Re: Recommended/Requested Updates to Automotive Schema

Dear Cayley:
Thanks for your email!

I think you are raising two different issues in your message:

1. Major search engines' consumption of schema.org markup and in particular the Google Structured Data Testing Tool.
I join you in asking the major sponsors of schema.org, namely Google, Microsoft, and Yandex, 

a) to increase both the actual and silent usage of automotive-specific schema.org markup,
b) to publish official recipes for schema.org markup for car offers and car spec pages, and
c) to update their validators so that those do not irritate developers adopting more advanced automotive schema.org markup by error and warning messages.

Note that warnings and errors in Google's SDTT do not actually prevent the consumption of your data; they often just indicate a delta to the official markup recipes from Google.

The GAO working group, however, can only make suggestions to Google and others; we have no means beyond that.

2. Modifications in the conceptual model

I understand that you suggest moving 

    https://schema.org/vehicleIdentificationNumber

from Vehicle to the subset of types that can actually have a VIN.

As for this proposal, I am unconvinced. First, schema.org regularly has properties at the most abstract type that includes things that MAY have this characteristics. This leads to potential irritations (e.g. volcanoes can have fax numbers), but simplifies the management of the vocabulary and is no actual logical contradiction. There might actually be an instance of Vehicle that is not a car and has a VIN anywhere in the universe. Second, using artificial classes/types just for the sake of bundling property assignments is not considered good practice by the schema.org Steering Group. We could manually attach the property to the types you suggest, but this will make the management of the vocabulary a bit more challenging.

Hope that helps!

Best wishes
Martin Hepp

-----------------------------------
martin hepp  http://www.heppnetz.de <http://www.heppnetz.de/>
mfhepp@gmail.com <mailto:mfhepp@gmail.com>
@mfhepp










> On 18. Sep 2019, at 21:02, Mosca, Cayley <Cayley.Mosca@cdk.com> wrote:
> 
> Good afternoon,
>  
> I am writing today to recommend an update be made to the Automotive Schema ontology. Background, request, and supporting documentation can be found below for your review.
>  
> Background:
> In the automotive industry, each physical, purchasable vehicle unit is assigned a VIN (Vehicle Identification Number) before leaving its’ respective manufacturing facility. And while this VIN number gives each physical unit its own identifier, the model line itself, which contains the overall engineering concept, aesthetics and performance specifics are not assigned an identifier that would define this concept from other model concepts as conceived by the manufacturer. This identifier is currently satisfied by a model name or title (Ex. Chevrolet Equinox).
>  
> Websites providers have Model Details pages that describe the general attributes of a model of vehicle, e.g. the Chevrolet Equinox, but that are not tied to a specific and purchasable vehicle.  Because of the generic nature of these pages, there is no unique identifying number (e.g. VIN, stock number, etc.) that can appear within the content..
>  
> Additionally, websites providers have Vehicle Detail pages that showcase a specific vehicle, e.g. a Chevrolet Equinox that is the physical vehicle that the shopper would be able to purchase. Because of the specific nature of these pages, there is a unique identifying number (e.g. VIN or stock number) that can appear within the content.
>  
> Update Request to Schema.org:
> As we understand it, schema is hierarchical in nature wherein as you move down to the more specific @types, properties are inherited from their parent.. In this communication we are specifically addressing automotive websites and are referencing properties from the Thing > Product types.
> We have observed an influx of “warnings” in Google’s Structured Data testing tool and in Search Console related to properties inherited from broader parent @types. This is impacting all websites providers within the automotive industry that utilize product type schema.
>  
> We would request that schema.org update certain properties within the @Vehicle type. Today, the Vehicle type includes the recommended property of “vehicleIdentificationNumber”, which is defined in the documentation as VIN. Because VINs are a 1:1 match vin:vehicle, we would recommend moving VIN from the broader vehicle @type to the more specific “Car”, “Motorcycle”, “BusOrCoach”, and “MotorizedBicycles” @types.
>  
> As a part of this effort, we would also request updating certain properties within the @Product type. As a broader @type exists for Rating (which then has more specific @types of aggregateRating), we would request “aggregateRating” and “review” from the @Product type expected properties. Due to the aforementioned nature of vehicles, it makes sense for Model Detail type pages to include the “aggregateRating” rating type but a Vehicle Details type page to include a “review” type. As “sku” and “identifier” are not applicable in automotive, we would request that they be removed from the over-arching “Product” and “Thing” schema respectively and be moved into subcategories in which they are relevant.
>  
> Schema Usage Recommendation to Automotive Websites Providers:
> We would then recommend websites providers use the @Vehicle type to describe a model of vehicle (as described in the Model Detail page above). We would recommend using the @Car type to describe a specific vehicle (as described in the Vehicle Details page above). The warnings being observed would then be resolved.
>  
> Examples and Supporting Evidence:
> Warnings for the “sku” and “global identifier” sub-type properties are being generated on a wide range of automotive sites that are marked up with “Vehicle”, “Car” or “Product” Schema. These events are occurring on various types of websites, from Tier 1 OEM providers that manufacture the vehicles, to Tier 3 dealership websites that sell vehicles to consumers via brick and mortar locations or online purchase portals. These events are also occurring on Automotive review and e-commerce research portals (Amazon My Garage)
>  
> Tier 1 OEM Website Example:
> https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/u/0/#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.gmc.com%2Fsuvs%2Facadia-mid-size-suv
> CDK Tier 3 Auto Dealership website Example:
> https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/u/0/#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.diverchev.com%2Fshowroom%2Fchevrolet
> Amazon “Your Garage” Vehicle Research feature:
> https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/u/0/#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2Fdp%2FB07K8B6M21%3Fref_%3Dgar_tc_vd
> Edmunds Car Reviews:
> https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/u/0/#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.edmunds.com%2Fchrysler%2F300%2F
>  
> Please let me know if there is any further information required to support this request, or if there are other next steps we should complete.
>  
> Sincerely,
>  
> Cayley Mosca
> Product Manager, Earned Media
> p: 313.309.9967 x554-9967
> 
> CDK Global, LLC 
> Evolving the Automotive Retail Experience
> 500 Woodward Ave. 29th Floor
> Detroit, MI 48226
> 
> cdkglobal.com
> 
> Follow us on: Twitter Facebook LinkedIn YouTube
> 
> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by email and delete the message and any attachments from your system.

Received on Thursday, 19 September 2019 09:25:31 UTC