Implemented schema.org on our website and it's showing up as being correct but I've been told its wrong- can someone please have a quick look ?

[PeteC12]

Dear Mozzers,

We have implemented schema.org on our website and it's showing up as being correct.

However, I've been told by a SEO company that what we have done is incorrect and is therefore giving out wrong signals to google and that it needs fixing but they haven't told me whats wrong with it.

Would someone please be able to have to have a quick scan and highlight anything that is not correct. I have enclosed 4 urls belows of the different sections of my website.

My website homepage - is -- http://goo.gl/2F80w2

We have a number of branches- An example branch url is - http://goo.gl/8FpcaS

example category url - http://goo.gl/gbAaD2

example product url - http://goo.gl/EXI1Sr

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated

Many thanks
Peter

[DirkC]

Hi

You can check the implementation in Webmastertools https://developers.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/ - or in a tool like https://webmaster.yandex.com/microtest.xml

I checked a branch page - for Yandex some of the fields are not correct (url / local address / local phone missing) - but most of it seems ok. For Google everything was ok.

You could check the other pages as well using these tools.

Dirk

[Andrew_Birkitt]

I have checked all of the urls that you have added in your question above and I can confirm that they are all clean and green according to the Structured Data Testing Tool as highlighted by Dirk above https://developers.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/ so not sure what the SEO Company is looking at.

[PeteC12]

Many thanks Both,

The SEO company got back to me and implied that as my webpages contain contains several blocks of markup , the first issue is that they need to be condensed into one set of markup for each page.

The also said, it was to basic and not extensive enough and even though Google's testing tool does not indicate any errors does not necessarily mean that the markup is correct or that it meets Google's guidelines.

Do you know if they have a point about the single markup as opposed to several blocks of markup per page as I have never heard that point mentioned before?

thanks

Peter

[DirkC]

If the markup passes the test it's valid markup & meets Google's guidelines. It would seem a bit ridiculous for Google to develop a test if the results of the test were not valid.

Never heard that markup needs to be put in one place. Most of the time the markup is inserted within your HTML so you will have several blocks of markup (unless you use the JSON-LD markup).

Dirk

[BlueprintMarketing]

Some outstanding examples can be found here

https://builtvisible.com/micro-data-schema-org-guide-generating-rich-snippets/

Then test your own site and other sites that you know will have proper implementation using

https://www.deepcrawl.com/knowledge/best-practice/schema-101-the-tags-that-search-engines-support/

THE REGEXES:

Use the pre-written regex below to extract your site’s schema tags.

MICRODATA ONLY:

microdata:(itemtype=["']http\:\/\/schema.org) microdata-itemtype:{0..9}itemtype\s?=['"\s]?http\:\/\/schema.org\/([^\"\s\']*)

RDFA ONLY:

rdfa:(vocab=['"]http:\/\/schema.org\/['"]) rdfa-typeof:{0..9}typeof=['"]([^"']*)"

JSON ONLY:

json-ld:(

[Andrew_Birkitt]

Hi Peter

Can only agree with Dirk on this, I have only ever seen the markup in one area when it has been implemented using JSON-LD, we did recently do some markup for a client using Magento which uses a third party search system.

We implemented the code in the normal manner which shows up in the html blocks as Dirk mentioned this was rewritten by the 3rd party search system to use JSON-LD and the code was then all in a nice neat block. But I have never heard of this being a requirement.

Andrew

[PeteC12]

Hi Tom,

Many thanks , Very helpful links here. I will take a look

thanks

Peter

[BlueprintMarketing]

Hi Peter, I am very glad I could be of help. Please let me know if there's anything else I can do for you sincerely, Thomas