When to Use Schema vs. Facebook Open Graph?
-
I have a client who for regulatory reasons cannot engage in any social media: no Twitter, Facebook, or Google+ accounts. No social sharing buttons allowed on the site. The industry is medical devices.
We are in the process of redesigning their site, and would like to include structured markup wherever possible. For example, there are lots of schema types under MedicalEntity: http://schema.org/MedicalEntity
Given their lack of social media (and no plans to ever use it), does it make sense to incorporate OG tags at all? Or should we stick exclusively to the schemas documented on schema.org?
-
Serendipitous timing - this article was posted yesterday about using mark-up, and how Open Graph and Schema.org are used, and why to use both:
Facebook Open Graph serves its purpose well, but it doesn’t provide the detailed information search engines need to improve the user experience. A single web page may have many components, and it may talk about more than one thing. Even if you mark up your content for Facebook Open Graph, schema.org provides an additional way to provide more detail about particular entities on the page.
http://searchengineland.com/schema-org-7-things-for-seos-to-consider-post-hummingbird-172163
-
I personally would use both. They way that I look at it with the OG tags is that you are controlling the consistency of the brand across platforms that you do not officially support. This is very much in my mind the same thing as making a page display correctly in older version of IE.
-
OG and Schema can live in the wild together. They are both ways to show information around the entities which they describe.
IMDB is using both OG and Schema to mark up their data:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1392170/ -
Thanks, Craig. Do you know if any of the OG and schema tags would duplicate or conflict? I see a lot of documentation about using one or the other, but not how to use both harmoniously.
-
Thanks Keri, interesting example. While the GE Healthcare site is more commercial in intent, I like how they've treated the share functionality using the node icon. Subtle, yet shareable
-
I haven't checked in depth, the regulations are with the FDA and they aren't the most up-to-date with social media practices! No competitors are using OG yet, but their sites are also very under-optimized.
-
This may be way over-the-top, but have you checked if OG tags would violate the regulations at all, or if they could potentially be a violation down the road? Granted, even though I haven't read the regulations, I don't think it should...but it's just something I'd double-check. I could see a potential problem if the wording is ambiguous and a competitor wants to stir up trouble for you.
-
Given that other people may share those pages, I would incorporate both OG and Schema on the site.
-
Just because you can't share doesn't mean people aren't going to share it on FB. Just yesterday, I shared http://www3.gehealthcare.com/en/Products/Categories/Accessories_and_Supplies/Adventure_Series_for_CT/Pirate_Island on FB with my friends. I don't have formal experience in this area, but did want to point that out. There was an article on slate.com about the design of these, and I went looking for more information, and found that page.
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
-
Schema.org wrong display in SERP
Hi, and happy new year! I tagged our new platform with schema.org: website+application software. There's also "reviews". Those reviews use datepublished microdata. However it seems that this info is used as a date for the page... Search for "logiciel cesar" with Google.fr, and the page is https://www.caplogiciel.com/logiciel/cesar
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 2MSens
Here's a screenshot of the result: https://www.evernote.com/l/AN29vPn0PFNJdINZtA9QU6x_tmoq99c8D3A What did I do wrong? I checked other websites which are well displayed on Google and they use the same microdata... Thanks. Best, Benoit.0 -
Desktop vs. Mobile Results
When googling on www.google.ca for "wedding invitations" and in my own geo location market of Toronto, my site - www.stephita.com, will show up differently on SERP on desktop (Chrome & IE) vs. mobile (iPad, iPhone, android, etc.). On desktop SERP, I will show up 6/7 position... (which is relatively a new position, the past 3 weeks - I was previously on page 2) (After a bunch of SEO fixes, I've managed to propel my site back to page 1!) On mobile SERP, I only show up on 1/2 position on PAGE 2 😞 As I mentioned above, I did a bunch of SEO fixes that I think were related to Panda/Penguin algos. So I'm wondering why my MOBILE SERP has NOT improved along the way? What should I be looking at to fix this 5-6 position differential? Thanks all!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TysonWong0 -
Canonical vs 301 - Web Development
So I'm having a conversation with the development team at my work and I'm a little tired today so I thought I would ask for other opinions. The currently the site duplicates it's full site by having a 200 show with or without a trailing slash. I have asked for a 301 redirect to with the trailing slash. They countered with having all the rel=canonical be the trailing slash, which I know is acceptable. My issue is that while a rel=canonical is acceptable, since my site has a very high level of competition and a very aggressive link building strategy, I believe that it may be beneficial to have the 301 redirect. BUT, I may be wrong. When we're talking hundreds of thousands of links, I would love to have them directly linked instead of possibly splitting them up between a duplicate page that has a correct canonical. I'm curious to what everyone thinks though....
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mattdinbrooklyn1 -
How use Rel="canonical" for our Website
How is the best way to use Rel="canonical" for our website www.ofertasdeemail.com.br, for we can say goodbye for duplicated pages? I appreciate for every help. I also hope to contribute to the SEOmoz community. Sincerely,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ZZNINTERNETMEDIAGROUP
Amador Goncalves0 -
Directory VS Article Directory
Which got hit harder in penguin update. I was looking at SEER Interactive backlink profile (the SEO company that didn't rank for it's main keyword phrases) and noticed a pretty big trend on why it might not rank for its domain name. SEER was in a majority of anchor text, many coming from directories. i'm guessing THEY were effected because they matched the exact match domain link profile rule I'm not an expert programmer, but if i was playing "Google Programmer" I would think the Algo update went something like. If ((exact match domain) & (certain % anchor text==domain) & (certain % of anchor text== partial domain + services/company)) { tank the rankings } So back to the question, do you think that this update had a lot to do with directories, article directories, or neither. Is article directories still a legit way to get links. (not ezine)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | imageworks-2612900 -
Using exact keyword domains for local SEO
The website is for the attorney that serves several nearby cities. The main page is optimized for the biggest central city. I have several options how to go after the smaller surrounding cities: 1. Create optimized pages inside the main domain 2. Get more or less exact keyword domains for each city e.g. for the city ABC get yourABClawyer.com and then a) use 1 page websites that use the same template as main website and link all the menu items to the main website b)use 1 page website with a link "for more information go to our main website" c) point exact keyword domains to the optimized pages within the main domain. Which option would be the best in terms of SEO and user experience? Would people freak out if they click on the menu item and go to a different domain website even though it uses the same template (option 2a) Would I get more bounces with option 2b in your opinion? Would option 2c have any positive SEO effect? Should I not even bother with exact keyword domain and go with option 1?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SirMax1 -
Schema - Could a company like mine benefit from this yet?
Hey there - I've been reading about rich snippets and was thinking of hiring a programmer to implement this. In my industry I would be the only one thus far on front page with a highly competitive keywords and would be displaying 5 stars based on our testimonials etc, would that be acceptable? These testimonials are not on my homepage so if I implemented would it be a misuse of these tags? My site is mortgage / financial company and I don’t see much in available tags yet except for “location” and “reviews” I could implement. I'm just trying to figure this out and I greatly appreciate any feedback! 😄
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CliffAuerswald0 -
How to redirect www vs. non-www in IIS
I have been wanting to set our site up to redirect non-www to www for the SEO benefits so often described here on SeoMoz. I see a lot on Apache but not so much for IIS. Is there any developers here that can point me to a how tutorial for people with little IIS experiences?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KJ-Rodgers0