Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Subscribe to HRA Now!

 



Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?

Share and download Custom Google Analytics Reports, dashboards and advanced segments--for FREE! 

 



 

 www.CustomReportSharing.com 

From the folks who brought you High Rankings!



Photo
- - - - -

Dublin Core Vs Schema Vs Rdf Vs...


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 jsp1983

jsp1983

    HR 3

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 98 posts
  • Location:Blackpool, UK

Posted 26 March 2012 - 04:38 PM

I'm not familiar with using metadata for my sites. I've spent a bit of time looking into it and what I've found so far isn't particularly clear. There doesn't appear to be a unified standard for implementing it (although from what I can see, Schema comes close to that).

I'm unsure of how to choose a metadata system for my site. What are the differences and how can I assess which system(s) to implement? Do sites implement more than one system?

I appreciate that Schema seems to be the most popular amongst Google and Bing, but I remember Michael Martinez mentioning that they also recommend Dublin Core - to what end, I don't know.

Does anybody have some general guidance on this or know of any discussions that I might benefit from reading?

#2 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 32,877 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 05:23 PM

I don't have an answer, but I don't believe that Dublin Core is used by anything important. (Although I could be wrong about that). It's definitely not used by the major search engines.

#3 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,028 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 26 March 2012 - 06:23 PM

I don't recall what I might have said about Dublin Core. That must have been a while back.

Before investing heavily in modifying your content to use Schema, do some investigation to see if your competitors are. But keep in mind that early adopters might have an advantage.

At the present time the only vertical I know of which is directly impacted by use of Schema (in terms of Google search results) are recipes. That may change later this year with Google's push toward more semantic search.

#4 jsp1983

jsp1983

    HR 3

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 98 posts
  • Location:Blackpool, UK

Posted 26 March 2012 - 06:29 PM

I got the impression (from what I found) that its origins are in the academic community, but I've still seen it pop up in discussions about rich snippets and the like.

My assumption so far is to implement the Schema and Open Graph systems for cataloguing my pages and trying to produce rich snippets.

Re Michael's point about who's using it (and thanks for replying to my thread!), none of the sites I'm competing against are using it, from what I can see. They're certainly not reaping any benefits from it in search results, anyway. Large, indirect competitors are getting star ratings showing, but none of the sites I'm competing against are.

Even if metadata for rich snippets isn't fully supported yet, this is one area where I'd like to be an early adopter, for once!

#5 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,028 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 27 March 2012 - 12:41 AM

Rich snippets are really something different from Schema. The rich snippets are, I think, more limited in application than Schema. If you were to format all your content using one or more Schema you could -- in theory -- design your own semantic site search tool that would provide superior results to whatever Google and Bing are presently capable of delivering.

#6 jsp1983

jsp1983

    HR 3

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 98 posts
  • Location:Blackpool, UK

Posted 27 March 2012 - 05:29 PM

I see. I think I've misunderstood something fundamental about Rich Snippets and/ or Schema. My understanding was that implementing Schema enabled search engines to create Rich Snippets based on the semantic information provided in the Schema markup (and that they could also do the same with RDFa, Open Graph and some other formats) - which led me to wonder just how many/ which metadata formats should be considered for a site.

So if Rich Snippets are different from Schema, and Google and Bing are endorsing Schema, what is Schema for? Sorry if this sounds like I'm going round in a circle here.

#7 qwerty

qwerty

    HR 10

  • Moderator
  • 8,580 posts
  • Location:Somerville, MA

Posted 27 March 2012 - 06:05 PM

Schema code (and other forms of microdata) can be used to generate rich snippets, such as the number of stars given in a review, a picture associated with an article, etc., but it's up to the search engines to choose to use it for that. My company set up schema code for job postings in response to a program sponsored by the US Department of Veterans' Affairs, but so far, it hasn't changed the way any of the search engines present our information in the SERPs.

