With the following JSON-LD structured data, an error is thrown by the google testing tool :
{
"#context": "http://schema.org",
"#type": "Person",
"name" : "Brent",
"makesOffer" : {
"#type" :"Offer",
"priceSpecification" : {
"#type" : "UnitPriceSpecification",
"priceCurrency" : "USD",
"price" : "18000" },
"itemOffered" : {
"#type" : "Car",
"name" : "2009 Volkswagen Golf V GTI MY09 Direct-Shift Gearbox",
"description" : "2009 Volkswagen Golf V GTI MY09 Direct-Shift Gearbox in perfect mechanical condition and low kilometres. It's impressive 2.0 litre turbo engine makes every drive a fun experience. Well looked after by one owner with full service history. It drives like new and has only done 50,000kms. (...)",
"image" : "2009_Volkswagen_Golf_V_GTI_MY09.png",
"color" : "Black",
"numberOfForwardGears" : "6",
"vehicleEngine" : {
"#type": "EngineSpecification",
"name" : "4 cylinder Petrol Turbo Intercooled 2.0 L (1984 cc)"
},
"numberOfAirbags" : "6"
}
}
}
The error thrown is : You must indicate offers, review or aggregateRating.
But this data is a generic sample provided by schema.org on their car markup page.
So why does Google pop an error when using the approach recommended by schema.org ?
To clarify, the data goes as follow :
Person
-> makesOffer
--> itemOffered
---> car
And it seems Google will throw an error any time you follow that path (a person offering something)
The errors and warnings from Googles testing tools are often related to the structured data required to get rich snippets in Google. In this case, your markup does not fit the product requirements to get rich snippets.
https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/product
As your markup does not relate to those rich snippets, you can ignore the error.
Related
The background is I have a custom JSON based language.
Consider the following
In file 1, I have the following:
[
{
"name" : "abcde",
"source" : "source::abcde",
// other attributes
},
{
"name" : "qwerty",
"source" : "source::qwerty"
// other attributes
},
]
In file 2, I have the following:
abcde.json
{
"name" : "abcde"
// properties related to it
}
querty.json
{
"name" : "querty"
// properties related to it
}
Now, I want to build an extension/ grammar such that when a visitor uses Ctrl + click on source::abcde, it takes them to abcde.json.
I am wondering how to achieve through a VS code extension. I dont have a lot of expertise in this area.
I took a look into https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/ , could not find one directly. I have 10000+ such definitions, it is becoming very hard to maintain and update these.
Any help on how to achieve this? or some pointing blogs would be really helpful
I created a text index based on title and main_body fields in my Mongo Collection. I have for instance an article with the title: "Abby Bengtsson" and her name "Abby", appearing throughout the actual article in main_body.
Making a text search query: {$text: {$search: 'abby bengtsson'}}, returns the desired article, along with a couple more.
But simply querying her first name: {$text: {$search: 'abby'}}, returns nothing.
I have tried using Mongo Compass, Downloaded Studio 3T, and using ssh and terminal commands on the server directly.
But I don't understand why this happens.. The same goes for other key words in other articles.
JSON Doc example
{
"_id" : ObjectId("5e0f4ded35fbd16f21bf3655"),
"category" : {
"category_id" : "5010",
"slug" : {
"0010" : "profiler",
"0020" : "profiler",
"0030" : "profiler"
},
"label" : {
"0010" : "Profiler",
"0020" : "Profiler",
"0030" : "Profiler"
},
"bg_color" : "#B12CA6",
"txt_color" : "#ffffff",
"main_category_id" : "5000"
},
"featured_image" : {
"main" : "https://img.norrbom.com/article/5e0f4d5e35fbd16f21bf3653/78805a221a988e79ef3f42d7c5bfd418-1578061277668/abby.jpg",
"mobile" : "https://img.norrbom.com/article/5e0f4d5e35fbd16f21bf3653/78805a221a988e79ef3f42d7c5bfd418-1578061277668/abby.jpg",
"square" : "https://img.norrbom.com/article/5e0f4d5e35fbd16f21bf3653/78805a221a988e79ef3f42d7c5bfd418-1578061277668/abby.jpg"
},
"metadata" : {
"title" : "Abby Bengtsson",
"description" : "Hon sprudlar av energi och glädje, vilket smittar av sig på hela redaktionen när hon kliver in hos En Sueco. Med sig har hon sin ursöta följeslagare pomeranianen Melwin",
