Google changes its review structured data requirements

Google has now updated its requirements for the review of structured data. Failure to follow the review structured data requirement of Google can make the web page ineligible to appear in a rich result in SERPs for the keyword searches.

The successful implementation of the review structure data can make a site eligible for the review-rich result. It includes the stars in the SERPs. Obtaining this rich results for a display in SERP gets coveted highly as it can lead to further traffic.

The review of structured data is very important as it relates to products. IT can further influence earning. Affiliate sites and retailers can both use the review structured data as the review snippets can lead to more traffic and sales. Hence it is very important to get it right.

While the structured data come with an optional warning, then generally, it is ok. The error warnings can appear as indicative of a severe problem which can result in the ineligibility of a page for a rich result.

Review structured data are the reviews of things like stories, events, products, courses, or a business. Not all the reviews will qualify for the review-rich results. There are 17 types that Google shows the result for. Review of those things which are not one of the 17 items will become ineligible for a rich result.

It is very necessary to publish correct structured data. To do it, you will need to use a valid data type within the limited list of Google to qualify valid review types.

Google has further announced a change to the field of author name and structured data. The author. The name field now has its limitation to only 100 characters. Review structured data with more than 100 characters will not become eligible for rich results in SERPs.

Schema.org is the organization that is responsible for the creation and maintenance of the Schema structured data rules. However, Google itself is free to set its requirements for what needs to use it for rich results in SERPs.

It can be prudent enough to review the author’s structured data property to ensure that it falls under the limit of 100 characters. It means that the authors that are more than 100 may make the review structured data ineligible for rich results.