Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Schema.org product offer with a price range, or multiple offers with single prices?
-
I'm implementing Schema.org, (JSON-LD), on an eCommerce site. Each product has a few different variations, and these variations can change the price, (think T-shirts, but blue & white cost $5, red is $5.50, and yellow is $6).
In my Schema.org markup, (using JSON-LD), in each Product's Offer, I could either have a single Offer with a price range, (minPricd: $5, maxPrice $6), or I could add a separate Offer for each variation, each with its own, correct, price set.
Is one of these better than the other? Why? I've been looking at the WooCommerce code and they seem to do the single offer with a price range, but that could be because it's more flexible for a system that's used by millions of people.
-
I have a question about the offerCount item within an AggregateOffer type.
I want to show the "true" price range of every product in our inventory but we don't automatically load them all to the page. Most implementations I have seen that trigger the price range showing in the SERP have the individual offers marked up further down the page as well, but that wouldn't work for us. We show 10 or so out of 100s.
In my mind there are two options here. We can use the true aggregate price of the set and skip tagging up individual offers. Or we can tag up the offers displayed but still show what I am calling the "true" aggregate price. Any opinions on whether Google needs the individual offers tagged up? And any opinions on whether the individual offers tagged up need to "match" the aggregate offer prices?
THANKS
-
Anytime, John, I am happy to help!
-
Thanks Thomas.
AggregateOffer is what I was looking for.
-
Each product can have a few different variations
See Google's https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/product
Aggregate offer properties
An
AggregateOfferis a kind of Offer representing an aggregation of other offers. When marking up aggregate offers within a product, use the following properties of the schema.org AggregateOffer type:Properties lowPriceNumber, required
The lowest price of all offers available. Floating point number.
|
|highPrice|Number, recommended
The highest price of all offers available. Floating point number.
|
|priceCurrency|Text, required
The currency used to describe the product price, in three-letter ISO 4217 format.
|
|offerCount|Number, recommended
The number of offers for the product.
|
https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/product
**Just 1 **
Product rich results provide users with information about a specific product, such as its price, availability, and reviewer ratings. The following guidelines apply to product markup:
- Use markup for a specific product, not a category or list of products. For example, “shoes in our shop” is not a specific product. See also our structured data guidelines for multiple entities on the same page.
- Adult-related products are not supported.
- Reviewer’s name needs to be a valid name for a Person or Team For example, "James Smith" or"CNET Reviewers." By contrast, "50% off on Black Friday" is invalid.
To include product information in Image Search, follow these guidelines for required markup:
-
To show your product information in the rich image viewer: Include the
name,image,price, andpriceCurrencyproperties. Alternatively, instead ofpriceandpriceCurrency, you can include any four properties and excludeprice. -
To show your product information in the Related Items feature: Include the
name,image,price,priceCurrency, andavailabilityproperties. -
Be careful that the text you use is the same text that is on the page
-
https://www.distilled.net/resources/understanding-and-implementing-json-ld/
-
http://www.remicorson.com/add-woocommerce-product-to-cart-from-url-using-products-sku/
/*
- Remove the default WooCommerce 3 JSON/LD structured data format
*/
function remove_output_structured_data() {
remove_action( 'wp_footer', array( WC()->structured_data, 'output_structured_data' ), 10 ); // Frontend pages
remove_action( 'woocommerce_email_order_details', array( WC()->structured_data, 'output_email_structured_data' ), 30 ); // Emails
}
add_action( 'init', 'remove_output_structured_data' );
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
-
Unsolved Using NoIndex Tag instead of 410 Gone Code on Discontinued products?
Hello everyone, I am very new to SEO and I wanted to get some input & second opinions on a workaround I am planning to implement on our Shopify store. Any suggestions, thoughts, or insight you have are welcome & appreciated! For those who aren't aware, Shopify as a platform doesn't allow us to send a 410 Gone Code/Error under any circumstance. When you delete or archive a product/page, it becomes unavailable on the storefront. Unfortunately, the only thing Shopify natively allows me to do is set up a 301 redirect. So when we are forced to discontinue a product, customers currently get a 404 error when trying to go to that old URL. My planned workaround is to automatically detect when a product has been discontinued and add the NoIndex meta tag to the product page. The product page will stay up but be unavailable for purchase. I am also adjusting the LD+JSON to list the products availability as Discontinued instead of InStock/OutOfStock.
Technical SEO | | BakeryTech
Then I let the page sit for a few months so that crawlers have a chance to recrawl and remove the page from their indexes. I think that is how that works?
Once 3 or 6 months have passed, I plan on archiving the product followed by setting up a 301 redirect pointing to our internal search results page. The redirect will send the to search with a query aimed towards similar products. That should prevent people with open tabs, bookmarks and direct links to that page from receiving a 404 error. I do have Google Search Console setup and integrated with our site, but manually telling google to remove a page obviously only impacts their index. Will this work the way I think it will?