"og" : {
"title" : "Abby Bengtsson",
"description" : "Hon sprudlar av energi och glädje, vilket smittar av sig på hela redaktionen när hon kliver in hos En Sueco. Med sig har hon sin ursöta följeslagare pomeranianen Melwin",
"image" : "https://img.norrbom.com/article/5e0f4d5e35fbd16f21bf3653/78805a221a988e79ef3f42d7c5bfd418-1578061277668/abby.jpg",
"type" : "article",
"site_name" : "En Sueco",
"url" : "https://www.ensueco.com/profil-abby-bengtsson"
},
"twitter" : {
"title" : "Abby Bengtsson",
"description" : "Hon sprudlar av energi och glädje, vilket smittar av sig på hela redaktionen när hon kliver in hos En Sueco. Med sig har hon sin ursöta följeslagare pomeranianen Melwin",
"card" : "summary",
"image" : "https://img.norrbom.com/article/5e0f4d5e35fbd16f21bf3653/78805a221a988e79ef3f42d7c5bfd418-1578061277668/abby.jpg"
}
},
"tags" : [
],
"title" : "Abby Bengtsson",
"state" : NumberInt(1),
"created" : ISODate("2020-01-01T04:17:00.000+0000"),
"modified" : ISODate("2020-01-01T08:27:54.000+0000"),
"version" : NumberInt(19),
"featured" : false,
"language" : "sv",
"magazines" : [
],
"slug" : "profil-abby-bengtsson",
"published" : ISODate("2020-01-02T10:14:00.000+0000"),
"published_until" : null,
"author_alias" : "Text: Sara Laine, sara#norrbom.com Foto: Mugge Fischer, mugge#norrbom.com",
"main_body" : "... stringified JSON object with article ...",
"article_id" : ObjectId("5e0f4d5e35fbd16f21bf3653"),
"origin" : "cms",
"site" : "0020",
"__v" : NumberInt(0)
}
EDIT 18-01-2020
I just tested something. It seems, that this issue only occurs for documents where the language property is set to sv (Swedish as per MongoDB Language Documentation). If I change the value to da (Danish), the document is being returned, when I search for "Abby".
I have currently solved my issue in production, by setting language_overwrite to a dummy field that doesn't exist.. Now all fields are being returned as they should. But the thing with the swedish language field still confuses me, as it is ONLY when I se the field to "sv" - and what sense does it make to have multiple language documents, and a text index that supposedly should return and search based on locale, if it doesn't work for one particular language variable?
What version of MongoDB are you using? The functionality has changed a bit version to version. See https://docs.mongodb.com/manual/core/index-text/#versions for more details.
I tested this out in 4.2 and got the results you would expect.
To test this out I created a free cluster in Atlas (cloud.mongodb.com) and loaded the sample data. Then I navigated to the Collections tab. The sample data contains a database named "sample_mflix" with a collection called "movies". My collection had a default text index that covered the following fields: cast_text_fullplot_text_genres_text_title_text.
Then I navigated to the Find tab. When I ran the searches you described, I got the results you would expect. Both {$text: {$search: 'abby bengtsson'}} and {$text: {$search: 'abby'}} return many results
Update based on new information added to original question on 18-01-20
I spoke with a colleague who explained to me what is going on:
It is worth noting that text search is designed for stemming with language heuristics. This will have unexpected outcomes with proper nouns like "Abby" (and with multi-language search).
Using query explain output for insight, this is what is happening:
- Abby stems to abby in Swedish but abbi in English, so the term is indexed as abby given the language value of sv in the document.
- A search without any language will default to English (rather than trying to stem in all possible languages) so a default search will not match the indexed term.
To search matching the indexed language they would have to provide a language value, eg: db.articles.find({$text: {$search: 'abby', $language: 'sv'}}).
This is working as designed but doesn't match the user's expectation that queries would be stemmed to match all possible languages (which is probably an unhelpful outcome in terms of relevance).
What they actually want is the solution they arrived at: they should index with a language of none for simple tokenisation without stemming or stopwords.
