Rich markup tester now rejecting productontology

[Margaret Ornsby]

Was doing a client report a couple of days ago and was able to test successfully via the structured data testing tool, microdata including the additional type / productontology method Phil and David posted about on Phil's blog a while ago.
Today, that same block of code is failing on the additionalType.
Have not been able to figure a way to work the additionalType parameter in at all.

Am I missing something? Is there a work-around?

Wonder if this is G relying on GMB categories more?

 

[Tim Colling]

Re: rich markup tester now rejecting productontology

It seems to like it for this site: A Servant's Heart In-Home Care - Senior Care San Diego County

What is the URL for the one that you're running into trouble with? Or which category is it?

 

[Linda Buquet]

Re: rich markup tester now rejecting productontology

Am I missing something? Is there a work-around

I'll ping David Deering, the Schema expert, and see if he can weigh in.
But I suspect he may need to see the code or page.

Wonder if this is G relying on GMB categories more?

I don't think so, since Google now only wants a SINGLE category in GMB. So I believe they are relying on the website and 3rd party data even more to get all the other categories and keywords that apply to the business.

 

[David Deering]

Re: rich markup tester now rejecting productontology

Hi Margaret. Can you please share the URL or code that you're having issues with so we can take a look?

 

[Linda Buquet]

Re: rich markup tester now rejecting productontology

Thanks so much for coming over David!

She's an Aussie, so may still be sleeping.

 

[David Deering]

Re: rich markup tester now rejecting productontology

Yeah, those Aussies are pretty lazy, aren't they? lol Just kidding!

Just get back to us when you get a chance, Margaret. We'll check it out and see if we can help solve it.

 

[Margaret Ornsby]

Re: rich markup tester now rejecting productontology

Thank you David & Linda

Eventually figured out what it was. Those pesky rabbit ears (quotes) got tilted instead of being the straight up and down ones. *So* hard to see. Looked at it time and again and only just figured it out now, days later.

 

[David Deering]

Re: rich markup tester now rejecting productontology

Yeah, that'll do it sometimes, Margaret. So you just need to be careful about the font that you use to create the markups with, as some will cause error messages when you test your markup.

By the way, you don't really need to use the additionalType property in this case, as schema.org does have a MovingCompany type. So you can simply change LocalBusiness to MovingCompany and eliminate the additionalType tag altogether.

I also noticed a couple of other minor problems with your markup that were preventing everything to be nested together (specifically how itemprop, itemscope and itemtype were formatted for certain tags) and a couple of other technical markup errors. So I made some small tweaks to the markup. You'll see now that everything is nested within the LocalBusiness type now when you test it. Just let me know if you have any questions about it.

I hope this helps.

David

<div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/MovingCompany">
<div itemprop="name">ABC Movers</div>
<link itemprop="hasMap" href="https://goo.gl/maps/blah"> 
<div>Phone: <a itemprop="telephone" href="+61-2-9999-1234">(02) 9999 1234</a></div>
<time itemprop="openingHours" datetime="Mo-Fr 08:00-17:00">Monday - Friday 8am-5pm</time>
<div itemprop="geo" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/GeoCoordinates">
<meta itemprop="latitude" content="-33.123456" />
<meta itemprop="longitude" content="150.123456" /> </div>
<div itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress">
<div itemprop="streetAddress">123 Main Street</div>
<div><span itemprop="addressLocality">Sydney</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">NSW</span> <span itemprop="postalCode">2000</span><meta itemprop="addressCountry" content="AU"></span>
</div> </div>
</div>

 

[Margaret Ornsby]

Re: rich markup tester now rejecting productontology

Awesome David - Cheers!

So I've looked at the schema.org site, disappointed that I hadn't seen the moving company type before. After a little while, came up with this page: https://schema.org/docs/full.html
For anyone else reading this thread, this page seems to list all the types defined, not just the ones found through the site navigation (why I missed moving company as a type).

Still need to load the individual page though, just to make sure the type you want to use isn't deprecated (s/a professional service)

Thank you again to David and Linda for another great learning moment

Happy New Year!

 

[Margaret Ornsby]

Re: rich markup tester now rejecting productontology

Better still, this is the latest and greatest version of full Full Release Summary: Schema.org - latest - 2015-11-05 released November 2015
Strangely, it still shows professional service as a type, so looks like we still need to check the individual page description of the type JIC.

 

[David Deering]

Re: rich markup tester now rejecting productontology

Anytime, Margaret. And sometimes using the search function on schema.org helps save time, too, when you're trying to find out if a certain schema type exists.