Mircodata markup container in body of page
-
I have a question about the "container" that's created whenever microdata markup is applied. What is the purpose of this? I know Google says it helps them understand your content etc. but it creates a really bad eyesore wherever microdata markup is used. Basically a box with all the markup details right there in the body. Has anyone else experienced this? Is this why microdata markup has been so slow to be adopted by webmasters? I understand "hiding" the box in your CSS is not a good idea either. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks
-
Thank you very much. That is just what I was looking for.
-
Hello,
The plugin creates a new CSS file, which you can access and control to make the data appear any way you like:
http://historyofmormonism.com/wp-content/plugins/schema-creator/lib/css/schema-style.css?ver=1.050Yes, the data that you are marking up needs to appear on the page, but you can mark up existing data instead of using a plugin that adds new data to the page. Or you can use the plugin to add the data to the page and customize the look by adjusting the CSS file.
My advice would be to learn how to add the markup yourself so you can just apply it to whatever it is on the page that you're trying to mark-up instead of relying on the plugin. This way you don't get the ugly box. It isn't that difficult if you can already do basic HTML. For example:
Here is what the plugin is doing:
Alex Baugh
Brigham Young University
ProfessorThe Div ID for "Schema_block" is what is creating that container. In the CSS file I linked to above it reads as follows (bolding is mine):
#schema_block {
clear:both;
margin:0 auto 10px auto;
** background: #EEEEEE;**
** border: 1px solid #CCCCCC;**
padding: 1em;
overflow: hidden;
}You can make that look like whatever you want it to look like. For instance, you could completely remove the margin, background, border and padding. It's not the "box" that Google needs to see, it's the content (e.g. Alex Baugh, Brigham Young University, Professor) on the page and the markup in the code that surrounds it.
I hope this clarifies the issue for you. A good designer/developer should be able to provide further assistance if you are not comfortable editing code or CSS files.
-
Does anyone else have insight on this?
-
The site is in Wordpress and I've been using a plugin called all in one schema.org rich snippets and schema creator by raven tools.
- As you can see it creates quite the eye sore especially if you were to start marking up a lot of stuff. Here is an example:
http://historyofmormonism.com/2014/03/26/hawns-mill-massacre-1838-resulted-30-mormon-casualties/
-
Schema creator by raven tools lets you add markup right into the body of the page like you will see about a paragraph down. I "marked up" the person Alex Baugh just for an example. You will notice the container it creates right inside the article.
-
If you scroll down to the bottom you'll notice a larger summary box, this is created by the other plugin; all in one schema.org rich snippets that marks up and creates a summary of the overall webpage.
-
If you look at the support forums for this plugin here: http://wordpress.org/support/topic/all-the-info-i-fill-goes-directly-into-my-post?replies=5#post-4030332
-
One of the authors of the plugin mentions that this box is necessary and includes a link to Google Webmaster forums backing it up, the 4th question down here:
https://sites.google.com/site/webmasterhelpforum/en/faq-rich-snippets#display
-
I also thought that maybe it was only this one plugin; all in one schema.org rich snippets but this other plugin from Raven Tools does the same thing. These two plugins are also two of the most popular schema microdata plugins on Wordpress.
-
This person has a similar question about the raven tools plugin
https://github.com/raventools/schema-creator/issues/104Thanks for your replies, I really appreciate it.
-
I am pretty sure you are doing it wrong. Can you link me? The markup should all be hidden normally, it is used as a way to describe elements that are on the page already, not for adding new elements.
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
-
Is it ok to repeat a (focus) keyword used on a previous page, on a new page?
I am cataloguing the pages on our website in terms of which focus keyword has been used with the page. I've noticed that some pages repeated the same keyword / term. I've heard that it's not really good practice, as it's like telling google conflicting information, as the pages with the same keywords will be competing against each other. Is this correct information? If so, is the alternative to use various long-winded keywords instead? If not, meaning it's ok to repeat the keyword on different pages, is there a maximum recommended number of times that we want to repeat the word? Still new-ish to SEO, so any help is much appreciated! V.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Vitzz1 -
Category Page as Shopping Aggregator Page
Hi, I have been reviewing the info from Google on structured data for products and started to ponder.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Alexcox6
https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/products Here is the scenario.
You have a Category Page and it lists 8 products, each products shows an image, price and review rating. As the individual products pages are already marked up they display Rich Snippets in the serps.
