John Mueller says don't use Schema as its not working yet but I get markup conflicts using Google Mark-up
-
I watched recently John Mueller's Google Webmaster Hangout [DEC 5th].
In hit he mentions to a member not to use Schema.org as it's not working quite yet but to use Google's own mark-up tool 'Structured Data Markup Helper'. Fine this I have done and one of the tags I've used is 'AUTHOR'. However if you use Google's Structured Data Testing Tool in GWMT you get an error saying the following Error: Page contains property "author" which is not part of the schema. Yet this is the tag generated by their own tool.
Has anyone experienced this before? and if so what action did you take to rectify it and make it work. As it stands I'm considering just removing this tag altogether.
Thanks
David
-
Just curious...and excuse my ignorance... is the Structure Data Markup Helper the same thing as the Data Highlighter ?
-
Yeah I've done that too, I have left in authorship in some of my content since it does not hurt and if it ever comes back in some form well I guess its there.
Cheers
David
-
If you read in the Q+A below that post Barry Schwartz asks whether we should remove the authorship code, and John Mueller replies that leaving it won't cause problems but yes, if you want to remove unnecessary code you can do that too.
-
Thanks Linda,
Yup aware of the Google author drop, my gut feeling was just to remove it, which I'll do.
Cheers
David
-
Google discontinued authorship back in August; apparently their tool hasn't caught up.
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
-
Will my site get devalued if I add the same company schema to all the pages of my website?
If I add the exact same schema markup to every page on my website - is it considered duplicate content? Our CMS is telling me that if I want schema mark-up on our site that it has to be the same on every page on the website. This limitation is frustrating but I am trying to figure out the best way to work within their boundaries. Your help is appreciated.
Technical SEO | | Annette_Wetzel0 -
Google Webmaster Tools is saying "Sitemap contains urls which are blocked by robots.txt" after Https move...
Hi Everyone, I really don't see anything wrong with our robots.txt file after our https move that just happened, but Google says all URLs are blocked. The only change I know we need to make is changing the sitemap url to https. Anything you all see wrong with this robots.txt file? robots.txt This file is to prevent the crawling and indexing of certain parts of your site by web crawlers and spiders run by sites like Yahoo! and Google. By telling these "robots" where not to go on your site, you save bandwidth and server resources. This file will be ignored unless it is at the root of your host: Used: http://example.com/robots.txt Ignored: http://example.com/site/robots.txt For more information about the robots.txt standard, see: http://www.robotstxt.org/wc/robots.html For syntax checking, see: http://www.sxw.org.uk/computing/robots/check.html Website Sitemap Sitemap: http://www.bestpricenutrition.com/sitemap.xml Crawlers Setup User-agent: * Allowable Index Allow: /*?p=
Technical SEO | | vetofunk
Allow: /index.php/blog/
Allow: /catalog/seo_sitemap/category/ Directories Disallow: /404/
Disallow: /app/
Disallow: /cgi-bin/
Disallow: /downloader/
Disallow: /includes/
Disallow: /lib/
Disallow: /magento/
Disallow: /pkginfo/
Disallow: /report/
Disallow: /stats/
Disallow: /var/ Paths (clean URLs) Disallow: /index.php/
Disallow: /catalog/product_compare/
Disallow: /catalog/category/view/
Disallow: /catalog/product/view/
Disallow: /catalogsearch/
Disallow: /checkout/
Disallow: /control/
Disallow: /contacts/
Disallow: /customer/
Disallow: /customize/
Disallow: /newsletter/
Disallow: /poll/
Disallow: /review/
Disallow: /sendfriend/
Disallow: /tag/
Disallow: /wishlist/
Disallow: /aitmanufacturers/index/view/
Disallow: /blog/tag/
Disallow: /advancedreviews/abuse/reportajax/
Disallow: /advancedreviews/ajaxproduct/
Disallow: /advancedreviews/proscons/checkbyproscons/
Disallow: /catalog/product/gallery/
Disallow: /productquestions/index/ajaxform/ Files Disallow: /cron.php
Disallow: /cron.sh
Disallow: /error_log
Disallow: /install.php
Disallow: /LICENSE.html
Disallow: /LICENSE.txt
Disallow: /LICENSE_AFL.txt
Disallow: /STATUS.txt Paths (no clean URLs) Disallow: /.php$
Disallow: /?SID=
disallow: /?cat=
disallow: /?price=
disallow: /?flavor=
disallow: /?dir=
disallow: /?mode=
disallow: /?list=
disallow: /?limit=5
disallow: /?limit=10
disallow: /?limit=15
disallow: /?limit=20
disallow: /*?limit=250 -
Why can't I rank for my brand name?
