Best practices for Structured Data to make both Google and Facebook happy

I am the effective webmaster of a small corporation. I want to add a Corporation Structured Data object to our corporate site. I hope to accomplish three things by adding this Structured Data:

  1. Google’s Rich Cards will correctly display my company’s name, logo, etc.
  2. Facebook’s Rich Cards (does Facebook call them something else?) will correctly display my company’s name, logo, etc.
  3. Hopefully I’ll get slightly better SEO

I (generally) understand how to write structured data, but I don’t understand where to put my Corporation object in particular. I need Google/Facebook to understand that my company’s website is At the same time, I need Google/Facebook to understand that any URI within this domain (e.g. should use my company’s name, logo, etc. Where do I put my Corporation object to allow all pages in the domain to “belong to” my object, but only the homepage “owns” the object?

Most effective structured data for a Person knowledge graph panel?

I am trying to make sure the structured data on my personal portfolio site is set up best to encourage a Google Knowledge Graph Person panel for my name. While I know structured data alone isn’t enough, I know it can help.

Right now, I have some Person json-ld written that includes a lot of info about myself such as name, jobTitle, alumniOf, address (country/locality only), and sameAs which lists my social media profiles.

According to Google guidelines they want the info in structured data to also be user-visible, however, the info referenced in my Person structured data block is not all on the same page, it’s spread out across my website. My job title and location are on my /contact/ page, my alma mater is on my /resume/ page, and my main / page is what’s listed by the url of the Person structured data.

Google says don’t add info to structured data that’s not visible, even if it’s accurate:

You should not create blank or empty pages just to hold structured data; nor should you add structured data about information that is not visible to the user, even if the information is accurate.

and that violating guidelines could prevent rich results:

Violating a quality guideline can prevent syntactically correct structured data from being displayed as a rich result in Google Search

In light of that, what is the most effective way in my case to use my Person json-ld to encourage Google to display a knowledge graph panel?

product spotted as article in google structured data

i have fixed all errors and warnings of my website with Schema & Structured Data For WP.

problem is that product pages defined as article so i got bad rank. i’m not very familar with coding.

is there any simple way for fix this problem?

<meta property="og:type" content="article"/> 

google structure data tester

google structure data tester

please tell me if need more information.

Textbook on how processors are actually structured at the circuit level

I am looking for a textbook that helps me understand how basic digital electronic units are used to build complicated integrated circuits.

I have looked online for textbooks, but what I have found tends to be either

  1. At a level of abstraction below what I’m looking for: textbooks on the nitty gritty electrical engineering aspects of circuits. They tend to have hundreds of pages on how a transistor even works. Example: Foundations of Analog and Digital Circuits by Agarwal and Lang.

  2. At a level of abstraction above what I’m looking for: textbooks that take “operations” and functional units as the basic units. E.g. they take the existence of an ALU as given, without explaining, in detail, how to make an ALU out of components like AND gates and flip-flops. They tend to emphasize programming language concepts rather than actual digital circuits and signals. Example: Modern Processor Design by Shen and Lipasti

Both of these are interesting of course. But I’m looking for a textbook that goes into the basic components of a microchip, abstracting away from the most nitty gritty physical implementation, but while capturing the basic low level details of micro chip design.

I want to basically know how AND, OR, gates etc, and flip flops, and clock signal (and whatever other units there might be) are used to create cache memory, ALU’s, to make sure that the circuit is synchronized etc.

I am not sure what keywords I should be looking for to find such a textbook.

How to credit a website’s designers and developers in structured data

Our web dev agency is working with a design agency to build a website for a client. I want to make it clear to google that our client owns the site, but that we and the design agency made it. So far here is what I have:

<script type="application/ld+json">{     "@type":"Organization",     "name":"Our Client",     "@id":"/#Organization",     "details":"checked against google structured data testing tool",     "@context":"" }</script><script type="application/ld+json">{     "@type":"WebSite",     "@id":"/#WebSite",     "details":"checked against google structured data testing tool",     "sourceOrganization":{         "@id":"/#Organization"     },     "creator":[         {             "@type":"Organization",             "name":"Web Dev Agency",             "@id":""         },         {             "@type":"Organization",             "name":"Design Studio",             "@id":""         }     ],     "@context":"" }</script> 

and then objects on the page are linked by isPartOf to a WebPage, which similarly links to the WebSite itself.

First off, does this make sense? I’m still figuring out structured data and haven’t been able to find examples of this particular use case, but the structured data testing tool is giving me the OK.

Is there a better way to show that our client owns the website and is responsible for its day to day running? I’ve also considered the Producer and Publisher types, but nothing feels quite right for this relationship.

I’d like to credit individual designers and developers – would it be better to have the website creator objects as Persons, pointing to unique @ids, or have them as members of the creator organisations as they stand?

