How do I set up AggregateRating when the object is not rated yet (ratingValue = 0)?
My current setup is:
<div itemprop="aggregateRating" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/AggregateRating">
<meta itemprop="ratingValue" content="0" />
<meta itemprop="bestRating" content="5" />
<meta itemprop="worstRating" content="1" />
<div itemprop="ratingCount">0</div>
</div>
When I check the Microdata with the Google Testing Tool I get an error "Failed to standardize the rating value". Do I just have to set worstRating to 0? Or is there an other way to tell that there’s no rating yet?
The schema specifically states that ratingValue is of type text, whilst bestRating and worstRating are text/number. This suggests you could put anything into ratingValue, even "not ranked". However, how Google would interpret that is up to debate.
However it seems to me the ACTUAL CORRECT way to implement this is to only give an aggregateRating where ratingCount > 0.
Simply omit the ratings when there are no ratings.
Well, I guess it does not make sense to specify a ratingValue of 0 if the worstRating should be 1:
worstRating must be the "lowest value allowed in this rating system", which would be 0 in your case.
A ratingValue of 0 does not mean that there are no votes yet (i.e., 0 has not a special meaning), as 0 is certainly a valid rating value (some rating systems allow this).
So either set worstRating to 0, or omit ratingValue for items not rated yet.
Related
On Google Search Console, I'm getting the error missing best and worst rating. But when I tested the link on testing tool, I am getting:
Failed to normalize the rating value.
Your rating value was out of the default range, you must provide best and worst values.
The code is given below:
<h3>Reviews</h3>
<div class="average-rating" itemprop="aggregateRating" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/AggregateRating">
<p class="rating-title">Average Rating</p>
<div class="rating-box">
<div class="average-value" itemprop="ratingValue">0/5</div>
<div class="review-amount" itemprop="ratingCount">0 rating</div>
</div>
When I change in rating value to
<div class="average-value" itemprop="ratingValue">0/5</div>
or to this
<div class="average-value" itemprop="ratingValue">0/-454545</div>
it gives a warning:
0 rating (The value provided for ratingCount must be an integer.)
How can I solve this?
The min/max attributes are plain HTML attributes, they don’t affect the Microdata (and they can, by the way, not be used on div elements).
In Schema.org, the worst/best rating can be specified with worstRating and bestRating. If you don’t provide these properties, "0" and "5" are assumed.
If you fix the other errors (ratingCount would have to be "0", not "0 rating"; and it might be better to use "0" instead of "0/5" as ratingValue), you could omit worstRating/bestRating. But it’s typically better to be explicit, so you could add:
<meta itemprop="worstRating" content="0" />
<meta itemprop="bestRating" content="5" />
or:
<meta itemprop="worstRating" content="0" />
<span itemprop="ratingValue">0</span>/<span itemprop="bestRating">5</span>
When I attempt to validate my structured data using Google's Structured Data Testing tool, I get an error:
The attribute publisher.itemtype has an invalid value.
I am getting that on this line:
<meta itemprop="publisher" content="My Real Name Here" />
How do I provide a valid value for this property?
The expected value of the publisher property is another item (Organization or Person).
While Schema.org always allows to provide a string value (like you do), Google might require a certain value type for one of their search features (e.g., an Organization value for their Articles rich result for AMP HTML pages). If you don’t care about (or can’t qualify for) this feature, you can ignore the error in the SDTT.
The problems with using a string value: it’s not clear if the publisher is a person or an organization, and it’s not possible to provide additional data about the publisher.
If you want to provide an item, it could look like:
<div itemprop="publisher" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Person">
<p itemprop="name">NewGuy</p>
</div>
<div itemprop="publisher" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Organization">
<p itemprop="name">NewGuy Inc.</p>
</div>
I'm new to code. I'm trying to add Structured Data code for Google reviews on my contact page:
http://www.catnips.co.uk/in-home-mobile-cat-groomer-feline-behaviourist.html
I am using the reviews from my Google Maps client reviews.
Testing it in Google Structured Data Testing Tool, it says
The attribute publisher.itemtype has an invalid value.
I can't work out what I'm doing wrong.
<div itemprop="review" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Review">
<meta itemprop="author" content="Anita Kelsey">
<strong itemprop="itemreviewed">Mobile Cat Grooming</strong> by Jen Crothers<br />
<strong>My Rating:</strong> <span itemprop="reviewRating" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Rating"><img src="http://www.catnips.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/5-stars-356x73.png" alt="5 stars" width="356" height="73" class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-4614" /><meta itemprop="ratingValue" content="5" /><meta itemprop="bestRating" content="5" /></span>
</div>
<span itemprop="reviewRating" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Rating">
Anita was absolutely brilliant with my Persian cat Ernie, who was a wriggly customer at times. She skillfully and gently removed the mats on his coat and gave him a very thorough groom. Brilliant, professional and easily a five star service provided from start to finish.
<meta itemprop="ratingValue" content="5" /><meta itemprop="bestRating" content="5" />
The error is not in the code you provided in your question body, but rather in the JSON-LD. In the Structured Data Testing Tool, you can click on an error to be taken to the line in the code that caused the error. This helps you identify what caused the problem.
