Structured Data for SEO

My idea is to grant users the ability to set-up "structured data" on blog posts to help with SEO.

 

Structured data is a system of pairing a name with a value that helps search engines categorize and index your content. Microdata is one form of structured data that works with HTML5. Schema.org is a project that provides a particular set of agreed-upon definitions for microdata tags.

 

Structured data seems to matter more often now with search engines and help boost SEO. 

HubSpot updates
changed to: In Planning
Apr 15, 2020

Hi all,

Our engineering teams are actively working on making it easier to add structure markup to HubSpot-hosted blogs posts. We are starting with adding the ability to specify JSON-LD in the blog post <head> section (see this idea for more information). 

As soon as we have an update available, I'll be sure to update this post. 

Cheers,

Lukas

changed to: In Planning
Jan 4, 2019

74件のコメント
常連投稿者

Hey guys, are there any examples or guides for adding FAQ schema to a single blog post? I'm not a developer, but can plug in source code where necessary if there's a clearly defined example to work from.

 

And would I need to modify the global css, or can all of what is needed for FAQ schema exist on the one FAQ blog post? I originally had the post working with WPress+yoast, but when transferring to Hubspot the schema neutralized.

Can't believe Hubspot brands as an SEO/Inbound solution, but has been unresponsive to the structured data need that's at least 5 years old now. Communication is king. I know I was using microdata on blogs in 2000, that's 20 years ago.


常連投稿者

If you're using Wordpress hosting, you can use something like Schema Pro. I prefer SP because of the level of control it gives me, but if you aren't as tech savvy, or don't have time to do a lot of setup, other 3rd party Wordpress plugins include the basics (typically FAQ, Video, Service, & Article schemas). If you're using Hubspot for your website hosting, your options may be more limited. Check the Hubspot Marketplace to see if there are any decent options there. It's that little "storefront" icon at the top right next to the "gear" settings button when you're logged into Hubspot.

常連投稿者

Thanks abourdon. We were on WP, and I easily added schema left and right. We migrated the site to Hubspot but did not find any good tools/plugins fo rmanaging schema with HS. I heard HS is working on a solution, but people have been calling for it on forum for at least 2 years. (and it's 20 year old digital marketing technology)

常連投稿者 | Diamond Partner
常連投稿者 | Diamond Partner

@donrua if you are looking to add sitewide schema to a HubSpot website, we have a template here you can use.

 

Let me know if you need any help adding it to your site.

常連投稿者

@Jon_Sasala thanks for posting that info. While it's not an ideal solution (no dynamic generation), it should get the job done for most simple landing and blog pages, which is what the majority of people are problably dealing with at the sole proprietor and small business level. Larger companies and those dealing with ecommerce should probably stick to more automated solutions. 

常連投稿者 | Diamond Partner
常連投稿者 | Diamond Partner

For larger organizations, especially eCommerce, I would suggest checking out Huckabuy. They provide dynamically generated schema that is then manually managed. The founder originally created this for overstock.com and is now using it for many large enterprise-level clients. 

 

In addition to structured data, they have a Cloud SEO product that will blow your mind. It renders a flat HTML version of your website, striping out bloat, and serves it to search engines. Vastly increases crawl percentage, discoverability and ranking.

常連投稿者

I'll check it out for future reference. I'm not integrating with any ecommerce platforms right now, relying on Schema.Press and YoastSEO on Wordpress. That combo works great for largely static content, but it probably wouldn't scale well beyond a moderately sized ecommerce website.

HubSpot製品開発チーム
HubSpot製品開発チーム
ステータスに更新: In Planning

Hi all,

Our engineering teams are actively working on making it easier to add structure markup to HubSpot-hosted blogs posts. We are starting with adding the ability to specify JSON-LD in the blog post <head> section (see this idea for more information). 

As soon as we have an update available, I'll be sure to update this post. 

Cheers,

Lukas

常連投稿者

Thanks @lpleva!

常連投稿者

Thanks for the update Ipleva. Communication is king.

常連投稿者

Hi All,

 

I've tried adding the BlogPosting schema to the header of our blog site, and using the "Google Structured Data Testing Tool" all looks good.

 

However, when using Google Rich Result Test or Search Console URL testing, I get an error "Page not Eligible" or when I use the siteside Organization schema, it will detect that, but not "BlogPosting" schema.

 

After digging and digging, I found this article from Google,  https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/7445569?hl=en#supported_types    which says what supported types are supported, and there is no support for Article or BlogPosting schema (yet).

 

Oh and then there is AMP.  I have this turned on for HubSpot blog pages. But I've tried toggling that on and off to see if there is a difference.    Now AMP does show as a feature enhancement when its enabled.     I question whether I want this on or not now?? Any opinions here?

 

Am I missing something with this whole "BlogPosting" schema?  My blog site is, https://blog.protectedtrust.com/  pick any article if you want to see the current schema.

 

Thanks!

 

常連投稿者

Oh, and I saw this article: (https://www.hallaminternet.com/add-article-schema-markup-to-blog-posts/)

 

  • The blog post’s image has to be a minimum of 700 pixels wide
  • Within the Publisher section, the logo of your business has to be 550 pixels wide x 60 pixels high (this is not the case in regular Organization schema – only when you add it within article schema)

So, and I made sure that the logos and such met this.  

 

And and Google has a guideline for this too for Articles , AMP.   This again really confuses me, is it AMP or Article in this article, https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/article

 

AMP logo guidelinesNote: These logo guidelines apply to the Article structured data placed on individual AMP pages. For guidelines about the Logo markup that apply to the actual logo of a site, see the Logo markup documentation.

The following guidelines apply to logos for all AMP pages, including AMP stories.

  • The file format must be supported by Google Images.
  • Don't use animation.
  • The graphic part of the logo should be legible on the background color.

The following guidelines apply to logos used for general AMP pages, not AMP stories. There are different logo requirements for AMP stories.

  • The logo must be a rectangle, not a square.
  • The logo should fit in a 60x600px rectangle, and either be exactly 60px high (preferred), or exactly 600px wide. For example, 450x45px would not be acceptable, even though it fits within the 600x60px rectangle.

 

常連投稿者

I kept getting an error on my blog schema testing for the logo. Then I replaced the .svg logo file with png, and it works. I read on another thread that the blog schema, or at least google's testing of it, may not accept svg at this time.

常連投稿者

@donrua I would recommend avoiding SVG for anything that isn't a clear-cut, mainstream application (ie using it for human visible diagrams and logos on your site). I know it's not always as efficient, but true SVG adoption across all/almost all platforms and applications isn't there yet, unfortunately. Stick with .PNG or .JPEG.

 

In regards to schema, one thing to be aware of is that Google is intentionally or accidentally forcing a fork. There are several schema.org elements that Google isn't recognizing (whether to use SVGs, the COVID-19 Notice type, various Event objects are some I'm aware of). Until Google better supports the open standard (or the standard bends to Google), you'll have to pick your battles.

 

For my own personal sites, I go with the official standard because I don't like corporate-induced forks to open standards. Remember how bad the old days were when Internet Explorer and Netscape did their own thing? For anything where I'm getting paid to provide maximum performance for the customer, I'd have to bend to Google's requirements. It's the right thing for the customer, at least for the time being.