CSS and Schema.org microdata

[ngors]

Is anybody familar with Schema.org microdata syntax and how it works when combined with css?
Google seems to encourage the use of microdata content from schema.org that is supposed to improve searches. I wanted to experiment with this but I need to understand how this works in conjunction with CSS style sheets. It appears to me that I cannot combine schema microdata tags with divs or other html elements that already have a css id or class associated with them. It appears the microdata has to be associated with a separate html element with no css class or id associated with it. Is my understanding correct?

[Beverleyh]

Presumably you've come to this conclusion based on the markup examples they give on their site? I think they've just done it that way to try and keep the illustrated examples as 'clean' as possible.

Nowhere does it state that you cannot use this type of micro data inside of elements that use classes and ids. As I understand it, this is additional micro data that enhances what's there - it doesn't replace or override anything so just use in conjunction with ids and classes and your usual css.

[ngors]

Thanks Beverleyh. yes I partly ask this because of the markup examples. However, I actually tried to do some schema markup myself and it appeared that my formatting was lost on my divs with css id when I introduced this schema mark up. But when I introduced mark up in a separate html element, it appeared that I was able to retain my css formatting.

It may be that I made some coding mistake when I added the mark up to the div with css id in the first place. I post this query because I thought if someone else had actually tried out this schema mark up, they could tell me for certain whether css can be combined with schema mark up in a single html element (e.g. a div) and then I would know whether to go back and fix up what must have been a coding mistake.

Alternatively, it seems extra cumbersome to add schema mark up if you can't integrate it into your existing divs. But if that is the limitation of this schema mark up then I don't want to waste time trying to force it to work inside a div with css id.

[Beverleyh]

I haven't used this particular kind of micro data but it seems like a whole lot of extra faff to me personally. To be honest, if you're writing good copy, and also have logical and clear markup and content separation, you're probably producing search/spider friendly web pages already.

If you treat each web page as a standalone document and provide a descriptive, enticing opening paragraph at the very top of your content, I think you can accomplish much of the scheme.org guidelines suggest without tying yourself in to the extra work. For example, they use the "Avatar" example - how do search engines know if you're talking about an image icon or the movie? - but if you include this information (release year, director, link to imdb) in your opening paragraph anyway, which you should be doing to add meaning and clarification for human readers, I don't really see how a sophisticated bot could overlook the connection either.

[ngors]

Yes I agree it looks like "a whole lot of extra faff". I may be grasping at straws. But based on my own experience, to compete for top ranking, it is not sufficient to "add meaning and clarification for human readers" when all the others have done more or less the same. I'm going to continue to fiddle with the schema code and see if I notice any difference over time.

My question was merely a technical question in relation to css and was not meant to debate the merits of this tool but if anyone does have any direct experience with schema and has found it to be a waste of time or conversely effective, that would also be helpful to know.

[Beverleyh]

Sadly I am not an expert in SEO and it seems that much of the exact "sciences" behind it remains a closely guarded secret to those in-the-know. Gradual experimentation may offer better clarification as you say, but without that expert knowledge (or the time or finances to out-source to a specialist), all I can suggest is to continue researching while writing interesting content, update regularly and make use of social media channels (Twitter/Facebook/Flickr/YouTube) and "traditional" avenues (mailshots/news letters/email signatures/business cards), to help publicise your services/products/articles as much as possible.

[djr33]

SEO is something of a myth. There are important things to do-- make your website easily visible to bots, make your content organized well. But those are to help search engines use your content, not to make your content better.
In the end, there are two primary factors: 1) the quality of your site (for visitors); 2) the amount of traffic you get.

There are other things, such as how many links you have from other websites. But my impression is that those will just boost your existing rating, not actually change it significantly without already having an established website.

You can do things like submit your website to Google (and other search engines) but that's just a way to get them to start looking at your website-- not a way to become more important than others.

So you can speed up the process, and you can boost it a bit, but in the end there's no magic.


Some SEO companies may do just that-- help some, especially if you're just starting out. Others are much less reputable and will attempt to get results in very bad ways-- such as spamming forums with a link to your website to attempt to boost it. But then search engines will also punish websites (by lowering their rating) when this happens.


In short, there's nothing more important to your website than people going there. You also need to design it in a search engine friendly way so that users can find it through search engines, but that's a fundamental basic, not something that will extremely boost anything, beyond helping more people find it in the first place (because it will be available on search engines, which is crucial but assumed).

[xavi]

HI! i Think that you have to built your site for users not for robots, if the users like and find that your page is usefull Google will Know IT!!!

[bizarro]

Microdata is good for increase your ctr in the serp, for example if you have a website where you do review and you use "schema review" it will show star in the serp and that is good.

[djr33]

This thread appears to be possibly attracting spam replies. For that reason it will be closed. If anyone has a new question on a related topic, please post a new thread.