Data-vocabulary.org for structured markup in 2019
-
Hi MOZ friends,
One of our clients has used data-vocabulary.org for structured markup.
Schema.org says:
"If you are already publishing structured data markup and it is already being used by Google, Microsoft, Yandex or Yahoo!, the markup format will generally continue to be supported. Changing to the new markup format could be helpful over time because you will be switching to a standard that is accepted across several companies, but you don't have to do it."
Although there is such statement, as schema.org is the common vocabulary in 2019, should I keep it or change it with schema.org?
Thanks in advance!
-
Thank you very much for the answer Martijn.
-
If you have the resources available and don't have many other priorities. It could be worth it to switch over, but honestly, if I would be in the situation and have many other things to change as well I wouldn't make this a priority. In the end, you're already benefiting from most of the upsides with data-vocabulary and Schema.org isn't going to get you much more. It will likely be a good thing for the future to move over as most of the new extensions are becoming available for Schema.org, but if you have very little upside I wouldn't make the migration right away.
-
Not sure how you run your agency or whatever but generally for changes like this I like to "task" them out. Meaning that I will always move to the preferred version of things over time. Let's say your client has 500 pages, can you do 50 pages a month with the correct version of schema? Start with the most important pages on the site and move from there. If you can't get to the pages that need updated in month three, you'll still be ok. I think the search engines will be able to read the data regardless but always like to move towards the preferred version of things. It's a "best practice" in a way. Just organize the pages by either traffic, importance, or relevance and go from there. No need to rush it. But definitely something I would move towards.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
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
-
blog url structure change affect on pagerank
We are looking to change our blog structure which will help us with the organization of the topics but the url structure will change if we do this. Right now all of the blogs are under a general news blog, which we will be breaking out articles into several blog category topics Current:
Technical SEO | | theblueprints
example of current structure
current site: https://domain/blogs/news/blog article name Proposed Change:
current site: https://domain/blogs/keyword-name-of-blog-category/blog article name We have ranked #1 for several keywords that we would like to preserve the ranking if we make this switch with 301 redirects. Looking for suggestion on the percentage of chance our ranking will be negatively affected and by how much? Also what everyones recommendation is if we should make this switch or not touch the urls. Your help is appreciated, thanks in advance.0 -
Has anyone had issues with Bazaarvoice and schema.org?
About a year ago we started using Bazaarvoice to get reviews for our products, and it has been great as far as accumulating content, but Google is not taking the schema.org data and displaying it on the SERP. Someone has told me it is because we are offering multiple products, or that our schema.org tags are incorrect but when I compare our code to other travel sites it seems like everyone is doing something different. This is especially annoying since the Google schema markup check says everything is fine. Does anyone have any advice or similar experiences? Thanks.
Technical SEO | | tripcentral0 -
Is there any problem with my information structure?
Hey guyz I have a client who got a very interesting structure that I've ever seen. He has got a navigation down link, and with that he links every page on his site , with his every each page.
Technical SEO | | atakala
I mean each page link each page with dropdown navigational menu. ( Menu can be crawled .)
And the other interesting thing is in the image . http://prntscr.com/3q7zp6 He has a level 1 page that has a huge content in it.
But he links every topic of the content with another link which is anchor text link I mean this (http://site.com/level2page.html#part1).
How Google treats this ?
Is there anything wrong with it ? I mean amount of it .
Thank you! 3q7zp60 -
Google Structured Data Problem
Hello everyone, About 1-2 weeks ago, I have implemented rich snippets (microdata) for the product pages of my e-commerce site. However, in the web masters tools, google is saying that the crawlers did not detect any structured data in my site. I have also checked my pages using Structured Data Testing Tool. You can see an example test result in the following address. http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tarzimon.com%2Fproduct%2Fnaif-tasarim-torr-aydinlatma-1031 What may cause this problem? Thank you for your help
Technical SEO | | hknkynr0 -
Site Structure Still Old
Ok after my first SEO report from seomoz I re-structured one of my sites. I basically split it into two different sites. I did this way before it was re-crawled on 5/1 and the results still show pages that no longer exist on that domain. What is causing this (user error I am sure but I just need to know what I can do to fix it).
Technical SEO | | bobbabuoy0 -
Schema.org : reviewCount & ratingValue - best practices for implementation?
I'd like to add our merchant review count and rating to our site and use the schema.org markup to indicate to the search engines what these are. The reason I'd like to do this is so that the star rating pulls through to the organic listing. Check out this example from several UK tight sites. Notice how the organic listings display the star rating... My questions are: Has anyone seen an example of this from Google.com (US site) I heard that you should only add this markup to the homepape - but couldn't find any Google documentation to back this up. Do you know if this can be applied throughout the site w/o penalty? Thanks everyone!
Technical SEO | | evoNick0 -
Suggested url structure for hierarchical data
For an existing web site we are developing a local info web site section where each area would get a review and information about local bars and restaurants. The site manages areas in the following hierarchy: Country > Broader region > Perfecture > Municipality > Neighborhood e.g. Italy > Northern Italy > Lombardia > Milano > Center Local Info pages would exist for all the above levels so you could have a page for Italy as a whole, a page for Lombardia, and a separate page for the Center of Milano. On certain countries there are many synonyms especially in the Neighborhood level but also a few in the Municipality level. We would like to build a generic SEF url structure/pattern that would be able to represent the above and be as short as possible for the purpose of SEO. 1. the obvious solution would be to incorporate the unique identifier of e.g. www.example.com/local-info/Italy-10
Technical SEO | | seo-cat
www.example.com/local-info/Milano-12363
www.example.com/local-info/Center-789172 but this does not represent the hierarchy and does not include the interesting keyword of e.g. Milano when looking at the neighborhood level 2. Another option would be to include all levels e.g. www.example.com/local-info/Italy/Northern-Italy/Lombardia
www.example.com/local-info/Italy/Northern-Italy/Lombardia/Milano
www.example.com/local-info/Italy/Northern-Italy/Lombardia/Milano/Center But this would end up with large URLs 3. I am thinking of another solution which would include the current level and its parent at any page. Not capturing the hierarchy very well but at least it includes the parent name for richer keywords in the url itself. www.example.com/local-info/Northern-Italy/Lombardia
www.example.com/local-info/Lombardia/Milano
www.example.com/local-info/Milano/Center 4. Or a hybrid where the first levels are always there and the rest are concatenated on a single segment www.example.com/local-info/Italy/Northern-Italy/Lombardia
www.example.com/local-info/Italy/Northern-Italy/Lombardia-Milano
www.example.com/local-info/Italy/Northern-Italy/Lombardia-Milano-Center any thoughts? thanks in advance0 -
Internal Linking Structure - help Req'd
I have a website that due to the way in which it was put together a few years back always redirects to a /subdomain folder when the top level domain is entered. When analysing the new SERPS tool i spotted that when the .com domain was assessed it didn't pick up the internal links that were pointing to the /subdomain. Q) Could the /redirect cause a problem when crawled by Google, and if i'm linking back to the homepage should i be using the domain or the subdomain as the link (even though one redirects to the other......)
Technical SEO | | NSJ780