Will search engines remove the page from their indexes if I add the NoIndex meta tag after they have already been index?
Is there a better way I should implement this? P.S. For those wondering why I am not disallowing the page URL to the Robots.txt, Shopify won't allow me to call collection or product data from within the template that assembles the Robots.txt. So I can't automatically add product URLs to the list.0 -
What's the best way to handle product filter URLs?
I've been researching and can't find a clear cut answer. Imagine you have a product category page e.g. domain/jeans You've a lot of options as to how to filter the results domain/jeans?=ladies,skinny,pink,10 or domain/jeans/ladies-skinny-pink-10 or domain/jeans/ladies/skinny?=pink,10 And in this how do you handle titles, breadcrumbs etc. Is the a way you prefer to handle filters and why do you do it that way? I'm trying to make my mind up as some very big names handle this differently e.g. http://www.next.co.uk/shop/gender-women-category-jeans/colour-pink-fit-skinny-size-10r VS https://www.matalan.co.uk/womens/shop-by-category/jeans?utf8=✓&[facet_filter][meta.tertiary_category][Skinny]=on&[facet_filter][variants.meta.size][Size+10]=on&[facet_filter][meta.master_colour][Midwash]=on&[facet_filter][min_current_price][gte]=6.0&[facet_filter][min_current_price][lte]=18.0&per=36&sort=
Technical SEO | | RodneyRiley0 -
Has anyone had issues with Bazaarvoice and schema.org?
About a year ago we started using Bazaarvoice to get reviews for our products, and it has been great as far as accumulating content, but Google is not taking the schema.org data and displaying it on the SERP. Someone has told me it is because we are offering multiple products, or that our schema.org tags are incorrect but when I compare our code to other travel sites it seems like everyone is doing something different. This is especially annoying since the Google schema markup check says everything is fine. Does anyone have any advice or similar experiences? Thanks.
Technical SEO | | tripcentral0 -
How big is the problem: 404-errors as result of out of stock products?
We had a discussion about the importance of 404-errors as result of products which are out of stock. Of course this is not good, but what is the leverance in terms of importance: low-medium-high?
Technical SEO | | Digital-DMG0 -
Can Google Read schema.org markup within Ajax?
Hi All, as a local business directory, we also display Openinghours on a business listing page. ex. http://www.goudengids.be/napoli-kontich-2550/
Technical SEO | | TruvoDirectories
At the same time I also have schema.org markup for Openinghours implemented.
But, for technical reasons (performance), the openinghours (and the markup alongside) are displayed using AJAX. I'm wondering if google is able to read the markup. The rich snippet tool and markup plugings like Semantic Inspector can't "see" the markup for openinghours. Any advice here?0 -
Switching from a .org to .io (301 domain redirect)
I'm considering switching my main site from a .org to .io address; the .org is an exact match domain which helped to kickstart it a few years ago and now has about 50% repeat visitors, but was thrown off the Apple affiliation program for trademark infringement. I've found and purchased a nice (non-infringing) .io domain, and I've read the advice here on how to properly 301 the old domain; but my question is - does it matter that it's .io? Is this going to significantly hurt my rankings, even when everything has been 301'd properly? Another thought I had is that I may actually come out better off in the long run, what with Google penalties being applied to exact match domains. Is this a ranking suicide? If so, I'm tempted to leave it as is; even without the affiliation, it's making a good amount every month in ad fees that I don't want to disrupt. Thanks all!
Technical SEO | | w0lfiesmithUK0 -
Two websites with similar products
I have two websites with similar products with different tld.I have a keywords that is comman in both.One site is at top in google with that keyword and one is not.Can we implement 301 redirect from one domain to another domain for that keyword or google will consider it spammy?Please help me out.
Technical SEO | | Alick3000 -
Google counting numbers of products on category pages - what about pagination ?
Hi there, Whilst checking out the SERPS, as you do, I noticed that where our category page appears, google now seems to be counting the number of products (what it calls items) on the product page and displaying this in the 1st part of the description (see image attached). My problem is we employ pagination, so that our category page will have 15 items on it, then there are paginated results for the rest, with either ?page=2 or page-2/ etc. appended to the URL. Although this is only a minor issue, I was just wondering if there was a way to change the number of products displayed on that page to be the entire number of products in that category, is there a microformat markup or something that can over-ride what google has detected ? Furthermore is this system of pagination effective ? I have considered using javascript pagination, such that all products would be loaded on to the one page but hidden until 'paginated', but I was worried about having hidden elements on the page, and also the impact of load times. Although I think this may solve the problem and display the true number of products in a section! Any help much appreciated, Stuart b4urme.jpg
Technical SEO | | stukerr0