I wonder how do we get the rich snippets for the category page. Now Google suggest a markup for shopping aggregator pages that lists a single product, along with information about different sellers offering that product but nothing for categories. My ponder is this, Can we use the shopping aggregator markup for category pages to achieve the coveted rich results (from and to price, average reviews)? Keen to hear from anyone who has had any thoughts on the matter or had already tried this.0 -
Ecommerce category pages
Hi there, I've been thinking a lot about this lately. I work on a lot of webshops that are made by the same company. I don't like to say this, but not all of their shops perform great SEO-wise. They use a filtering system which occasionally creates hundreds to thousands of category pages. Basically what happens is this: A client that sells fashion has a site (www.client.com). They have 'main categories' like 'Men' 'Women', 'Kids', 'Sale'. So when you click on 'men' in the main navigation, you get www.client.com/men/. Then you can filter on brand, subcategory or color. So you get: www.client.com/men/brand. Basically, the url follows the order in which you filter. So you can also get to 'brand' via 'category': www.client.com/shoes/brand Obviously, this page has the same content as www.client.com/brand/shoes or even /shoes/brand/black and /men/shoes/brand/black if all the brands' shoes happen to be black and mens' shoes. Currently this is fixed by a dynamic canonical system that canonicalizes the brand/category combinations. So there can be 8000 url's on the site, which canonicalize to about 4000 url's. I have a gut feeling that this is still not a good situation for SEO, and I also believe that it would be a lot better to have the filtering system default to a defined order, like /gender/category/brand/color so you don't even need to use these excessive amounts of canonicalization. Because, you can canonicalize the whole bunch, but you'd still offer thousands of useless pages for Google to waste its crawl budget on. Not to mention the time saved when crawling and analysing using Screaming Frog or other audit tools. Any opinions on this matter?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Adriaan.Multiply0 -
Removing pages from index
My client is running 4 websites on ModX CMS and using the same database for all the sites. Roger has discovered that one of the sites has 2050 302 redirects pointing to the clients other sites. The Sitemap for the site in question includes 860 pages. Google Webmaster Tools has indexed 540 pages. Roger has discovered 5200 pages and a Site: query of Google reveals 7200 pages. Diving into the SERP results many of the pages indexed are pointing to the other 3 sites. I believe there is a configuration problem with the site because the other sites when crawled do not have a huge volume of redirects. My concern is how can we remove from Google's index the 2050 pages that are redirecting to the other sites via a 302 redirect?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | tinbum0 -
Any downsides of (permanent)redirecting 404 pages to more generic pages(category page)
Hi, We have a site which is somewhat like e-bay, they have several categories and advertisements posted by customers/ client. These advertisements disappear over time and turn into 404 pages. We have the option to redirect the user to the corresponding category page, but we're afraid of any negative impact of this change. Are there any downsides, and is this really the best option we have? Thanks in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vhendriks0 -
Incorrect cached page indexing in Google while correct page indexes intermittently
Hi, we are a South African insurance company. We have a page http://www.miway.co.za/midrivestyle which has a 301 redirect to http://www.miway.co.za/car-insurance. Problem is that the former page is ranking in the index rather than the latter. The latter page does index occasionally in the same position, but rarely. This is primarily for search phrases like "car insurance" and "car insurance quotes". The ranking was knocked down the index with Penquin 2.0. It was not ranking at all but we have managed to recover to 12/13. This abnormally has only been occurring since the recovery. The correct page does index for other search terms like "insurance for car". Your help would be appreciated, thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | miway0 -
Merging your google places page with google plus page.
I have a map listing showing for the keyword junk cars for cash nj. I recently created a new g+ page and requested a merge between the places and the + page. now when you do a search you see the following. Junk Cars For Cash NJ LLC
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | junkcars
junkcarforcashnj.com/
Google+ page - Google+ page the first hyperlink takes me to the about page of the G+ and the second link takes me to the posts section within g+. Is this normal? should i delete the places account where the listing was originally created? Or do i leave it as is? Thanks0 -
SEO Landing Page Fail
We have a PPC landing page template that I've used to aggregate blog post collections thematically. http://www.ietravel.com/machu-picchu-travel http://www.ietravel.com/kenya-and-tanzania-safari The hope was that they would start ranking. After 5 months, it has yet to happen.Thought it was a good idea at the time because these pages have a nice prominent call-to-action area. It now occurs to me that the pages are probably under-performing because they are not incorporated into the main site navigation. Do you think that if I move these under their appropriate categories in the main site I'll see some lift? (Of course, I will add 301 redirects as well.) Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | csmithal0