I was looking at YouTube's HTML source code for video pages and saw these tags:
<div id="watch7-container" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/VideoObject">
<link itemprop="url" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikbEBp5BeCM">
<meta itemprop="name" content="THE TEST">
<meta itemprop="duration" content="PT1M10S">
<meta itemprop="unlisted" content="False">
<link itemprop="embedURL" href="http://www.youtube.com/v/ikbEBp5BeCM?autohide=1&version=3">
<meta itemprop="playerType" content="Flash">
<meta itemprop="width" content="640">
<meta itemprop="height" content="480">
Every time the value is a URL, YouTube uses the link
tag instead of the meta
tag.
http://validator.w3.org/ validated both <meta content="http://..." itemprop="url">
and <link href="http://..." itemprop="url">
as being valid HTML.
What is the benefit of doing this?
On the page for the type http://schema.org/VideoObject
you can find the "Expected Type" for each property.
For url
and embedURL
it says: "URL".
If you want to provide a URL in HTML5, you have to use the href
attribute (on link
, a
, …), the src
attribute (img
, …), or any other ways that are defined.
If you use a URL as value of the content
attribute of a meta
element, it will represent a string (looking like a URL), not a URL.
You can find the relevant part in the Microdata spec, 5.4 Values.
They might think that link
elements will be processed in normal indexing robot operations (even when not trying to interpret microdata as per Schema.org), since they generally follow links. Another possible reason is that link checkers can be used to verify URLs when they appear as href
attribute values or otherwise in attributes that specifically take URL values.
Note, however, that the sample code on the Google instructions page Schema.org for Videos uses meta
for embedURL
.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With