Guide : SoftwareApplication Schema

TL;DR — SoftwareApplication schema is code vous ajouter to une page à propos de an app or software outil que étiquettes the details pour moteur de recherches — “ce is the app’s nom,” “ce is ce que it costs,” “ce is the operating system it runs on,” “ces are its star ratings.” Ajout it correctement rend lune page eligible pour Google’s Software App rich result, qui peut montrer the rating, examiner count, price, and OS correct in the search listing. It’s a différent schema type from Product, and the ratings vous mark up have to be réel.

Ce que SoftwareApplication schema is

Quand vous regarder at an app’s page, vous pouvez lire the nom, the price, “fonctionne on Windows,” and the ⭐ ratings sans thinking à propos de it. A moteur de recherche sees plain text and has to guess ce que chaque bit signifie. SoftwareApplication schema spells it out in code, en utilisant the shared schema.org vocabulary — it tags the name, the category, the operatingSystem, the price, and quelconque utilisateur ratings so Google knows exactly ce que it’s looking at.

It’s almost toujours written as JSON-LD — a petit block of code que sits in the page sans modification how lune page semble.

Pourquoi it’s worth doing

The payoff is the Software App rich result: quand une page qualifies, Google peut montrer the star rating, the number of reviews, the price, and the operating system directement in the search snippet. A listing que montre “4,6 ★ · 8 864 reviews · Free · Android” is plus eye-catching que a plain blue lien, and que peut earn plus clicks.

The three choses vous almost toujours besoin

To be eligible pour the Software App rich result, Google demande pour the app’s nom, an offer (its price — utiliser 0 si it’s free), and au moins un of a examiner score (aggregateRating) or a unique review. Two plus are strongly recommended:

• applicationCategory — the type of app, comme BusinessApplication or GameApplication (Google seulement accepts valeurs from its propre fixed liste).
• operatingSystem — ce que it runs on, comme Windows, Android, or a navigateur.

The chose la plupart personnes obtenir incorrect

SoftwareApplication n’est pas “Product schema for software.” They’re two différent schema.org types with différent requis fields and différent résultats de recherche. Si votre app is a SaaS outil or a downloadable program, SoftwareApplication is usually the correct un — reaching pour Product schema (construit pour physical, purchasable goods) misses the fields Google en réalité checks pour the Software App result. Plus on que in the Avancé tab.

Two plus beginner traps:

• Valid markup ≠ guaranteed rich result. It rend vous eligible; Google encore decides si to afficher it — and eligibility doesn’t promise plus downloads, plus élevé rankings, plus clicks, or AI-search citations soit.
• The ratings have to be réel. Genuine, user-sourced ratings seulement — fabricated or paid-for stars peut trigger a manual action, pas simplement a failed validation.

Vouloir the complet version — the required-vs-recommended split, the applicationCategory enum, choosing the correct subtype, the Product-schema comparison, and the ratings rules? Switch to the Avancé tab.

TL;DR — schema.org/SoftwareApplication markup (usually JSON-LD) rend an app or software page eligible pour Google’s Software App rich result (rating, examiner count, price, OS in the snippet). Google’s requis fields are narrow: name, offers (with price; 0 pour free apps, priceCurrency recommended une fois price

0), and au moins un of aggregateRating or review. applicationCategory (from a fixed enum) and operatingSystem are recommended. The rest of the grand schema.org property liste (downloadUrl, fileSize, screenshot, permissions…) is spec-valid but SEO-inert pour ce result. Préférer the la plupart spécifique subtype (WebApplication, MobileApplication, VideoGame) over generic SoftwareApplication. It’s a separate type from Product with a separate rich-result surface — a paid SaaS/web app devrait généralement utiliser SoftwareApplication, pas Product. Ratings doit be genuine and user-sourced; fabricated or misleading examiner markup violates Google’s structured-data policies.

