Structured Data on mobile and desktop version of a page
-
Hey there,
certain pages of our website have mobile versions like m.mysite.com/content-xyz. On the desktop pages (i.e. mysite.com/content-xyz) we have "rich snippets for ratings" marked up and displayed in SERPs. However the ratings also appear in mobile search results when SERPS reference the mobile version of the page (m.mysite.com/content-xyz) which doesn't have any ratings or markup?I am trying to figure out how Google treats mobile versions of a page in relation to the desktop version in relation to structured data (breadcrumbs etc.)? Would you always mark up both versions to be the same?
Any ideas and thoughts on this are greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
Jochen
rich Snippets for Ratings
-
Hi Jochen,
SUPER interesting find, thanks for pointing this out, Jochen.
To me, this looks like Google understands that these two pages are the same page, except for different devices, and is using information on the desktop page to make their search results more robust for mobile.
You can see the connection by looking for Google's cache of your mobile page. The best way to do this is to search in Google for "cache:[URL]". If you search for "cache:http://m.avogel.ch/de/ihre-gesundheit/erkaeltung/alles_ueber_erkaeltungen.php", Google will send you to the desktop version of the page.
Here's my theory: Google has one index for both desktop and smartphone users, so it combines data and gives the user the best result possible. Google's doing more and more to try to improve its search results even without SEO intervention, so I'm not too surprised about this, but can't seem to find this in any SEO articles out there.
In answer to your question: I recommend that you continue to keep you mobile and desktop sites similar enough that Google is pulling from both. In the past, some SEOs would build sites differently for mobile users, but I've never seen any UX studies that shows that that's a better approach. Given that Google strongly recommends that you use responsive web design, it's certainly not Google's recommended approach.
I hope this helps? I'm not sure if this was a post because you were worried about something - this seems like good news to me!
Kristina
-
Thanks again!
If I am doing "mobile friendly test" for the page Google doesn't seem to have any problems accessing the mobile version. If also crawled the page with googles mobile crawler in screamingfrog and again there were not issues.
So I don't think the rather unusual behavior of not beeing able to access the mobile site with a desktop browser has an impact on my question regarding the desktop "rich snippets for ratings" showing up in mobile search results.
-
Is this how you intended the site to work/ (ie as described above)
For example if you go to any of these 3 sites:
http://www.ticketmaster.com.au/
www.ticketek.com.au
www.bankwest.com.auThen after that load their mobile site without deleting any cookies or changing any user agents, all the mobile sites load up straight away:
m.ticketmaster.com.au
m.ticketek.com.au and
m.bankwest.com.auHave a look through this Google Artilcle which might help:
https://developers.google.com/webmasters/mobile-sites/mobile-seo/common-mistakes?hl=en-US&utm_source=MFT&utm_campaign=MFT&utm_medium=incoming-link#blocked-resources -
Thanks for the feedback. I get the mobile page loaded in my browser (only) after deleting all cookies from the site and using the Chrome extension "User-Agent Switcher".
Thanks for the feedback. I get the mobile page loaded in my browser (only) after deleting all cookies from the site and using the Chrome extension "User-Agent Switcher".
-
http://m.avogel.ch/de/ihre-gesundheit/erkaeltung/alles_ueber_erkaeltungen.php - Mobile Page... are you 100% sure that is set up correctly? I've tried to load the mobile version in my browser and keeps redirecting me to full site. Even using the mobile emulator on Chrome I cant log up the mobile site keeps redirrecting to full site.
All other websites that I know that have a m. subdomain for mobile site load up with no issues at all in computer Browser.
Is the mobile site made using one of the Mobile Apps or something similar?
I would suggest try use Google Webmaster tools and use the 'Fetch & Render' option so you can see how Google is rendering the mobile page
-
Hi Sandi,
not at all:
Desktop Page: http://www.avogel.ch/de/ihre-gesundheit/erkaeltung/alles_ueber_erkaeltungen.php
Mobile Page: http://m.avogel.ch/de/ihre-gesundheit/erkaeltung/alles_ueber_erkaeltungen.php
Serps on google.chCheers,
JochenHi Sand,not at all: Desktop Page: http://www.avogel.ch/de/ihre-gesundheit/erkaeltung/alles_ueber_erkaeltungen.phpMobile Page: http://www.avogel.ch/de/ihre-gesundheit/erkaeltung/alles_ueber_erkaeltungen.phpSerps on google.chCheers
-
Hi Jochen
DO you mind sharing the URLs in question?