We are soon to launch a new company in New Zealand called Zing. I have been tasked with the challenge of ranking as highly as possible for anything to do with Zing before launch in February. Zing is in the financial industry so my colleagues thought that it would be a good idea to make a small blog (very small with literally one post) that reviewed other financial lenders. This sight stayed online for a couple of months before it was replaced. The official website is still yet to launch, so as an in between, I asked that we make a splash page with a small competition on it (see here at zing.co.nz). I would have preferred there were more keywords on the website but this was not achieved. I am still pushing for this and am hoping to get a few pages on there in the near future. Instead of getting the keywords on the splash page, I was given permission to start a subdomain, (blog.zing.co.nz). This contains many more common search terms and although its not quite doing the job I would like, the rankings for Zing have started to increase. At the moment, we are ranking number 1 for a few brand related keywords such as zing loans. This is why I feel something is wrong, because we rank number 1 for over 10 similar terms but yet we DO NOT EVEN APPEAR on the search engines at all for Zing. Have we been penalized? Do you have any suggestions at all? Do you think we could have been penalized for the first average blog? Maybe I messed up the swap over? Any help would be hugely appreciated!
Technical SEO | | Startupfactory0 -
Google lists eBay.au number one for vertical garden and their sellers are using my IMAGES
Is there anyway of getting Google to slap eBay with a loss of page rank ? eBay.au has number one position for vertical garden in google.com.au. (search 9000). Fair enough I suppose because they are delivering a huge range of vertical garden products BUT the sellers are using images for their products that are not showing their products. Most of the sellers are flogging China copies - and I mean these are really bad copies. But what angers me even more is some of their top sellers are using MY IMAGES. They have taken my images used on a UK website and have reused them in AUstralia. Sellers have even rebranded my images. GRRRRR Is there some international sin bin where I can name and shame? Does Google care about such matters?
Technical SEO | | GardenBeet0 -
Is the seomoz on-page factor :Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical working properly?
I have a word press site with a rel canonical plug in. The rel="canonical" href= is there and the url in there works and goes to the actual page.So why does the seomoz keep giving the warning: Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical
Technical SEO | | CurtCarroll0 -
Can't for the life of me figure out how this is possible !! Any ideas ?
I would imagine it's not all that easy to rank on 1st page ( not going for 1st position here ) for https://www.google.com.au/search?q=credi+cards. I am looking at the AU market. For some reason which I can't figure out Everyday Money Credit Card ( https://www.woolworthsmoney.com.au/ ) ranks number 4. The home page redirect to https://www.woolworthsmoney.com.au/wowm/wps/wcm/connect/wowmoney/wowmoney/home/home/ Why have your homepage in this format ? I would love to hear any theories you guys might have. It does not look like they have a strong link profile , I could not figure out how old the domain was or what other possible reason there is for the site to rank .
Technical SEO | | RuchirP0 -
Rel=author: Which Google+ profile do I use (personal profiles or profiles set up under company email domain)?
Since our organization uses Google Business Apps, everyone in our org has a Google account under our company's domain name. When Google+ came out a lot of our employees set up two separate Google+ accounts (one under their work email address and one under their personal email address). Some people use one account more than the other. I'm about to set up rel=author on our blog, but I'm not sure which profiles to link to: personal account, business account or the account the individual uses the most?
Technical SEO | | janrain0 -
Different version of site for "users" who don't accept cookies considered cloaking?
Hi I've got a client with lots of content that is hidden behind a registration form - if you don't fill it out you can not proceed to the content. As a result it is not being indexed. No surprises there. They are only doing this because they feel it is the best way of capturing email addresses, rather than the fact that they need to "protect" the content. Currently users arriving on the site will be redirected to the form if they have not had a "this user is registered" cookie set previously. If the cookie is set then they aren't redirected and get to see the content. I am considering changing this logic to only redirecting users to the form if they accept cookies but haven't got the "this user is registered cookie". The idea being that search engines would then not be redirected and would index the full site, not the dead end form. From the clients perspective this would mean only very free non-registered visitors would "avoid" the form, yet search engines are arguably not being treated as a special case. So my question is: would this be considered cloaking/put the site at risk in any way? (They would prefer to not go down the First Click Free route as this will lower their email sign-ups.) Thank you!
Technical SEO | | TimBarlow0