We have been having very similar issues with our website. As with yours we have waited above that time period (6 months in fact), and all the testing tools show the markup as valid.
The third bullet point is most likely the issue. The reasons Google outline are (in the form of answering a question):
Q: Why doesn't my site show rich snippets? I added ...
you should be clear, why do you want to make use of structured data? to go through the testing tool or to deliver correctly formatted and standard conform structured data to search engine, so your site will be included into Google News output?
Google News Article needs image: that's the fact. Why it needs it? To show it to the people. What are solutions?
Not saying that this is the reason for the problem, but it seems that you shouldn’t use reviewCount unless you have reviews (in contrast to ratings, which ratingCount is for).
From Google’s guidelines for the Reviews/Rating Rich Snippet:
Make sure the reviews and ratings you mark up are readily available to users from the marked-up page. It should be ...
Yes, it’s a good idea.
Structured data is not only useful for content you authored. It allows you to say anything about anything (see Semantic Web and Linked Data).
You provide this video for your human visitors, possibly showing its title and other metadata. Why not also provide this data in a way that machines can easier understand?
Or in other words: ...
Google doesn’t seem to document if it’s sufficient to provide this one the homepage, or if every page should have it.
Note that they do state this for the Sitelinks Searchbox ("Add the markup only to the homepage of your site. It is not necessary to repeat the markup in other pages of your site."), so either they forgot to mention this for the Site Name, too,...
If you access the page (https://auto.ndtv.com/honda-bikes/grazia) and run it through the structured data testing tool (https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool) you will see that the page includes four types of structured data. The relevant one is Product, and it has 12 warnings: the markup uses datePublished, reviewBody, author, and ...
You want to apply the properties identified in both the Question scheme and Answer scheme as defined on Schema.org.
In particular and at minimum, use the following attributes/properties:
itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Question" on the DOM element wrapping entire set of question & answer content
itemprop="name" (typically on an H1) wrapping the ...
Importing reviews into a website seems to be against Google's guidelines:
Sites must collect ratings information directly from users and not from other sites.
Review Guidelines for Local Businesses
However the wording is fuzzy here. Do they mean that (1) you need to collect reviews directly through your domain, or that (2) you can use external tools ...
I do not have SKU and unique identifier, so how can I fix these warnings?
Is there any way I can by-pass these errors or do tweak in code?
There is no way to fix this other than to provide the data.
I have a doubt that Google may penalize in future because of these warnings.
As long as it’s just a warning, you can still get the search result feature (...
The order of structured data properties can't effect rankings. This is because Google says structured data doesn't affect rankings at all.
For more information about how structured data actually affects SEO see: Is Schema.org structured data (in Microdata, JSON-LD, or RDFa) relevant for SEO?
The simple answer would be to change the way the data is presented. (Grouping the data by itemtype.)
For example. If "most" of the data pertains to "People", then you would put all of the data related to people in a div or some element of the sort. Then you would specify an itemtype of "Person".
Now, you CAN contain multiple itemtypes in a section of data....
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 ...