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
-
More Singular KW Targeted Landing Pages vs. Less Multiple KW Targeted Landing Pages
So my question is... I have a adopted a site which currently ranks quite well for some industry competitive keywords with a number of poor quality landing pages which specifically target a singular keyword. I am wondering if its worth merging some of these pages together into one authoritative, better quality landing page targeting multiple keywords (as the intent for some of these keywords are largely the same). What i don't want to do is jeopardise the existing rankings in doing so. The alternative option would just be to improve the content on the existing landing pages without merging. What are peoples thoughts on this? Are there any positive case studies out there where merging has had a positive effect? Any help would be great. Regards,
On-Page Optimization | | NickG-1231 -
Does having landing page text beneath the products at the base of the page hinder SEO?
I have a site that is capable of hosting the landing page description either above the products under the H1 or below them at the bottom of the page before the footer. I have always chosen to keep the text "above the fold" as presumably this would be crawled sooner in relation to the rest of the page content than had it been at the bottom. However, this means that I can only really write just a few sentences for each landing page - otherwise the products would shift further down the page - and I don't think this is good from a UX POV. Question: If I move the bulk of my landing page descriptions to the text snippet located underneath the products, could this negatively affect my SEO? Text at the bottom of the page is obviously not significant for users, so is there a chance this could be seen as spam?
On-Page Optimization | | Silkstream0 -
On Page reports is empty
Hello, Yesterday I created my PRO account, I have several urls in top 50 instead of a have no report in On Page Reports, how low take the system for generating this? Thank you, Carlos
On-Page Optimization | | cahams0 -
Too many links on the same page
I have a problem with to many links on the same page, and there all for the classified adds of my web site, what would be the best way to handle this.
On-Page Optimization | | clickit2getwithit0 -
Locating Duplicate Pages
Hi, Our website consists of approximately 15,000 pages however according to our Google Webmaster Tools account Google has around 26,000 pages for us in their index. I have run through half a dozen sitemap generators and they all only discover the 15,000 pages that we know about. I have also thoroughly gone through the site to attempt to find any sections where we might be inadvertently generating duplicate pages without success. It has been over six months since we did any structural changes (at which point we did 301's to the new locations) and so I'd like to think that the majority of these old pages have been removed from the Google Index. Additionally, the number of pages in the index doesn't appear to be going down by any discernable factor week on week. I'm certain it's nothing to worry about however for my own peace of mind I'd like to just confirm that the additional 11,000 pages are just old results that will eventually disappear from the index and that we're not generating any duplicate content. Unfortunately there doesn't appear to be a way to download a list of the 26,000 pages that Google has indexed so that I can compare it against our sitemap. Obviously I know about site:domain.com however this only returned the first 1,000 results which all checkout fine. I was wondering if anybody knew of any methods or tools that we could use to attempt to identify these 11,000 extra pages in the Google index so we can confirm that they're just old pages which haven’t fallen out of the index yet and that they’re not going to be causing us a problem? Thanks guys!
On-Page Optimization | | ChrisHolgate0 -
Jquery in top of page vs text on bottom page
Is it the best way to use jquery sliders on the top of your page to still get all your text above the fold and score in search engines? for example: http://www.wolf-howl.com/wp-conte... is much better to score high ranks in search engines than http://www.wolf-howl.com/wp-conte... ?? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | HMK-NL0 -
Would I be safe canonicalizing comments pages on the first page?
We are building comment pages for an article site that live on a separate URL from the article (I know this is not ideal, but it is necessary). Each comments page will have a summary of the article at the top. Would I be safe using the first page of comments as the canonical URL for all subsequent comment pages? Or could I get away with using the actual article page as the canonical URL for all comment pages?
On-Page Optimization | | BostonWright0 -
SEO Value of Within-Page Links vs. Separate Pages
Title says it all. Assuming that you're talking about similar content (let's say, widgets), which is better: using within-page links for variations or using separate pages? I.e., do we have a widget page and then do in-page links to describe green, blue, and red widgets, or separate pages for each type of widget? In-page pro: more content on a single page, thus more keywords, key phrases, and general appearance of real content. In-page con: Jakob Neilsen says they're confusing. Also, for SEO, you only get one page title, rather than a separate page title for each. My personal bias is for in-page, since I hate creating dozens of short pages for what could be on one page, but my suspicion is that separate pages are better for SEO.
On-Page Optimization | | maxkennerly0