I'm getting puzzled more and more discovering how mongodb is overcomplicated and bad designed in the query writing, anyway I have this kind of document in a db with thousand of records:
db.messages.aggregate([{$limit: 1}]).pretty()
{
"_id" : ObjectId("4f16fc97d1e2d32371003f42"),
"body" : "Hey Gillette,\n\nThe heat rate is going to depend on the type of fuel and the construction \ndate of the unit. Unfortunately, most of that info is proprietary. \n\nChris Gaskill is the head of our fundamentals group and he might be able to \nsupply you with some of the guidelines.\n\n-Bass\n\n\n \n\tEnron North America Corp.\n\t\n\tFrom: Lisa Gillette 04/05/2001 02:31 PM\n\t\n\nTo: Eric Bass/HOU/ECT#ECT\ncc: \nSubject: Power Generation Question\n\nHey Bass,\n\nI have a question and I am hoping you can help me. I am wanting to compile a \nlist of all the different types of power plants and their respective heat \nrates to determine some sort of generation ratio.\n\ni.e. Coal 4 mmbtu = 1 MW\n Simple Cycle 11 mmbtu = 1 MW\n\nPlease let me know if you can help me or point me to someone who can. Just \nFYI...Bryan suggested that I call you so blame him as you curse me under your \nbreath right now.\n\nThanks,\nLisa\n\n",
"filename" : "1045.",
"headers" : {
"Content-Transfer-Encoding" : "7bit",
"Content-Type" : "text/plain; charset=us-ascii",
"Date" : ISODate("2001-04-05T14:45:00Z"),
"From" : "eric.bass#enron.com",
"Message-ID" : "<2106897.1075854772243.JavaMail.evans#thyme>",
"Mime-Version" : "1.0",
"Subject" : "Re: Power Generation Question",
"To" : [
"lisa.gillette#enron.com"
],
"X-FileName" : "ebass.nsf",
"X-Folder" : "\\Eric_Bass_Jun2001\\Notes Folders\\Sent",
"X-From" : "Eric Bass",
"X-Origin" : "Bass-E",
"X-To" : "Lisa Gillette",
"X-bcc" : "",
"X-cc" : ""
},
"mailbox" : "bass-e",
"subFolder" : "sent"
}
And I need to find records from address X to address Y.
I managed to catch the "From" records with
db.messages.find({"headers.From": "eric.bass#enron.com"}).pretty().count()
But I can't get the To records (and I Need to get both togheter).
To query the "To" field I've tried:
db.messages.find({headers: {$elemMatch :{ "To": "lisa.gillette#enron.com"}}})
But it returns nothing
What am I missing?
Thanks
$elemMatch - To use this operator we need to give the array element and the matching operator, here in your case it should be like
db.messages.find({"headers.To": {$elemMatch :{$eq:"lisa.gillette#enron.com"}}})
$elemMatch is optimal to use when we have multiple queries to given for the array elements. If we are specifying only a single condition in the $elemMatch expression, we don't need to use $elemMatch, instead we can use find
db.messages.find({"headers.To": "lisa.gillette#enron.com"});
I am triggering marketing goals using back-end code as follows:
if (!TrackerEnabled())
{
Tracker.StartTracking();
}
Item goal = Sitecore.Context.Database.GetItem(goalId);
var goalAsPageEvent = new PageEventItem(goal);
var pageEventsRow = Sitecore.Analytics.Tracker.CurrentPage.Register(goalAsPageEvent);
Sitecore.Analytics.Tracker.Submit();
And I can see the data in MongoDB interactions table as follows:
"PageEvents" : [
{
"Name" : "Apply Now - Auto Loans",
"Timestamp" : NumberLong(0),
"PageEventDefinitionId" : LUUID("dc9d7115-7bd5-7b40-9fa5-2722a2fb2e00"),
"IsGoal" : true,
"DateTime" : ISODate("2016-07-28T12:47:33.700Z"),
"Value" : 25
},
// ...
]
My question is: how can I see this data in Sitecore Experience Analytics or Content Editor?
Yes, you will be able to see this in Experience Analytics in aggregated state.
If you want to see this data in Sitecore with details you should use Experience Profile application.
Take the following URI's as an example:
/tracks
/tracks/:id
/playlists
/playlists/:id
/playlists/:id/tracks
I have a question about the last URI (/playlists/:id/tracks). How do I add extra information/context to the track objects in relation to it's parent playlist?
Examples of context:
Added time of the track to the playlist
Play count of the track within the playlist
Likes per track within the playlist
All tracks have a created timestamp, play count and likes on a global scale. So my question is how would this information be added to the response of the endpoint.
I've come up with following for now:
{
"title" : "harder better faster stronger",
"artist" : "daft punk",
"likes" : 234252,
"created_at" : "2012-10-03 09:57:04"
"play_count" : 1203200035,
"relation_to_parent": {
"likes" : 5,
"created_at" : "2014-11-07 19:21:64",
"play_count" : 20
}
}
I've added a field called relation_to_parent which adds some context to the relation between the child and it's parent. I'm not sure though if this is a good way to do it. Hope to hear some other solutions.