Ce que SoftwareApplication schema unlocks

The concrete payoff is the Software App rich result — Google’s enhanced listing pour app and software pages que peut surface the star rating, examiner count, price, and pris en charge operating system in the snippet. schema.org describes the type itself in a unique line — “A software application.” — and Google’s Search Central docs turn que into a spécifique eligibility spec pour the rich result. The whole point of getting ce markup correct is to be eligible pour que snippet; valid markup seulement puts vous in the running, it doesn’t guarantee afficher — and it doesn’t promise downloads, rankings, CTR, star visibility, or AI-search citations soit. Google dit it plainly: “Google ne fait pas guarantee que votre données structurées va montrer up in résultats de recherche, même si votre page is marked up correctement.”

Requis and recommended properties

Google’s requirements ici are refreshingly narrow — narrower que la plupart third-party guides faire les regarder. Here’s the réel split from Google’s Software App docs:

That’s the entier eligibility surface. name + offers + one-of-rating/examiner, with applicationCategory and operatingSystem as the two recommendations worth ajout every temps.

Handling free apps vs. paid apps

Google is explicit à propos de free apps: “Si the app is disponible sans payment, définir offers.price to 0.” Don’t drop offers entirely parce que the app is free — offers is on the requis liste; a free app devrait inclure it with price: 0, pas omit it. And pour paid apps: “Si the app has a price supérieur que 0, we recommend aussi notamment the offers.priceCurrency property (or Google va essayer to trouver the correct currency).” So définir priceCurrency to a valid ISO 4217 code comme USD une fois you’re charging anything.

The applicationCategory enum — and the quiet mistake it causes

applicationCategory seulement accepts valeurs from Google’s documented liste. The accepted valeurs are:

GameApplication · SocialNetworkingApplication · TravelApplication · ShoppingApplication · SportsApplication · LifestyleApplication · BusinessApplication · DesignApplication · DeveloperApplication · DriverApplication · EducationalApplication · HealthApplication · FinanceApplication · SecurityApplication · BrowserApplication · CommunicationApplication · DesktopEnhancementApplication · EntertainmentApplication · MultimediaApplication · HomeApplication · UtilitiesApplication · ReferenceApplication

Vous pouvez aussi utiliser the schema.org URL formulaire (e.g. https://schema.org/GameApplication), but the plain text string is standard pratique. Here’s the trap: a valeur outside que liste — dire a descriptive "Productivity Software" — isn’t a hard error. Google simplement silently ignores it, so the rest of votre markup validates and vous jamais voir a warning, but the field isn’t doing anything. Que quiet no-op is un of the la plupart Erreurs fréquentes I’d expect to trouver auditing app pages.

Choisir the la plupart spécifique subtype

SoftwareApplication has several plus spécifique subtypes in schema.org — its “More specific Types” are MobileApplication, WebApplication, VideoGame, OperatingSystem, and RuntimePlatform. Où un fits, utiliser it au lieu de the generic type:

• WebApplication — a browser-based SaaS outil (ce is the courant cas pour the audience I écrire pour).
• MobileApplication — a native iOS/Android app.
• VideoGame — a game, but voir the caveat ci-dessous — VideoGame alone isn’t suffisant pour the rich result.

Google’s Software App eligibility docs treat SoftwareApplication, MobileApplication, and WebApplication interchangeably, so specificity costs vous nothing in eligibility pour ceux three and adds precision. VideoGame is the un exception: Google is explicit que “Google doesn’t montrer a rich result pour Software Apps que seulement have the VideoGame type. To assurez-vous que votre Software App is eligible pour afficher as a rich result, co-type the VideoGame type with un autre type” — Google’s propre exemple co-types it with MobileApplication, e.g. "@type": ["VideoGame", "MobileApplication"]. So a game page nécessite VideoGame plus un autre eligible application type in the même @type array, pas VideoGame on its propre. Si vous run a SaaS product, WebApplication is usually the honest, precise choice.

