Structured Data + Meta Descriptions
-
Hey All,
Was just looking through some google pages on best practices for meta descriptions and came across this little tidbit.
"Include clearly tagged facts in the description. The meta description doesn't just have to be in sentence format; it's also a great place to include structured data about the page. For example, news or blog postings can list the author, date of publication, or byline information. This can give potential visitors very relevant information that might not be displayed in the snippet otherwise. Similarly, product pages might have the key bits of information—price, age, manufacturer—scattered throughout a page. A good meta description can bring all this data together. For example, the following meta description provides detailed information about a book.
"
This is the first time I have seen suggested use of structured data in meta descriptions. Does this totally replace a regular meta description or will it work in conjunction with the regular meta description? If I provide both structured data and text, will the SERP display text and the structured data the way it was previously displayed? Or will the 150 -160 character limit take precedence and just cut off all info after that?
-
JStrong,
Just to make sure we're all on the same page: Although Google uses the phrase "Structured Data..." I don't think they mean it in the same was as you would use, for example, Schema markup in the code. The example there is simply a meta description, which you can use for whatever purpose you like. It could be worth testing the Click-Through-Rate on meta descriptions like that (a metric you can see in Google Webmaster Tools) to decide if you want to use it, though for my money I'd bet on a description with a clear value proposition, offer, call to action, emotion, etc... that will also have their keywords bolded if they appear in the description.
If you do test it out please share what the effect on CTR in the SERPs was from GWT. Just because I'm curious.
-
Very interesting! I don't recall seeing that before but I checked the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine entry for that URL and the quoted extract has been there since at least 2013.
Elsewhere Google has been pretty insistent on structured data being part of the document itself as much as possible so it does seem somewhat contradictory advice. As you say perhaps they've simply forgotten to update that particular entry to reflect current thinking.
-
Hi Alex,
Ah, so something older then? This is where I saw the information. I thought Google was usually pretty good about removing outdated information, but maybe not in this case. I agree, that I have previously only worked with and seen structured data in the body markup, so not sure if this was a more recent development or not.
Thanks for the input!
-
Once upon a time it was possibly a good use of the meta description to include some salient structured data but today we have a proper way of marking up structured data. The meta description is best used for compelling, relevant copy to attract the user to click through to your site as the meta description is your one best hope of affecting what is shown to the user in the SERPs.
Search engines haven't shown any inclination to parse the meta description and I doubt they would do so in future. Structured data belongs in the document itself, marked up accordingly.
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
-
Best-practice URL structures with multiple filter combinations
Hello, We're putting together a large piece of content that will have some interactive filtering elements. There are two types of filters, topics and object types. The architecture under the hood constrains us so that everything needs to be in URL parameters. If someone selects a single filter, this can look pretty clean: www.domain.com/project?topic=firstTopic
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | digitalcrc
or
www.domain.com/project?object=typeOne The problems arise when people select multiple topics, potentially across two different filter types: www.domain.com/project?topic=firstTopic-secondTopic-thirdTopic&object=typeOne-typeTwo I've raised concerns around the structure in general, but it seems to be too late at this point so now I'm scratching my head thinking of how best to get these indexed. I have two main concerns: A ton of near-duplicate content and hundreds of URLs being created and indexed with various filter combinations added Over-reacting to the first point above and over-canonicalizing/no-indexing combination pages to the detriment of the content as a whole Would the best approach be to index each single topic filter individually, and canonicalize any combinations to the 'view all' page? I don't have much experience with e-commerce SEO (which this problem seems to have the most in common with) so any advice is greatly appreciated. Thanks!0 -
Google User Click Data and Metrics
Assuming that Google is using click data from users to calculate rankings (bounce rate, time on site, task completion, etc.) where does Google get the data, especially from browsers that aren't Chrome?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AMHC0 -
Measure impact from new meta descriptions
Hi guys, I'm looking to implement new meta descriptions across a site and i want to measure the impact. So far I'm thinking of extracting the CTR data from GWT for the last 90 days to get the most accurate CTR averages for each URL. Then once the new meta descriptions have been implemented, compare the CTR with the old CTR averages accross URLs. Do you think this would be the most accurate way of measuring the impact? Cheers, Chris
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jayoliverwright1 -
What's the best possible URL structure for a local search engine?
