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
-
Schema Markup for property listings (estate agent)
Hello, I've been looking online for some help with this. An estate agent has a page of properties for sale. Is it possible to mark these individual properties up and if so would they appear as rich snippets in the SERPS - never seen anything like this for properties for sale so just wondered,
Technical SEO | | AL123al1 -
Multiple H1 Tags on Page
Can having multiple H1 tags on a webpage be detrimental to its rankings?
Technical SEO | | AubbiefromAubenRealty0 -
Product Pages Outranking Category Pages
Hi, We are noticing an issue where some product pages are outranking our relevant category pages for certain keywords. For a made up example, a "heavy duty widgets" product page might rank for the keyword phrase Heavy Duty Widgets, instead of our Heavy Duty Widgets category page appearing in the SERPs. We've noticed this happening primarily in cases where the name of the product page contains an at least partial match for the desired keyword phrase we want the category page to rank for. However, we've also found isolated cases where the specified keyword points to a completely irrelevent pages instead of the relevant category page. Has anyone encountered a similar issue before, or have any ideas as to what may cause this to happen? Let me know if more clarification of the question is needed. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | ShawnHerrick0 -
Can hotlinking images from multiple sites be bad for SEO?
Hi, There's a very similar question already being discussed here, but it deals with hotlinking from a single site that is owned by the same person. I'm interested whether hotlinking images from multiple sites can be bad for SEO. The issue is that one of our bloggers has been hotlinking all the images he uses, sometimes there are 3 or 4 images per blog from different domains. We know that hotlinking is frowned upon, but can it affect us in the SERPs? Thanks, James
Technical SEO | | OptiBacUK0 -
Google Showing Multiple Listings For Same Site?
I've been optimizing a small static HTML site and have been working to increase the keyword rankings, yet have always ranked #1 for the company name. But, I've now noticed the company name is taking more than just the first position - the site is now appearing in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd position (each position referencing a different page of the site). Great.. who doesn't want to dominate a page of Google! ..But it looks kind of untidy and not usually how links from the same site are displayed. Is this normal? I'm used to seeing results from the same site grouped under the primary result, but not like this. any info appreciated 🙂
Technical SEO | | GregDixson0 -
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 -
Adding Rel Canonical to multiple pages
Hi, Our CMS generates a lot of duplicate content, (Different versions of every page for 3 different font sizes). There are many other reasons why we should drop this current CMS and go with something else, and we are in the process of doing that. But for now, does anyone know how would I do the following: I've created a spreadsheet that contains the following: Column 1: rel="canonical" tag for URL Column 2: Duplicate Content URL # 1 Column 3: Duplicate Content URL # 2 Column 4: Duplicate Content URL # 3 I want to add the tag from column 1 into the head of every page from column 2,3, and 4. What would be a fast way to do this considering that I have around 1800 rows. Check the screenshot of the builtwith.com result to see more information about the website if that helps. Farris bxySL
Technical SEO | | jdossetti0 -
Products with discrete URLs for each color
here is the issue. i have an ecommerce site that on a category page, shows each individual color for each product sold. and there is a distinct URL for each color. each product page shares the same content, with the only potentially differentiating factor being customer reviews (not nearly enough of these to differentiate anything). so we have URLs like: www.domain.com/product-green www.domain.com/product-yellow www.domain.com/product-red and so on. i am looking for a way to consolidate these URL while still showing all colors on the category page. the first solution i am considering is using the hash tag. so we would create www.domain.com/product#green, www.domain.com/product#yellow, www.domain.com/product#red. if possible, i would set the canonical tag as www.domain.com/product. the second solution would be to use the canonical tag and keep the URLs as is. the issue i see here is that we would need to create www.domain.com/product and show that page somewhere. www.domain.com/product would the URL that the above color URLs would canonicalize to. what would be the preferred solution? or is there something else?
Technical SEO | | rakesh_patel0