SoftwareApplication vs. Product schema — the disambiguation que matters

Ce is the confusion I la plupart vouloir to clair up, parce que SaaS marketers reach pour Product schema reflexively — the app is “a thing you buy,” so Product feels correct. It usually isn’t the correct pick. The correct appel follows ce que lune page’s entity en réalité is and qui Google fonctionnalité you’re targeting — pas a blanket rule que every SaaS, boxed-software, subscription, or app-marketplace page defaults to un type.

SoftwareApplication and Product are separate schema.org types with separate requis/recommended fields and separate Google rich-result surfaces:

• SoftwareApplication cares à propos de operatingSystem and applicationCategory, and feeds the Software App rich result.
• Product cares à propos de gtin/mpn/sku/brand, availability, shipping and renvoie, and feeds product snippets and merchant listings — surfaces construit autour physical, purchasable goods and (optionally) a Google Merchant Center feed.

Ceux Product-side conventions — GTIN/MPN catalog matching, shipping details, merchant feeds — don’t map cleanly onto software. A downloadable app or a SaaS subscription doesn’t have a UPC or a shipping policy. So pour installable or runnable software with an OS and a category, utiliser SoftwareApplication (or a subtype). Reach pour Product schema seulement quand the item genuinely behaves comme a generic sellable bon — pour instance boxed software sold comme a retail SKU, or a subscription you’re deliberately modeling as a plain purchasable product plutôt que as the application itself. Picking the incorrect type signifie Google checks pour fields votre markup doesn’t have and misses the ones que en réalité drive le résultat vous vouloir. (The Product schema article on ce site goes deep on que side; ce is the app-native counterpart to it.)

Ces aren’t toujours forced soit/or nodes, soit. Google’s propre worked exemple pour VideoGame co-types it with MobileApplication in the même @type array plutôt que picking un — proof que a unique entity peut carry plus que un type quand it genuinely is plus que un chose. The même logic s’applique ici: si une page’s entity truthfully is les deux an application and a generically sellable bon, co-typing (or a @graph with les deux nodes) peut be the honest réponse. Don’t reach pour que as a par défaut hedge — do it parce que the entity en réalité supports les deux, and document pourquoi.

Reviews and ratings — the eligibility rules que en réalité matter

Parce que aggregateRating/review is partie of the requis définir, the ratings rules are load-bearing ici, and Google incorporates its general Examiner snippet guidelines by référence: the aggregateRating and review docs les deux dire to “Follow the Examiner snippet guidelines and liste of requis and recommended” properties. The rules que bite:

• Ratings doit come from réel utilisateurs. Google: “Ratings doit be sourced directement from utilisateurs.”
• Don’t pull in autre sites’ ratings. Google: “Don’t aggregate reviews or ratings from autre websites.”
• Si vous montrer individual reviews, aussi montrer an aggregate. Google: “Si vous inclure multiple individual reviews, aussi inclure an aggregate rating of the individual reviews.”

Un nuance worth getting correct, parce que it’s facile to over-state. There’s a self-serving-reviews ineligibility rule que obtient quoted a lot — “Si the entity that’s being reviewed contrôle the reviews à propos de itself, leur pages que utiliser LocalBusiness or quelconque autre type of Organization données structurées are ineligible pour star examiner fonctionnalité.” Remarque ce que it’s scoped to: LocalBusiness/Organization markup. Google’s review-snippet docs liste SoftwareApplication among the normal reviewable item types (alongside Product, Book, Course, Game, Movie, Recipe, and others), and it is pas swept into que spécifique LocalBusiness/Organization ban. So app schema ratings on votre propre page are eligible — but that’s pas a loophole. Ils encore have to be genuine and user-sourced, and Google’s broader fake-review enforcement (removal at scale, spam policies, manual actions) s’applique to app ratings simplement comme everything sinon.

