Warning: This tool or project is no longer maintained and kept available only for archival purposes. Since GoodRelations and schema.org have evolved significantly in the past years, the current status available on this page is unlikely to function as expected. We take no responsibility for any damage caused by the use of this outdated work, to the extent legally possible.

Due to a lack of resources, we are unable to provide support for this project outside of consulting projects or sponsored research. Please contact us if you can contribute resources to update and enhance these resources.

GoodRelations - The Web Vocabulary for E-Commerce

This is the archive of the goodrelations dicussion list

GoodRelations is a standardized vocabulary for product, price, and company data that can (1) be embedded into existing static and dynamic Web pages and that (2) can be processed by other computers. This increases the visibility of your products and services in the latest generation of search engines, recommender systems, and other novel applications.

[goodrelations] What parts of Goodrelations are implemented by major search engines?

Jamshaid Ashraf jamshaid.ashraf at gmail.com
Wed Mar 9 01:45:17 CET 2011


In one of our recent study we analyzed the current implemented instance
data, marked with GR Ontology and will be available shortly.

Regarding "What Part" of ontology terms recognized (or indexed) by search
engines (Google and Yahoo!) follows:

"Our investigation found that Yahoo and Google currently includes price,
availability (Google only), description and product pictures drawn from GRO
annotated structured data as part of their enhanced search results"

The above data elements are what get displayed to user but to what extend
search engines extract and store in their database is not know yet. Best
guess is that they extract maximum set of structured data from webpages and
will use in future when, relevent information is helpful to improve search
result such as Product ontology


On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Aaron Bradley <aaranged at yahoo.com> wrote:

>  GoodRelations is one of the markup formats supported by Google to produce
> rich snippets in search engine results pages.
> Rich snippets are described in broad terms here:
> http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2010/11/rich-snippets-for-shopping-sites.html
> And by this suite of Google reference pages:
> http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/topic.py?topic=21997
> This related Google page contains a product properties table comparing
> hProduct, GoodRelations, Google Product format and Google Merchant Center
> feed properties :
> http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=186036
> That sort of answers "what part" of GoodRelations is currently supported by
> Google, insofar as I understand that question.  Namely product-related
> information that appears in rich snippets.  To the best of my knowledge the
> gr:BusinessEntity is not used, say, to produce localized geo-targeted
> listings (e.g., Google Map pins), but I could be wrong and would welcome any
> evidence to the contrary (as I think it would be a sensible use of these
> data by Google).
> Bing has yet to formally support any structured product data, but I would
> be very surprised if this continues indefinitely.  As Yahoo results are now
> powered by Bing, Yahoo's legacy support of GoodRelations may mean that
> enhanced product information appears there:
> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/pipermail/goodrelations/2010-August/000245.html
> More generally in terms of ROI, I'd offer the opinion that structured
> product markup to better inform the search engines and enhance search
> results is here to stay - so I think an investment in GoodRelations is a
> safe one.  And for any merchant that sells products online, there's not a
> lot of additional technical overhead involved in producing GoodRelations
> markup for those already producing a Google Merchant Center feed (where the
> investment for the latter is, perhaps, easier to justify, as it is required
> to turn up in Google shopping results).
> As an aside, have you ever considered a forum Martin?
>   1. What parts of Goodrelations are implemented by    major search
>        engines? (L?szl? T?r?k)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 11:12:10 +0100
> From: L?szl? T?r?k <ltorokjr at gmail.com>
> Subject: [goodrelations] What parts of Goodrelations are implemented
>     by    major search engines?
> To: goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org
> Message-ID:
>     <AANLkTimcSymtmok_AGdEUbkm+R3qYZ=AtToaej-OsEQG at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> Hi,
> I was going over the GoodRelations wiki in the last too days, a very
> comprehensive work even if some of it is still WIP.
> The wiki is well formulated, I did not have any issues with understanding
> the concepts and methods described there.
> However, there is one important missing page that is essential for adopters
> on the data provider side IMHO.
> Considering the compelling use case of semantic SEO and increased
> visibility
> via marking up the products and services with GoodRelations, I cannot
> currently tell, what part of the GoodRelations vocabulary is supported by
> major search engines (Yahoo, Google). I found the links to Google Rich
> Snippets and Yahoo Searchmonkey, however, I am still missing something like
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_(HTML_5).
> It is clear that there is a chicken-and-egg problem with respect to who
> should implement support first. (data providers or data consumers).
> Therefore, I am sure there will be arguments, that the more data providers
> implement, the higher the incentive for search engines to support it.
> However, if I am running an e-commerce site even as small as simple web
> shop
> running on a shared server, I want to be able to assess the return on
> investment that goes into the semantic markup.
> Has this concern been raised previously?
> Many thanks,
> Laszlo T?r?k
> _______________________________________________
> goodrelations mailing list
> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org
> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ebusiness-unibw.org/pipermail/goodrelations/attachments/20110309/dd68fd45/attachment.html>

More information about the goodrelations mailing list