The error is informing you that the itemtype you provided for the publisher property is invalid. Whilst schema.org does support the type Person for the publisher property of Article, Google does not. Google only supports Organization, not Person, as the type for the publisher property, as mentioned in the Articles Structured Data page on Google Developers.
You can fix error in settings: Yoast SEO > Search Appearance > Knowledge Graph > Choose Company or Person.
Of course you do! You just don't know it yet. ;) Try using this line:
"publisher":{"id":"http://www.catnips.co.uk/#organization"},
"baseSalary": {
"#type": "MonetaryAmount",
"currency": "EUR",
"value": {
"#type": "QuantitativeValue",
"value": 850,
"unitText": "MONTH"
}
}
Like many sites, we deliver a lot of imagery on our web site.
Use case: set up labels/refinements in Google Custom Search that aggregate and filter two different classes of image objects. Using Schema.org Microdata markup is very easy and works great, but we want the user to select either
1) PHOTOS: a "photo" is taken by with an instrument -- some kind of camera/lens "machine" that comprises something from "real life"
OR
2) ART: all other images that are creative works by an illustrator/artist: vector art, scans of drawings, scans of paintings, water colors etc.
I can easily determine which is which as our web CMS gets metadata from the database, and drives the content through the pipe and fork dynamic insertion of metadata. Something like
<section class="page-content" role="main" itemprop="image" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject">
<meta itemprop="image" content="Red Roses" /> #art
and toggle to this if it were a photo
"itemprop="photo" content="Daffodils" # photo
But this is really not doing the job. I would expect to have some property like "imageType" that I could then apply like this
itemprop="imageType" content="photo"
itemprop="imageType" content="art"
But I don't see anything that meets this requirement in Schema.org (my eyes are bleeding from reviewing the hierarchy and still can't find what I need). There is nothing to designate "art" as such.
Any ideas?
I don’t know which features Google Custom Search supports,
but you have the following options with Schema.org and Microdata.
Unless you have to implement it right now, I recommend option b).
a) Propose new Schema.org types/properties
See my answer to another question for links.
b) Wait for an appropriate Schema.org type/property
The next Schema.org release will contain the type VisualArtwork (draft):
A work of art that is primarily visual in character.
It has an artform property (draft) that takes text or an URL as value:
e.g. Painting, Drawing, Sculpture, Print, Photograph, Assemblage, Collage, etc.
Caution notice: these are drafts, subject to change!
Update: VisualArtwork and artform got released.
<div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/VisualArtwork">
<meta itemprop="artform" content="Painting">
</div>
<div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/VisualArtwork">
<meta itemprop="artform" content="Photo">
</div>
c) Use Schema.org’s extension mechanism
The "slash-based" extension mechanism is "outdated", but valid.
<div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject/Photo"></div>
<div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject/Art"></div>
I would only use this as a last resort.
d) Use an additional Schema.org type
This does not work for most cases, but it’s possible in your case: Both of your images are ImageObject, and only the photos are Photograph in addition.
The itemtype attribute can have several values as long as they are from the same vocabulary. But note that you could only use properties that are defined for all of the used types.
<div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject">
<!-- art -->
</div>
<div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject http://schema.org/Photograph">
<!-- photo -->
</div>
e) Use a type/property from a different vocabulary
If you know/find a vocabulary about your subject/model, you can use the corresponding types as value for Schema.org’s additionalType property:
<section itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject">
<link itemprop="additionalType" href="http://example.com/vocabulary/photo">
</section>
<section itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject">
<link itemprop="additionalType" href="http://example.com/vocabulary/art">
</section>
If you find a suitable property, you may use its URL as value for itemprop:
<section itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject">
<meta itemprop="http://example.com/vocabulary/imageType" content="photo">
</section>
<section itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject">
<meta itemprop="http://example.com/vocabulary/imageType" content="art">
</section>
f) Use your own proprietary property
If you don’t find a suitable vocabulary, you can use your own URL as property:
[…] a proprietary item property name (i.e. one used by the author for private purposes, not defined in a public specification)
(Example like the second one in b).)
#unor
My developer told me (talking to him after I posted this) we can use (to avoid adding another meta line to the document):
<section itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject"> # for art
<section itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Photo"> # for photography
From tests I see that Google will actually parse this: its structured data previewer show it is being extracted. (though it's structured data preview may throw an error). As such I could use it in a custom search refinement/label.
But, it seems wrong to me from the schema.org standard -- since both classes of
images:(photos),(paintings,drawings,vector)
are all "ImageObjects"
Does anyone know what I would set as the value for the "content" attribute if I'm utilizing the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)?
<span itemprop="code" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/MedicalCode">
<meta itemprop="code" content="305.90"/>
<meta itemprop="codingSystem" content="_______"/>
</span>
Might the codingSystem content value be "DSM-IV", "DSM-4", "DSM4" or "DSM-4"?
Schema.org doesn’t restrict how the value for the codingSystem property should be specified (apart from the recommendation that the value should be Text).
You should use the name/abbreviation that is most widely known. Wikipedia lists it as "DSM-IV", so unless you know better, go with this.
I don’t know anything about this domain, but I think codeValue (which expects Text) is more appropriate than code (which expects another MedicalCode item):
<span itemprop="code" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/MedicalCode">
<meta itemprop="codeValue" content="305.90" />
<meta itemprop="codingSystem" content="DSM-4" />
</span>