Correct value for ItemAvailability in structured data vs. google shopping feed

I’ve been working on implementing a data feed for Google merchant center and after submitting it for the first time I noticed that Google’s automatic update changed some of our items’ availability from out of stock to in stock with this message:

Your product’s availability status was automatically updated to match the data on your landing page.

A help article ( explains that this is likely to occur due to a discrepancy between the data provided in the feed and structured data shown on the product page itself. It goes on to say:

Check your product data for those products (using the item ID), and make sure that each item has the same values for availability as is represented on your own site and in its structured data.

There is a problem here though since we use OnlineOnly in our structured data and this option is not valid in the merchant center feed. My best guess is that Google classifies OnlineOnly the same as in stock.

The items in question are items that we don’t keep physical stock of, but like many online retailers these items are available directly from the supplier and fulfilled for orders as they are placed. We don’t want to falsely claim that they are in stock, so originally OnlineOnly seemed like the best option for our structured data.

At this point I’m left with a few options that I can think of to resolve this:

  • Change both values to out of stock
  • Change both values to in stock
  • Allow the discrepancy stand and let Google do as they see fit

Can anyone advise what is the most correct value for availability on both the feed and our structured data in this situation?

Here’s how my niche SaaS company structured our SEO strategy

I run marketing at a venture-backed SaaS company and wanted to share with you guys some of the ways that we (and many other SaaS companies) go about in order to create a comprehensive/effective SEO strategy.

–Let's fictitiously say that my company offers a CRM for Animal Shelters.–

IMO, the SEO strategy begins with and comes down to the keywords you intend on targeting. And I break these down into two groups. Direct and Indirect.

Direct: Keywords used to search for the specific tools…

Here's how my niche SaaS company structured our SEO strategy

Explain structured support vector machines

To understand Structured Support Vector Machines I am reading the following paper: Large Margin Methods for Structured and Interdependent Output Variables. I’ve got one minor question and a bigger one. Both are about the section 2.2.1:

enter image description here

My question is:

1) Since $ Ψ$ is the a joint feature map $ Ψ(x,y) ≡ Φ(x)⊗Λ^c(y)$ , why is the equation (3) nonlinear?


2) Explain better how one arrive at the equations in (4) starting with constraints in (3).

Shall I localise and translate structured data into each available language?

Let’s say we have a website that is offered in English and German. Assume the Services offered –

{ "@context": "", "@type": "Service", "serviceType": "#{t('TRANSLATION.MARKETING')}", "provider": { "@type": "LocalBusiness", "name": "#{Settings.brand.company_name}" } 

— are available in UK, Ireland, Germany, Austria and beautiful Switzerland (hence, content is available in both EN & DE).

Should we add the structured data both on EN & DE pages in English, or shall we translate it into each respective language?

Example – Translated JSON-LD with LocaleApp (Ruby on Rails):

"areaServed": [ { "@type": "Country", "name": "#{t('generals.united-kingdom')}" }, "@type": "Country", "name": "#{t('generals.ireland')}" }, "@type": "Country", "name": "#{t('generals.austria')}" }, "@type": "Country", "name": "#{t('generals.germany')}" }, "@type": "Country", "name": "#{t('generals.switzerland')}" }, ] 

or just keeping it simple and tag in English (on both EN & DE):

"areaServed": [ { "@type": "Country", "name": "United Kingdom" }, "@type": "Country", "name": "Ireland" }, "@type": "Country", "name": "Germany" }, "@type": "Country", "name": "Austria" }, "@type": "Country", "name": "Switzerland" }, ] 

I am split about this, given the information is for search engines, and to make sense of the content (Semantic Web). Of course anything tagged on a page needs to correspond to its content (according to Google Best Practice). However, JSON-LD remains something we feed to SEs and not the user. So by that logic, offering it in English should be sufficient. I have not been able to find a clear answer to this.

So if anyone has a link that confirms the best practice that would be amazing – or perhaps has experience with multilingual pages.

Google Adds Breadcrumb Structured Data To Search Console Enhancement Report

I got a errors notice in my email this am for one of the sites I look after regarding this:


Google added another report this week to Google Search Console’s enhancement report section. The new report shows you about structured data errors, warnings and success specifically with breadcrumb structured data….

Google Adds Breadcrumb Structured Data To Search Console Enhancement Report
Sep 20, 2019

But when I looked the problem is against good web design practices.

There is an old good web design practice to not include a live link in your navigation for the current page the person is on.

Home > Category Name > Sub Category Name > Product Name

The first 3 parts of this breadcrumb trail would be clickable so the person can see where they are in the site structure and go back if necessary without using the back button. The last part (Product Name) is not clickable for usability and good practices reasons but Google wants it clickable.

So who wins? Google or good usability/practices?