Structured Data and Google Rich Cards for products
-
It appears Google is moving towards the Rich Cards JSON-LD for all data. https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2016/05/introducing-rich-cards.html
However on an ecommerce site when I have schema.org microdata structured data inline for a product and then I add the JSON-LD structured data Google treats that as two products on the page even though they are the same. To make the matter more confusing Bing doesn't appear to support JSON-LD.
I can go back to the inline structured data only, but that would mean when Rich Cards for products eventually come I won't be ready. What do you recommend I do for long term seo, go back to the old or press forward with JSON-LD?
-
Thanks for the feedback Martijn. We have decided to go the JSON-LD as you did. Having both markups on the page caused duplicate products in Google Search Console. We worried that might have negative effects.
-
Hi Keith,
In this case I would say it really depends on how much traffic Bing is sending your way. In our case that was so low that we decided to remove the inline Schema.org implementation and go full in on JSON-LD although we knew Bing wasn't supporting it. As we see more initiatives move with JSON-LD I can't imagine that Bing also won't move that way.
Worst case you could add the content twice with both inline and JSON-LD, I can't prove it but for now I would say that it definitely wouldn't cause duplicate content.
Hope that helps, Martijn!
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
-
Reporting Webspam to Google
We are in ecommerce, and there are a few review sites that are dominating the rankings for our products. The sites are very good - very well written content (2000+ words) and visually appealing sites. The 2 main culprits are clearly black hat. One site's backlinks are pure spam, and the other is buying footer and sidebar links. Will ratting them to Google have any impact? If not, any suggestions on how to compete? Our competing pages are product descriptions, and creating a 2000 word product description seems inappropriate. Also, all of these products are brand new, and due to extensive media spends, the search volume is very high. Since they are beating us to the punch by getting good content posted first, they are proving difficult to displace.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AMHC0 -
Why Did My Google Crawls Hit A Wall?
Hello, One my the sites I work with, http://www.oransi.com, has seen a significant decrease in crawl Googlebot activity in the last 90 days. See screenshot. This decrease in crawl stats runs in conjunction with less Kb downloaded per day & an increase in how much time it took Google to download a page. The client did just go through a redesign, however that happened on 4/16/15, which was after the decrease in Googlebot activity, so that should not be the issue. Same could be said for the mobilegeddan algorithm change. Any help would be greatly appreciated. 5u1lM6B
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BrandLabs0 -
Fetch as Google - Redirected
Hi I have swaped from HTTP to HTTPS and put a redirect on for HTTP to redirect to HTTPS. I also put www.xyz.co.uk/index.html to redirect to www.xyz.co.uk When I fetch as Google it shows up redirect! Does this mean that I have too many 301 looping? Do I need the redirect on index.html to root domain if I have a rel conanical in place for index.html htaccess (Linix) - RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^xyz.co.uk
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Cocoonfxmedia
RewriteRule (.*) https://www.xyz.co.uk/$1 [R=301,L] RewriteRule ^$ index.html [R=301,L]0 -
Acceptable use of availability attribute 'preorder' value in rich snippets schema markup and Google Shopping feed?
Hello all, Could someone please advise on acceptable use of the availability attribute 'preorder' value in rich snippets schema markup for our websites and the Google Shopping feed? Currently all of our products are either 'in stock' or 'out of stock', also mentioned was 'available for order' but I found that in the 2014 Google Shopping update, this value will be merged with 'in stock' here 'We are simplifying the ‘availability’ attribute by merging ‘in stock’ with ‘available for order’ and removing ‘available for order’. The products which we would like to mark as 'preorder' have been in stock and then sold out, however we have a due date for when they will come back into stock, so therefore the customer can preorder the product on our website i.e. pay in advance to secure their purchase and then they are provided with a due date for the products. Is this the correct use of the 'preorder' value, or does the product literally have to never have been released before? The guidance we have is: 'You are taking orders for this product, but it’s not yet been released.' Is this set in stone? Many thanks in advance and kind regards.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jeffwhitfield0 -
Does putting a Google custom search box on make Google think my users are bouncing?
I added a Google custom search box to my pages, that's doing an advanced Google search. A lot of people are using it. So users are coming to my site from a Google search, and then often performing another Google search on my site. Should I be worried that Google may interpret the resultant user behavior as a bounce or pogo-stick? Or will the fact that the second search occurred on my site, using custom search, and with advanced parameters signal to Google that this is not a dissatisfied user returning to Google? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GilReich0 -
What to do with my keyword rich domainnames?
Hi, We have a holiday home rental business in Italy (Umbria). At this moment the language of the site is dutch and we targeting at the dutch and belgium market. We now in the fase of developing/adding 2 more languages, german and english. The url structure is going to is/be. dutch version (live)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | remcozwaan
domainname.com/nl
domeinname.com/nl/vakantiehuizen English (en) version (dev)
domainname.com/en
domeinname.com/en/villas
domeinname.com/en/villas/name-of-the-villa
domeinname.com/en/apartments
ect German (de) version (dev)
domainname.com/de
domeinname.com/de/ferienwohnung
domeinname.com/de/erienwohnung/name-of-the-ferienwohnung
domeinname.com/de/ferienhauser
domeinname.com/de/ferienhauser/name-of-the-ferienhauser
ect I have some registred some keyword rich domainnames like vakantiehuizeninumbrie.com (nl)
ferienwohnungumbrien.de (de)
ect question: Is it a good approach (seo wise) to point the keyword rich domainname to the specified landingpage. By example: point ferienwohnungumbrien.de to the page domeinname.com/de/ferienwohnung ? mille grazie! remco0 -
Google Penguin Penalty
Howdy Guys,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ScottBaxterWW
We have been battling our way the Google penguin penalty and have just received our 3 knocked back reconsideration request. I posted a find on here the other day about a simple change of page title made our site jump back up... In the meantime I've built 1 hight quality link back to our site and we have moved again from #50 to #46.Have Google ever removed a penalty without telling you?Should we ask for another reconsideration request?Thanks,
Scott0 -
How to Block Google Preview?
Hi, Our site is very good for Javascript-On users, however many pages are loaded via AJAX and are inaccessible with JS-off. I'm looking to make this content available with JS-off so Search Engines can access them, however we don't have the Dev time to make them 'pretty' for JS-off users. The idea is to make them accessible with JS-off, but when requested by a user with JS-on the user is forwarded to the 'pretty' AJAX version. The content (text, images, links, videos etc) is exactly the same but it's an enormous amount of effort to make the JS-off version 'pretty' and I can't justify the development time to do this. The problem is that Googlebot will index this page and show a preview of the ugly JS-off page in the preview on their results - which isn't good for the brand. Is there a way or meta code that can be used to stop the preview but still have it cached? My current options are to use the meta noarchive or "Cache-Control" content="no-cache" to ask Google to stop caching the page completely, but wanted to know if there was a better way of doing this? Any ideas guys and girls? Thanks FashionLux
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | FashionLux0