microformats

colak · 2013-11-17 17:57:01

Hi all,

I’ve been reading on microformats and I was left more confused to how I was before :)

I’m trying to implement them on some sites but I am not sure as to which ones should be used

ie rel="canonical" v rel="bookmark"

Also what microformat should the sections links menu have? Should it be <a href="/section/" rel="section">? …

And what about the category list?

milosevic · 2013-11-17 19:07:18

I’m not an expert but I think microformats are a bit outdated, specially for it use of classes. I whould look instead for thinks like schema.org to mark meta information.

You can find a lot of examples and test your markup against Google rich snippets validator.

Last edited by milosevic (2013-11-17 19:12:04)

colak · 2013-11-18 06:15:39

Hi Jorge,

You tell me I was reading the wrong site all this time? !!!! :)
Schema looks like it can have its limitations too as it tries too hard to cater for everything but it already leaves many things out… That conclusion is only after reading their event specs.

springworks · 2013-11-18 09:57:32

I’ve been using Schema for a while now. You can see it in action on one of my Textpattern sites for an amateur covers band Carnaby Street where I have used the music event schema.

Searching Google for Carnaby Street band gigs shows the next three gigs listed in the Google search results (it’s the fifth result on the first page for me).

That really demonstrates the benefit of using Schemas – enhanced search result visibility. I’m not sure if you can prove that the listing is higher than it would have been without the Schema markup, but you can’t deny that the listing has a better visibility and therefore someone is more likely to click on it.

milosevic · 2013-11-18 11:18:20

colak dijo:

You tell me I was reading the wrong site all this time? !!!! :)

No! what a want to tell you is thar maybe microformats are not any more the best way to markup your metadata. I have used it a lot several years ago, but now I think de schema approach is more used and more smart because it never relies on HTML classes. There are other ways out there like RDF, etc. but for me schema cover all my actual needs: separate meta from css classes and a high level of recognition by Google to improve the aspect of my SERPs.

Any way in general this things are not exclusive so you can try both systems to markup your meta data, see the results and decide wich one do yo prefer.

Last edited by milosevic (2013-11-18 11:18:33)

philwareham · 2013-11-18 13:45:06

I’m in agreement with Jorge on this, schema.org is the way to go, but with a small amount of microformats where they are still relevant. This table shows the proposed rel values you can use in HTML5. Since they are just proposals, bear in mind that there is no guarantee that all of them will be accepted into the final HTML5 spec.

colak · 2013-11-18 15:26:08

Thanks guys,

Phil, that link is indeed helpful but I still don’t know if bookmark or canonical is better. If we had the possibility of using both I would:)

Re schema… The only way I can think of implementing that is through custom fields with the danger of constant typos.

I’m still trying to figure out a full proof way of implementing those.

springworks · 2013-11-18 15:59:29

colak wrote:

Re schema… The only way I can think of implementing that is through custom fields with the danger of constant typos.

I’m still trying to figure out a full proof way of implementing those.

The way I did it for the band site was to use different custom fields for each element of the scheme data and just put the relevant bit of data in the custom field. I then output those bits of data and wrap them around the appropriate schema markup in my output form. For example, here is the form I use for outputting each gig listing (the excerpt field holds the iframe code for the embedded Google Map):

<article role="article" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/MusicEvent">

  <h3><time datetime="<txp:posted format='iso8601' />" itemprop="startDate"><txp:posted /></time></h3>

  <h1 itemprop="name"><a href="<txp:permlink url="1" />" itemprop="url"><txp:title /></a></h1>

<txp:if_excerpt><div class="map"><txp:excerpt /></div></txp:if_excerpt>

<div class="gig-address" itemprop="location" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress">
  <txp:if_custom_field name="Address"><p itemprop="streetAddress"><txp:custom_field name="Address" /></p></txp:if_custom_field>
  <txp:if_custom_field name="Town"><p itemprop="addressLocality"><txp:custom_field name="Town" /></p></txp:if_custom_field>
  <txp:if_custom_field name="County"><p itemprop="addressRegion"><txp:custom_field name="County" /></p></txp:if_custom_field>
  <txp:if_custom_field name="Postcode"><p itemprop="postalCode"><txp:custom_field name="Postcode" /></p></txp:if_custom_field>
</div>

  <div itemprop="description">
    <txp:body />
  </div>

</article>

philwareham · 2013-11-18 17:33:32

colak wrote:

Phil, that link is indeed helpful but I still don’t know if bookmark or canonical is better. If we had the possibility of using both I would:)

Well, bookmark is not part of the current proposal, so don’t use it. Besides, they serve two completely different purposes anyway.

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#1 2013-11-17 17:57:01

microformats

#2 2013-11-17 19:07:18

Re: microformats

#3 2013-11-18 06:15:39

Re: microformats

#4 2013-11-18 09:57:32

Re: microformats

#5 2013-11-18 11:18:20

Re: microformats

#6 2013-11-18 13:45:06

Re: microformats

#7 2013-11-18 15:26:08

Re: microformats

#8 2013-11-18 15:59:29

Re: microformats

#9 2013-11-18 17:33:32

Re: microformats

Board footer