Hi Mozzers, I'm working at AskMe.com which is a local search engine in India i.e if you're standing somewhere & looking for the pizza joints nearby, we pick your current location and share the list of pizza outlets nearby along with ratings, reviews etc. about these outlets. Right now, our URL structure looks like www.askme.com/delhi/pizza-outlets for the city specific category pages (here, "Delhi" is the city name and "Pizza Outlets" is the category) and www.askme.com/delhi/pizza-outlets/in/saket for a category page in a particular area (here "Saket") in a city. The URL looks a little different if you're searching for something which is not a category (or not mapped to a category, in which case we 301 redirect you to the category page), it looks like www.askme.com/delhi/search/pizza-huts/in/saket if you're searching for pizza huts in Saket, Delhi as "pizza huts" is neither a category nor its mapped to any category. We're also dealing in ads & deals along with our very own e-commerce brand AskMeBazaar.com to make the better user experience and one stop shop for our customers. Now, we're working on URL restructure project and my question to you all SEO rockstars is, what can be the best possible URL structure we can have? Assume, we have kick-ass developers who can manage any given URL structure at backend.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | _nitman0 -
Use of ajax to fetch data of a section
Hi, Is it ok to fetch a section on a page using ajax. Will it be crawlable by Google. I have already seen google's directions to get a complete ajax fetched page crawled by Google. Is there a way to get a particular section on a page fetched through ajax & indexed by Google. Regards
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vivekrathore0 -
Error Meta Description
(adult website) https://www.google.com.br/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=robertinha Why Google is not reading my description of Yoast plugin? Vídeos de sexo - Vídeos porno
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | stroke
www.robertinha.com.br/
Robertinha.com.br. lupa. facebook twitter plus. Página Inicial; Última Atualização: terça, 14 abril 2015. Página Inicial. Categorias. Amadoras (227) · Coroas (6) ... If I site: meusite.com.br work, he read correctly, but the site search not.
I do not understand https://www.google.com.br/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=site:robertinha.com.br Vídeos de sexo - Vídeos porno
www.robertinha.com.br/
Vídeos de sexo grátis: assista agora mesmo vídeos porno com gatas, gostosas, safadas fazendo muito sexo.0 -
Organic search data not representative of site Authority, need advice
Hi, I seeking some advice, I have an organic search issue, I would like to figure out if there is any reason why my site www.aatravel.co.za would not be doing well in the rankings? This domain is more powerful than a previous Domain we had, 51 versus 37 according to MOZ, but despite this it is not ranking nearly as well. There are a few things to consider. The domain was owned by us then got taken away about 3 years ago and then 301ed to a completely new site, then it was 404ed for about a year before we got it back, and now we have it back and have populated it with the same data as the less powerful Domain www.aaholidays.co.za. I believe that most of the AA Travel Authority comes from a stronger backlink profile. Why would this now 2 month after we reskinned and converted 301s back not be ranking as highly? Is there an issue with old site structure and google not passing through the 301 link juice from old pages that have links to the new ones(we have 301ed them)? Also I have 301ed the old aaholidays.co.za site to this one as the new home of AA Travel, that organic traffic was at about 8 000 visits a month, and the new site is at about 2 300. Has Google sandboxed the Domain for a certain period of time, or is there something else that may be the matter?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ProsperoDigital0 -
Meta Abstract & Revisit
Moz Community, I have just noted a competitor using some meta information i have not seen before, Just wondering if anyone has any experience or feedback on using these tags and if they are worth implementing, Seems very similar to the meta description, i don't really see the point unless potentially this abstract could be more topic based if your meta description is designed for Click-Through optimization. Isn't this defined in the sitemap anyway? , and most of the time we will Tweet and Google Plus share any new updates to our site also Google seems to do a good job anyway of crawling anything new we publish or change, Any advice or feedback would be great please, Thanks James
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Antony_Towle0