Schema.org vs data-vocabulary.org
-
Hi, I am implementing the rich snippets on an e coomerce site.
Should we implement schema.org or data-vocabulary.org?
As i feel data vocabulary is more used by google in showing rich snippets.
-
Need to know which is best out of the two.
I also read somewhere that JSON is becoming the standard. Confused!! Please help..
-
Plus today's blog post discusses Rich Snippets. http://www.seomoz.org/blog/a-visual-guide-to-rich-snippets
-
you say so and seomoz also says so.
then i am going with schema.org. Just read some negative posts on schema.org. Just wanted to confirm.Thanks
-
schema.org is becoming the standard.
Here is a great post from SEOmoz: Schema.org - Why Your'e Behind if You're Not Using It...
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
-
Hreflang Errors 404 vs "Page Not Found"
For a websites that differ between catalogs (PDPs) what hreflang error causes the least harm? Obviously the best solution is to only have hreflang for shared products, but this takes more work to implement. So when no identical product exists... 1. Hreflang points to 404 or 410 error. 2. Hreflang points to 200 status "Page Not Found" page. This obviously has the additional issue of needing to point back to 100+ urls. I want to avoid having Google decide to ignore all hreflang due to errors as many correct urls will exist. Any thoughts?
On-Page Optimization | | rigelcable0 -
Using Google structured Data for SEO benefit
Hi there I run www.isacleanse.com.au and I've set up some Structured data using Google Webmaster Tools which says it will be picked up during the next Google update (has been set up over 4 weeks ago), however I dont seem to see any of the structured data for the products/reviews/ratings etc coming through in search results. Question at hand: Is there additional things I need to do in the code of the website or should this be sufficient? (see attached screenshot) szpFUpX
On-Page Optimization | | IsaCleanse1 -
Duplicate anchor text vs poor relevance in internal links
We're writing a number of blog posts, all based around a particular head-term (call it "women's widgets"). Each post will be centered around a different long-tail keyword (e.g. "women's brandA widgets", "women's brandB widgets", "women's type1 widgets", etc.). We want to link from the blog posts back to the main "women's widgets" category-level page on our site. Should we: a) Use the words "women's widgets" in each blog post and link that to the "women's widgets" page? This would be the most relevant, but it also seems like using the same anchor text on all of the posts, and linking to the main page, is not good since Google doesn't like seeing the same exact anchor text all the time, right? b) Link the long-tail keyword ("women's brandA widgets") to the main "women's widgets" page? That would solve the anchor text duplication issue, but then the anchor text doesn't seem relevant to the page being linked to (it might never mention "brandA" on that main page at all), and I think it would also hurt the blog post's chances of ranking for the long-tail keyword since we're basically saying that there's a more relevant page for that keyword somewhere else (i.e. you shouldn't link out from a page using the phrase you're trying to optimize that page for). c) Link a nearby word/phrase instead? For example, we could say "Trust Companyname.com for your women's widget needs", and link "Companyname.com" to the "women's widget" page. By proximity to the keyword phrase, that may help a bit, but again the relevancy of the anchor text to the page being linked to is fairly low. I'd hate to have a bunch of "click here", "read this" or "company name" anchor texts being used, just in the name of not overusing the head-term in the anchor text. Are we just missing something, or misunderstanding Google's preferences? What do you do when you don't want to overuse a keyword in anchor text, but you still want to link to a main category-level page using the head-term in order to tell Google that that is the most relevant, best page for that keyword? Is anchor text duplication more of a problem for external backlinks, and less of an issue for internal interlinking? Do you have a different suggestion, other than what I outlined above? Thanks for the help!
On-Page Optimization | | BandLeader
John0 -
Duplicate Content, http vs https
Hi All! I just discovered that a client of ours a duplicate content issue. Essentially they have approximately 20 pages that have an http and an https version. Is there a better way to handle this than a simple 301? Regards, Frank
On-Page Optimization | | FrankSweeney0 -
Domain Authority vs. Page Authority?
I have a couple of questions about this. First of all is one more important than the other? Also, I currently have a website setup for www.domain.com, should I try to change that to domain.com without the www? How is it possible to grow page authority yet I am having a hard time growing domain authority.
On-Page Optimization | | jonnyholt0 -
Exact Match Domain + shorter permalink vs. longer permalink?
So here's the scenario... You own the exact match domain for "Acupuncture Intake Form" and want to create a page that targets the phrase, "Acupuncture Intake Form Template"... In terms of SEO, which of the following permalinks does a better job targeting the term "Acupuncture Intake Form Template" : A) www.acupunctureintakeform.com/template/ B) www.acupunctureintakeform.com/acupuncture-intake-form-template/ From a user-friendliness perspective, I can definitely see why the /template/ is more ideal. It's more memorable, easier to link to, and logical. I'm just wondering whether there is some edge that the /acupuncture-intake-form-template/ has that I'm not aware of, or if there's some gray area. I can also think of scenarios where the longer version might be better. For example, if there were several different kinds of acupuncture intake form templates. If that were the case, then /template/ might be too vague (e.g. is it the normal "acupuncture intake form template" or is it the "acupuncture intake form template with diagram"). So in that respect, the longer one might be less concise in certain situations, but in others provide more clarity. (Note: I'm looking for answers to this situation as it applies to any website. I just chose this extremely small niche exact match domain because it's an example that illustrate my questions). Thanks in advance for any answers, insights, or comments! I'm not sure if there's a specific answer, but I'm sure there are some key points to discuss. Michael
On-Page Optimization | | InRakeLLC0 -
Broad keyword usage vs appropriate keyword usage
May I ask what is the difference between "broad keyword usage" and "appropriate keyword usage" that is included on the on-page reports? thank you!
On-Page Optimization | | karalyte0 -
Absolute vs relative urls
Hello, Should absolute or relative urls to be used for the internal links? I heard mixed opinions on that: One source claims that web crawlers prefer absolute urls as they are more understandable Other source points that there is no difference for web crawlers what urls are used and relative urls are shorter which reduces the size of a page. Which option is recommended? Many thanks Darius
On-Page Optimization | | LinenMe0