What all of this code is for is to semantically define content. You can post text on a page that looks like

Acme Products
123 Main Street
Cambridge, MA 02142

...and it's pretty likely a search engine is going to figure out that the text represents a company and its address. But if you use the schema code for Corporation and mark up the content like this:
<div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Corporation">
<span itemprop="name">Acme Products</span>
<div itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress">
<span itemprop="streetAddress">123 Main Street</span>
<span itemprop="addressLocality">Cambridge</span>,
<span itemprop="addressRegion">MA</span>
<span itemprop="postalCode">02142</span>
</div>

</div>

Then you're explicity telling any entity interested in reading it that the text represents a thing, and that thing is a corporation, that one property of that corporation is its name, that another of the properties of that corporation is also a thing, and that thing is a postal address which has properties including its street adress, the city and state where it's located, and its zip code.

You may have a way to make use of that information for searching within your site, and maybe search engines will find a use for it as well. But they don't use it today, at least not in a way that's visible to us.

Edited by qwerty, 27 March 2012 - 06:10 PM.


#8 copywriter

copywriter

    HR 7

  • Moderator
  • 1,856 posts
  • Location:South Carolina, USA

Posted 28 August 2013 - 12:09 PM

Can we revisit this topic?  I've got someone who emailed me asking about this today as far as using it with Wordpress sites.

 

She says...

 

Google has been using schema for about 2 years now and I'm starting to see a decline in my SEO from others using schema microdata.

 

Eventually Google plans to fade out the old and use all schema writeup.

Can you give me your take on it and any suggestions, products, training, etc?

Here's Google's FAQ: https://support.goog...r/1211158?hl=en

 

I am using Genesis 2.0 which now has the basics built-in for microdata, but I don't want to start with only the basics if I am going to edit things when I could also add more that is needed at the same time.

Here's a great article on how Genesis 2.0 works with it:

http://wpsites.net/w...specific-niche/

 

I know practically nothing about schema. Qwerty, is your opinion the same now as it was a year ago?  Can you (or others) address her questions/comments?

 

Thanks!



#9 qwerty

qwerty

    HR 10

  • Moderator
  • 8,580 posts
  • Location:Somerville, MA

Posted 28 August 2013 - 03:25 PM

My opinion now is that you should use it, especially if anyone else in your niche is using it. I'm pushing for it here right now, but it's a little complicated: the schema for this particular type of item doesn't officially exist (that is, there's no page for it on the schema.org site), but one of our competitors is using it anyway, and they're getting rich snippets.

 

That's kind of the thing about this sort of markup. It's open-source, so even if a particular itemtype doesn't officially exist, it may become standard just because it's used and it's structured properly by those who make use of it. And the competitor that's using it and getting rich snippets is a very big site, so they probably have some influence.

 

The only danger I can see in jumping onto this before it becomes officially official is that the powers that be might make changes to some of the details (the various properties) of the schema, and I'll have to explain to our developers that they need to redo some of the work I convinced them to do.



#10 copywriter

copywriter

    HR 7

  • Moderator
  • 1,856 posts
  • Location:South Carolina, USA

Posted 28 August 2013 - 03:41 PM

So, how do you tell if someone in your industry is using it?  Just check the SERPs for rich snippets?

 

Are there any training courses out there on schema?  Or is it just the info published by people using it and by Google?



#11 qwerty

qwerty

    HR 10

  • Moderator
  • 8,580 posts
  • Location:Somerville, MA

Posted 28 August 2013 - 08:13 PM

That's how I found out, a month or two back. I ran a search and there was our competitor, with a big picture next to their snippet. I went to the page, looked at the source code, then entered its URL in the rich snippets testing tool, and there was the URL for this particular schema. I navigated over to that URL, and got a 404 response.



#12 copywriter

copywriter

    HR 7

  • Moderator
  • 1,856 posts
  • Location:South Carolina, USA

Posted 29 August 2013 - 06:48 AM

Thanks Bob.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

SPAM FREE FORUM!
 
If you are just registering to spam,
don't bother. You will be wasting your
time as your spam will never see the
light of day!