Data-vocabulary.org for structured markup in 2019
-
Hi MOZ friends,
One of our clients has used data-vocabulary.org for structured markup.
Schema.org says:
"If you are already publishing structured data markup and it is already being used by Google, Microsoft, Yandex or Yahoo!, the markup format will generally continue to be supported. Changing to the new markup format could be helpful over time because you will be switching to a standard that is accepted across several companies, but you don't have to do it."
Although there is such statement, as schema.org is the common vocabulary in 2019, should I keep it or change it with schema.org?
Thanks in advance!
-
Thank you very much for the answer Martijn.
-
If you have the resources available and don't have many other priorities. It could be worth it to switch over, but honestly, if I would be in the situation and have many other things to change as well I wouldn't make this a priority. In the end, you're already benefiting from most of the upsides with data-vocabulary and Schema.org isn't going to get you much more. It will likely be a good thing for the future to move over as most of the new extensions are becoming available for Schema.org, but if you have very little upside I wouldn't make the migration right away.
-
Not sure how you run your agency or whatever but generally for changes like this I like to "task" them out. Meaning that I will always move to the preferred version of things over time. Let's say your client has 500 pages, can you do 50 pages a month with the correct version of schema? Start with the most important pages on the site and move from there. If you can't get to the pages that need updated in month three, you'll still be ok. I think the search engines will be able to read the data regardless but always like to move towards the preferred version of things. It's a "best practice" in a way. Just organize the pages by either traffic, importance, or relevance and go from there. No need to rush it. But definitely something I would move towards.
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
-
Woocommerce URL Structure Issue
Hi everyone ! To put you in context, I am doing an audit on an E-Commerce site selling auto parts with WooCommerce. I have some concerns regarding the url structure and here's why: Product category page url: /auto/drivetrain/cv-axle-shaft-assembly/
Technical SEO | | alexrbrg
Product page url included in the product category page: /product/acura-integra-cv-axle-shaft-90-01-honda-civic/ The way I see my situation is that the product page is considered by Google as an intern link and not as a page included in in the subfolder of the category page. 1. Am I right?
2. If yes, is there a solution to fix the issue with woocommerce to improve the category page ranking ? Thanks y'all !0 -
Why seomoz.org still in Google index?
I searched in Google, the number of URLs indexed left in the seomoz.org domain since it changed to moz.comI am surprised that after all this time more than 15,000 URLs indexed:https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=site%3Aseomoz.org%20inurl%3Aseomoz.org If I clicked on any of the results it will be redirect (301) to the new domain, so it is working, but Google still keep these URLs in the index.
Technical SEO | | Yosef
What could be the reason?Will not cause duplicated content issue on moz.com?0 -
Need URL structure suggestions
On my website I am in the process of creating expat city guides for different cities in Cambodia. I've already gotten three up, but I am worried that my URL structure is not the best, so I am wondering if I should fix it before I put the rest up. Right now the city guides are housed here: movetocambodia.com/expat-city-and-island-guides/ There's a section for each city, this one is for Battambang: movetocambodia.com/expat-city-and-island-guides/battambang And then there are sections for hotels, restaurants, etc. movetocambodia.com/expat-city-and-island-guides/battambang/battambang-hotels-and-accommodation So once you finally get to a review for an individual hotel or activity, the URL is really long, like this: movetocambodia.com/expat-city-and-island-guides/battambang/battambang-hotels-and-accommodation/classy-hotel Should I just par the section names down so the URL would be something like this: movetocambodia.com/expat-city-guides/battambang/accommodation/classy-hotel/ ? I was hoping by having the long URLs slugs for my section pages, such as "battambang-hotels-and-accommodation" they would be more likely to show on search terms like "Battambang hotels" than if the section was just "accommodation." However, this whole section is getting much less search traffic than anything else on my site, so I am wondering if it is because of these ridiculously long URLs. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Technical SEO | | Lina5000 -
What is the best practice to seperate different locations and languages in an URL? At the moment the URL is www.abc.com/ch/de. Is there a better way to structure the URL from an SEO perspective?
I am looking for a solution for using a new URL structure without using www.abc.com**/ch/de** in the URL to deliver the right languages in specific countries where more than one language are spoken commonly. I am looking forward to your ideas!
Technical SEO | | eviom0 -
Could schema.org and GoodRelations be bad for SEO?
One of my clients is going through a redesign and I am considering implementing schema.org and GoodRelations as it is an e-commerce website. The site sells cutting edge products and competes with some of the top tech blogs for rankings on the first page. Essentially, this means that e-commerce product listings are competing with news stories. It is becoming more and more difficult to rank as Google puts more emphasis on news over products in the serps, especially prior to a product release. My concern is that in implementing schema.org and GoodRelations, detailing to seach engines that this is in-fact a product page and not news could harm rankings. What opinions do others have on this?
Technical SEO | | pugh0 -
Should I add author markup to sales pages?
Adding author markup to the homepage or to SEO optimised sales landing pages is possible. However it doesn't really seem to be using the feature in the spirit of it's purpose. It makes sense for blog posts. It's possible for other pages and will likely improve CTRs from SERPs. But is it against the spirit of it's purpose?
Technical SEO | | designquotes0 -
Added data to links
Hello I am in the process of cleaning a site and getting less pages cached. it is a magento site and I was wondering what is your advice fo pages that get this padded to the link ?material=139&price=10%2C12 accept the obvious canonical? thanks
Technical SEO | | ciznerguy0 -
Microformats & Schema.org query
Just finished watching the Microformats & Schema.org webinar (thanks for a good presentation Richard) and picked up some interesting tips. It did get me thinking about ways I could use them with a couple of ecommerce sites I am working on. At present there are no reviews on the page so cannot add that tag, however the product pages have a facebook like and a tweet option so maybe I could add a tag based around that? Another one I am considering is putting the sizes of the items in one 'available in sizes 12-32' for example as women often ponder if a store will have it in their size. I guess my question is, would these ways of using it be considered too spammy. I note the webinar state using microformats can be useful but there is a risk if they are too spammy etc. Any opinions would be most welcome, Carl
Technical SEO | | Grumpy_Carl0