The markup and content would be on the page yes. Then then the search engines can read the data and make sense of it. You could style the address block of text using Freeway styles CSS.
David
On 9 Mar 2013, at 16:25, “James I” email@hidden wrote:
Hi David.
Thanks for the reply… I’m a bit lost though…
Surely then the text in the metadataMicrodata would be visible on the page?
Sorry - am I being thick?.. isn’t the rich snippet supposed to be “behind the scenes”?
What is “structured data”? I just checked and one of my sites has it, but I don’t recall adding any code.
Basically, Google Webmaster Tools says the Data Type is, “hatom”, the source is, “Markup: microformats.org”, and there are 5 pages. Not sure what any of that means.
Google are really big on it and it looks like it can make a big difference on how your site looks in search results.
Although Dave’s suggestion is good, it doesn’t work with my website layout. (Thanks though Dave). Also the microdata code I got from Schema.org would not work as text on anyone’s site.
This thread is a couple years old but still relevant, hence my interest in joining the discussion. I am now looking at Structured Data for my site. In an earlier post, David Owen suggests that we Insert > HTML item, place it on the page, double-click inside, then paste in our structured data. That seems bizarre, for the reasons already stated; namely, you’re dumping HTML CODE on the page itself. Is that really correct?
Here’s an example schema.org JSON script that Google recommends using to tag a company logo:
So you folks are telling me that I need to copy/paste the following code into an HTML item that is placed in open view on a web page?
How is that even sane? How can one justify placing it in open view? Saying “so bots can read it” is crazy. Surely there is a way they can read Meta Tags which are not in view, so I don’t see why this Structured Data thing needs to be in view!
Can someone please explain this?
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
It’s not going to be visible to anyone except bots. Anything inside a script tag is literally invisible. Try it, you’ll see.
Walter
On Jul 30, 2015, at 4:32 AM, JDW email@hidden wrote:
This thread is a couple years old but still relevant, hence my interest in joining the discussion. I am now looking at Structured Data for my site. In an earlier post, David Owen suggests that we Insert > HTML item, place it on the page, double-click inside, then paste in our structured data. That seems bizarre, for the reasons already stated; namely, you’re dumping HTML CODE on the page itself. Is that really correct?
Here’s an example schema.org JSON script that Google recommends using to tag a company logo:
How is that even sane? How can one justify placing it in open view? Saying “so bots can read it” is crazy. Surely there is a way they can read Meta Tags which are not in view, so I don’t see why this Structured Data thing needs to be in view!
Walter, the only reason I posted what I did here is because I tried it and discovered that the aforementioned it is DEFINITELY VISIBLE when one reads through earlier posts in this thread and follows David Owen’s advice of doing a “Insert > HTML item” on the page. Mr. Owen continues making that point by saying the following:
The markup and content would be on the page yes.
Then then the search engines can read the data and make sense of it.
You could style the address block of text using Freeway styles CSS.
But as Thomas Kimmich correctly points out, doing a “Insert > Markup Item…” instead will hide the content. I was also very aware of that. But reading through this thread confused the heck out of me and made me wonder if what was said earlier could possible be true — that Google would somehow force us to dump visible code on the page!!
Now that the situation is somewhat clarified (i.e., the folks who talked earlier in this thread were dead WRONG because in fact we HIDE the code via Markup Item on the page), the question then becomes: DOES IT MATTER WHERE we put that Markup Item? Or can we just use “Page > HTML Markup… > Before ” ?
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
I would definitely try putting it in the page head, not the visible page, as you suggest. Any time you see a script block outside the head (except maybe at the bottom of the body, in the Before /body part of the page markup dialog, it’s probably either something that is using document.write (like an animal) or is not written in an unobtrusive manner. Technically, you can put a block anywhere inside an HTML page and it will work. But you really should put it inside the head, or just before the close of the body tag if you’re playing a straight wicket.
Walter
On Jul 30, 2015, at 8:17 PM, JDW email@hidden wrote:
Walter, the only reason I posted what I did here is because I tried it and discovered that the aforementioned it is DEFINITELY VISIBLE when one reads through earlier posts in this thread and follows David Owen’s advice of doing a “Insert > HTML item” on the page. Mr. Owen continues making that point by saying the following:
The markup and content would be on the page yes.
> Then then the search engines can read the data and make sense of it.
> You could style the address block of text using Freeway styles CSS.
But as Thomas Kimmich correctly points out, doing a “Insert > Markup Item…” instead will hide the content. I was also very aware of that. But reading through this thread confused the heck out of me and made me wonder if what was said earlier could possible be true — that Google would somehow force us to dump visible code on the page!!
Now that the situation is somewhat clarified (i.e., the folks who talked earlier in this thread were dead WRONG because in fact we HIDE the code via Markup Item on the page), the question then becomes: DOES IT MATTER WHERE we put that Markup Item? Or can we just use “Page > HTML Markup… > Before ” ?
Thank you for the clarification, Walter. I will dump all of these blocks into: Page > HTML Markup… > Before .
But now the question becomes, how do we properly use these tags?
Consider the following page which discusses the tagging of a company logo:
It’s pretty terse. Most companies have their logo atop EVERY PAGE. Does that mean we must dump that code on every page in a site? Or do we dump it on the TOP page only?
Well, that Google page does say “your preferred logo” (singular, not plural), so I assume it’s done only on 1 page in a site.
Fine. Let’s say we add the block to the TOP page only. Does bitmap resolution of the logo matter? Should we create a new page with a hi-rez logo (or SVG) and tag that instead? Because if we tag a tiny low-rez logo, we don’t know exactly how that will be used, right?
Has anyone done this before? If not, is it because you feel it’s unimportant?
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
They’re talking about the homepage, so I’d start with the index just because the storage of the image (company logo) won’t change for any other page.
Sounds all pretty interesting and is some kind of homework. Could this even be a nice lil item-action which puts the required credentials to the dedicated places (not that it could be accomplished without)?
Kinda set-and-forget.
Cheers
Thomas
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
Google “Sony” or “Google” you will see company info appear in the results at right. You can see their logo as 151x151px, which I assume means that is the size of the logo we should prepare. But that wouldn’t work on everyone’s home page. Furthermore, my company has a couple logo variants, with a graphic logo to the left of the text logo, and the graphic logo enlarged and above the text logo (square). I currently do not use that square logo on my HOME page, nor do I want to, but that would be my choice of logo for Structured Data. So the question then becomes, if I put that square logo on my HOME page, hide it, then add the to “Before ” will it get detected and used?
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
Seeing this was “waaaay back” in 2013 I was naturally assuming the insert HTML item (which original post was just HTML) would be positioned absolutely on the page and not pasted inline. These days and using inline then yes use Walters Crowbar to banish those pesky Freeway P tags.
–
David Owen
On 30 Jul 2015, at 13:28, Thomas Kimmich email@hidden wrote:
preferably a CrowBar-item,
not in a HTML item itself (which will throw out plain text).
