Schema.org Microdata or Microformats - Which Should We Use
-
Hi All,
I'm wondering what would be the better alternative - schema.org microdata or microformats. I am aware that search engines such as Google, Yahoo, and Bing recognize Schema.org as the standard. Question is, will it have any negative affect? Our web developer here says that schema.org microdata may result in negative html. I don't think that it will affect our SEO, but I guess that's also something to shed some light on.
So, what's the consensus here - should we implement schema.org or go with microformats - or, does it really make any difference?
-
i think the case can be made for any of the three main formats. all have their pros & cons, but Google recommends schema.org microdata
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/99170?hl=en
structured data offers search engines more information about the site. more information they can use to evaluate the relevancy of your site to a query as well as the depth of content for a richer snippet. as far as it negatively affecting SEO, i would say take the same precautions as you would with any other tactic. implement it as cleanly & honestly as possible. if it's done with (perceived) manipulation for the sole purpose of better rankings it can negatively affect the a website's SEO. but that's just a good rule of thumb regardless of the tactic.
-
Hi Pedram,
You are correct when you say Schema.org is the standard by the major search engines.
Here's a great discussion on the subject here: http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/166612/schema-org-vs-microformats
Hope this helps
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
What is the feeliing of "Here's where our site can help" text links used for conversions?
If you have an ecommerce site that is using editorial content on topics related to the site's business model to build organic traffic and draw visitors who might be interested in using the site's services eventually, what is the SEO (page ranking) impact -- as well as the impact on the visitors' perceptions about the reliability of the information on the site -- of using phrases like "Here is where [our site] can help you." in nearly every article. Note: the "our site" text would be linked in each case as a conversion point to one of the site's services pages to get visitors to move from content pages on a site to the sales pages on the site. Will this have an impact on page rankings? Does it dilute the page's relevance to search engines? Will the content look less authoritative because of the prevalence of these types of links? What about the same conversion links without the "we can help" text - i.e., more natural-sounding links that stem from the flow of the article but can lead interested visitors deeper into the ecommerce section of the site?
Algorithm Updates | | Will-McDermott0 -
Does using parent pages in WordPress help with SEO and/or indexing for SERPs?
I have a law office and we handle four different practice areas. I used to have multiple websites (one for each practice area) with keywords in the actual domain name, but based on the recommendation of SEO "experts" a few years ago, I consolidated all the webpages into one single webpage (based on the rumors at the time that Google was going to be focusing on authorship and branding in the future, rather than keywords in URLs or titles). Needless to say, Google authorship was dropped a year or two later and "branding" never took off. Overall, having one webpage is convenient and generally makes SEO easier, but there's been a huge drawback: When my page comes up in SERPs after searching for "attorney" or "lawyer" combined with a specific practice area, the practice area landing pages don't typically come up in the SERPs, only the front page comes up. It's as if Google recognizes that I have some decent content, and Google knows that I specialize in multiple practice areas, but it directs everyone to the front page only. Prospective clients don't like this and it causes my bounce rate to be high. They like to land on a page focusing on the practice area they searched for. Two questions: (1) Would using parent pages (e.g. http://lawfirm.com/divorce/anytown-usa-attorney-lawyer/ vs. http://lawfirm.com/anytown-usa-divorce-attorney-lawyer/) be better for SEO? The research I've done up to this point appears to indicate "no." It doesn't make much difference as long as the keywords are in the domain name and/or URL. But I'd be interested to hear contrary opinions. (2) Would using parent pages (e.g. http://lawfirm.com/divorce/anytown-usa-attorney-lawyer/ vs. http://lawfirm.com/anytown-usa-divorce-attorney-lawyer/) be better for indexing in Google SERPs? For example, would it make it more likely that someone searching for "anytown usa divorce attorney" would actually end up in the divorce section of the website rather than the front page?
