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
-
JSON-LD meta data: Do you have any rules/recommendations for using BlogPosting vs Article?
Dear Moz Community. I'm looking at moving from in-line Microdata in the HTML to JSON-LD on the web pages that I manage. Seems a far simpler solution having all the meta data in one place - especially for trouble shooting! With this in mind I've started to change the page templates on my personal site before I tackle the ones for my eCommerce site. I've made a start, and I'm still working on the templates producing some default values (like if a page doesn't have an associated image) but have been wondering if any of you have any rules/recommendations for using BlogPosting vs Article? I'd call this type of page an Article:
Technical SEO | | andystorey
https://cycling-jersey-collection.com/browse-collection/selle-italia-chinol-seb-bennotto-1982-team-jersey Whereas this page is from the /blog so that should probably be a BlogPosting:
https://cycling-jersey-collection.com/blog/2017-worldtour-team-jerseys I've used the following resources but it would be great to get a discussion on here.
https://yoast.com/structured-data-schema-ultimate-guide/
https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/data-type-selector
https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/u/0/ I'm keen to get this 100% right as once this is done I'm going to drive through some further changes to get some progress on things like this: https://moz.com/blog/ranking-zero-seo-for-answers
https://moz.com/blog/what-we-learned-analyzing-featured-snippets Kind Regards andy moz-screenshot.jpg1 -
Issues with structured data on angular pages.
I am having an issue with Structured Data. I have added the structured data to angular pages of my site but when I run the test from the testing tool it doesn't detect the same. Although when I cut and paste the code (from inspect element) it detects the structured data. But in my webmaster tools, those pages don't show up under structured data. I am unsure if my structured data is being picked up by google. What should be done here? Should I provide pre-rendered pages to google?
Technical SEO | | Lybrate06060 -
Changed all product titles, lost google schema markup in listings. Temporary?
We changed all of our product titles to be way shorter and less keyword stuffed last week. Short of dropping a few places in rank for most keywords (we assume temporarily) that all went fine. What we didn't expect was to loose all the schema data in our google listings from product pages. Price, and review stars are missing. Has anyone seen this before?
Technical SEO | | monkeyevil0 -
Schema.org markup for breadcrumbs: does it finally work?
Hi, TL;DR: Does https://schema.org/BreadcrumbList work? It's been some time since I last implemented schema.org markup for breadcrumbs. Back then the situation was that google explicitly discouraged the use of the schema.org markup for breadcrumbs. In my experience it had been pretty hit or miss - sometimes it worked without issues; sometimes it did not work without obvious reason. Consequently, I ditched it for the data-vocabulary.org markup which did not give me any issues. However, I prefer using schema.org and currently a new site is being designed for a client. Thus, I'd like to use schema.org markup for the breadcrumb - but of course only if it works now. Google has dropped the previous warning/discouragements and by now lists a schema.org code https://developers.google.com/structured-data/breadcrumbs based on the new-ish https://schema.org/BreadcrumbList. Has anybody here used this markup on a site (preferably more than one) and can confirm whether or not it is reliably working and showing the breadcrumb trail / site hierarchy in the SERP? Thanks for your answers! Nico
Technical SEO | | netzkern_AG0 -
SEO impact of the anatomy of URL subdirectory structure?
I've been pushing hard to get our Americas site (DA 34) integrated with our higher domain authority (DA 51) international website. Currently our international website is setup in the following format... website.com/us-en/ website.com/fr-fr/ etc... The problem that I am facing is that I need my development framework installed in it's own directory. It cannot be at the root of the website (website.com) since that is where the other websites (us-en, fr-fr, etc.) are being generated from. Though we will have control of /us-en/ after the integration I cannot use that as the website main directory since the americas website is going to be designed for scalability (eventually adopting all regions and languages) so it cannot be region specific. What we're looking at is website.com/[base]/us-en. I'm afraid that if base has any length to it in terms of characters it is going to dilute the SEO value of whatever comes after it in the URL (website.com/[base]/us-en/store/product-name.html). Any recommendations?
Technical SEO | | bearpaw0 -
Weird problems with google's rich snippet markup
Once upon a time, our site was ranking well and had all the markups showing up in the results. We than lost some of our rankings due to dropped links and not so well kept maintenance. Now, we are gaining up the rankings again, but the markups don't show up in the organic search results. When we Google site:oursite.com, the markups show up, but not in the organic search. There are no manual actions against our site. any idea why this would happen?
Technical SEO | | s-s0 -
Domain Structure - without www.
I'm working on a new project and we would prefer to not use the www. - for name/branding reasons. Are there any SEO ramifications from setting the domain without the www and using 301 redirects for all home page extensions to forward to -> domain.com(without the www)? Furthermore, we will be hosting many profiles on this site and would like to structure them for optimal SEO. Would there be an issue with using sub domains - user.domain.com, or would sub directories be more optimal? Thank you in advance!
Technical SEO | | NickMacario0 -
Product reviews markup
Hi, I'm currently having issues with some of the user reviews on product pages. Can you spot any issues in the reviews? Thanks
Technical SEO | | pikka0