By 1:n relations you can define a subresource. By n:m relations it is better to define a separate relationship resource. Note that these are just best practices, not standards.
Be aware that you can add links pointing to a different resource. According to the HATEOAS constraint you have to create hyperlinks if you want to expose an operation (for example getting another resource).
I don't think there is a 'one true way' to do this. Personally, I dislike adding the extra information like that, since you are giving a resource-plus, when you are looking for a resource. In any case, are 'likes' and 'created_at' and 'play_count' actually part of the relation to the parent, aren't they part of the track itself?
The two paths I usually see for this are:
/playlist/:id/tracks - returns a list of IDs (or URLs) for actual tracks, which you then fetch with /tracks/:track
/playlist/:id/tracks - returns the actual tracks, as if you did both steps in 1 above.
As for additional information, if it is not part of the tracks, you might do it as (any of these is valid):
info as part of the track, so /tracks/:track always returns the 'play_count' and 'likes', etc.
separate information, i.e. its own resource, if you want to keep the track clean. So you might get it at /tracks/:track/social_info or maybe /social_info/:track where it matches the track ID 1-to-1
If you have actual relation information, then it depends if it is 1:1 or 1:N or N:1 or N:N. 1:1 or 1:N or N:1 you would probably reports as part of the resource itself, while N:N would either be part of the resource (JSON objects can have depth) or as a separate resource.
Personally, I have done all of the above, and find cleaner is better, even if it is multiple retrievals. But now we are delving into opinion....
EDITED:
There are lots of ways to do N:N, here are just some:
/playlist/:id/tracks/:track/social_info - which could be embedded or a link to another object
/social_info/:playlist - more direct
/social_info/playlist/:id if you might have different kinds of social info
Personally (there is that word again; so much of this is personal preference and opinion), every time I have tried using deeper paths, thinking something only makes sense in a parent context, I have found myself ending up making its own resource for it, and linking back, so the 2nd or 3rd option ends up being what I do, with the first linking to it (either convenience to retrieve it or retrieve a list of it).
Mostly, that has not been because of constraints on the server side - e.g. when I write in nodejs, I use http://github.com/deitch/booster which handles multiple paths to the same resource really easily - but because client side frameworks often work better with a one true path.
If you want to fully embrace RESTful service design principles you definitely want to use hyperlinks in your representation format. JSON has some existing specifications if you prefer not to come up with your own: HAL and JSON API. A naive hypermedia format might look like this:
{
"playlist_id" : "666",
"created_at" : "2014-11-07 19:21:64",
"likes" : 5,
"tracks" : [
{"index" : 1,
"begin_at" : "00:02:00",
"end_at" : "00:05:23",
"_links" : {"track" : {
"href" : "/tracks/123",
"type" : "track"}}},
{"index" : 2,
"_links" : {"track" : {
"href" : "/tracks/432",
"type" : "track"}}},
{"index" : 3,
"_links" : {"track" : {
"href" : "/tracks/324",
"type" : "track"}}},
{"index" : 4,
"_links" : {"track" : {
"href" : "/tracks/567",
"type" : "track"}}}]
}
More elaborate features are included in both HAL and JSON API, like defining embedded resources and link templates. Using such semantics you might end up with something like the following:
{
"id" : "666",
"created_at" : "2014-11-07 19:21:64",
"likes" : 5,
"tracks" : [
{"id" : "123",
"index" : 1,
"begin_at" : "00:02:00",
"end_at" : "00:05:23"},
{"id" : "432",
"index" : 2},
{"id" : "324",
"index" : 3},
{"id" : "567",
"index" : 4}
],
"_links" : {
"_self" : {
"href" : "/playlists/666",
"type" : "playlist"},
"tracks" : {
"href" : "/tracks/{id}",
"type" : "track"}
},
"_embedded" : {
"track" : [
{"id" : "123",
"title" : "harder better faster stronger",
"artist" : "daft punk",
"created_at" : "2012-10-03 09:57:04",
"likes" : 234252,
"play_count" : 1203200035},
{"id" : "432",
"title" : "aerodynamic",
"artist" : "daft punk",
"created_at" : "2009-03-07 11:11:11",
"likes" : 33056,
"play_count" : 8796539}
]
}
}
Also, don't forget that using hyperlinks to express static relationships between entities is just the beginning of the journey. Using Hypermedia As The Engine Of Application State is the real Nirvana... but then you might be aiming too high.