Algorithm Updates | | micromano0 -
Does it impact over ranking of any website if their same content being used some other external sources
Hi Moz & members, I just want to make sure over website www.1st-care.org , does it impact over ranking this website if the same content (of about us or home care services) being used some other external sources or local citations places. Do those published same content create any ranking drop issue with this website's and making its content strengthen week? . As I was on 9th position in Google.com before, now it has slipped to 29th position. WHY? is there content issue or anything else which i am not aware.
Algorithm Updates | | Futura
See the content used:
Home page content
About us page content Regards,
Teginder Ravi0 -
Schema tags demystified
I am looking for a basic description of the use for schema tags and how and in what circumstances they are best applied. I have found a few resources such as schema.org and here on this forum, but find I still need a basics lesson and subsequently, some ways to execute. The Raven plugin appears to make the code visible to the viewer which seems unacceptable...Guess I'm just a bit stumped! Thanks in advance for any available hand-holding on this. ;o)
Algorithm Updates | | gfiedel0 -
Should I use the Disavow Tool at this point?
After Penguin, our site: www.stadriemblems.com jumped up to #1 for the keyword "embroidered patches." Now, months later, it's at the top pf page two. I'm pretty sure this is because we do have a few shady links (I didn't do it!) that perhaps Penguin didn't catch the first time around, but now Google is either discounting them or counting them against us. My question is, since I'm pretty sure those links are the reason we are gradually declining, should I submit them to Google as disavowed, even though technically, we're not penalized . . . yet? I have done everything possible to get them removed, and it's not happening.
Algorithm Updates | | UnderRugSwept0 -
Does Schema.org markup create a conflict with Power Reviews' standard microformat markup for e-commerce product pages?
Does anyone have experience implementing Schema.org markup on e-commerce websites that are already using Power Reviews (now Bazaar)? In Google's documentation they say that it's generally not a good idea to use two types of semantic markup for the same item (reviews in this case), but I wouldn't think that there would be a problem marking up other items on the page with Schema such as price, stock status, etc... Anyone care to provide some insight? Also in a related topic, have you all noticed that Google has really dialed back the frequency in which they display rich snippets for product searches? A few weeks ago the site that I'm referring to had hundreds of products that were displaying snippets, now it seems that only about 10% (roughly) of them are still showing. Thanks everybody.
Algorithm Updates | | BrianCC0 -
Has Google problems in indexing pages that use <base href=""> the last days?
Since a couple of days I have the problem, that Google Webmaster tools are showing a lot more 404 Errors than normal. If I go thru the list I find very strange URLs that look like two paths put together. For example: http://www.domain.de/languages/languageschools/havanna/languages/languageschools/london/london.htm If I check on which page Google found that path it is showing me the following URL: http://www.domain.de/languages/languageschools/havanna/spanishcourse.htm If I check the source code of the Page for the Link leading to the London Page it looks like the following: [...](languages/languageschools/london/london.htm) So to me it looks like Google is ignoring the <base href="..."> and putting the path together as following: Part 1) http://www.domain.de/laguages/languageschools/havanna/ instead of base href Part 2) languages/languageschools/london/london.htm Result is the wrong path! http://www.domain.de/languages/languageschools/havanna/languages/languageschools/london/london.htm I know finding a solution is not difficult, I can use absolute paths instead of relative ones. But: - Does anyone make the same experience? - Do you know other reasons which could cause such a problem? P.s.: I am quite sure that the CMS (Typo3) is not generating these paths randomly. I would like to be sure before we change the CMS's Settings to absolute paths!
Algorithm Updates | | SimCaffe0 -
Has anyone starting using schema.org?
On the 3rd June 2011 Google announced that they are going to start using Schema. Do you think this will change the way search engines find content, from briefly looking at Schema I'm concerned that the proposed tags could just turn into another keyword meta tag and be abused. Have you started using this tags yet and have you noticed a difference?
Algorithm Updates | | Seaward-Group0