Qui leads to the warning I vouloir to faire loudly, parce que la plupart competitor guides skip it entirely: fabricated, incentivized, or editorially-curated ratings are a manual action risk, pas simplement a validation problem. Google’s propre guidelines section on the Software App page ties back to Search Essentials and the general structured-data policies: “Si votre site violates un or plus of ces guidelines, alors Google may prendre manual action contre it. Une fois vous have remedied the problem, vous pouvez submit votre site pour reconsideration.” And it’s worth understanding how beaucoup a rich-result manual action peut escalate — voir the Quotes tab pour Danny Sullivan’s general statement que a rich-result manual action peut lead to votre résultats enrichis being supprimé and peut widen into a broader spam manual action que affecte ranking. That’s general rich-result policy, pas a SoftwareApplication-specific ruling — but it’s exactly pourquoi casually faking app stars is a bad trade.

Autre schema.org properties worth knowing — but pas requis

schema.org donne SoftwareApplication a big property liste au-delà the requis définir: downloadUrl, installUrl, fileSize, screenshot, featureList, softwareVersion, permissions, memoryRequirements, storageRequirements, operatingSystem, applicationSubCategory, applicationSuite, and plus. A few, with schema.org’s propre descriptions:

• downloadUrl — “If the file can be downloaded, URL to download the binary.”
• fileSize — “Size of the application / package (e.g. 18MB). In the absence of a unit (MB, KB etc.), KB va be assumed.”
• permissions — “Permission(s) requis to run the app (Par exemple, a mobile app may exiger complet internet accès or may run seulement on wifi).”
• screenshot — “A link to a screenshot image of the app.”

Ces are tout valid and peut aider autre consumers (AI agents, aggregators, votre propre tooling) comprendre the app — but none of les are requis or recommended by Google’s Software App rich-result docs, and none of les affecter rich-result eligibility. I’m appel ce out parce que third-party guides routinely pad leur “requirements” listes with downloadUrl, screenshot, and fileSize to regarder comprehensive, leaving readers polishing fields que ne faites pashing pour the snippet they’re chasing. Ajouter les si they’re utile pour autre raisons; don’t ajouter les thinking they’ll earn or améliorer the rich result.

Bing and autre engines

Bing supports schema.org and JSON-LD broadly and validates markup via its Markup Validator, but it doesn’t publish a dedicated “Software App” requis/recommended property table or a distinct app rich-result surface the façon Google fait. So schema.org/SoftwareApplication is valid, generically-supported markup on Bing — there’s simplement aucun bespoke Bing app rich result to target. Bing recognizing the même vocabulary isn’t fonctionnalité parity with Google’s Software App result: don’t assume the même markup earns vous an equivalent rating/price/OS snippet on Bing, since Bing hasn’t documented que it builds un.

Où ce sits in the bigger picture

SoftwareApplication is un type in the wider données structurées / balisage de données structurées world, and the ratings mechanics it leans on are shared with the examiner and aggregateRating vocabularies. Pour a paid app, the Product schema article is its closest neighbor and the placer to go quand vous decide the item really is a generic sellable bon plutôt que the application itself. And si votre implementer is a SaaS marketing team, ce markup usually lives on the même pricing and landing pages que the broader SaaS SEO fonctionner covers.

AI summary

A condensed prendre on the Avancé version:

• Ce que c’est: schema.org/SoftwareApplication markup (usually JSON-LD) que étiquettes an app/software page’s name, category, OS, price, and ratings so Google peut montrer a Software App rich result (rating, examiner count, price, OS in the snippet).
• Requis pour eligibility: name, offers (with price; 0 pour free apps, priceCurrency recommended une fois price > 0), and au moins un of aggregateRating or review.
• Recommended: applicationCategory (from Google’s fixed enum) and operatingSystem. An out-of-list applicationCategory valeur is silently ignored, pas flagged — a courant quiet mistake.
• Subtypes: préférer the la plupart spécifique — WebApplication (SaaS/navigateur outils), MobileApplication (native apps), VideoGame (games) — over generic SoftwareApplication. Specificity costs nothing in eligibility except pour VideoGame: Google won’t montrer the rich result pour VideoGame alone — co-type it with un autre application type (Google’s propre exemple: ["VideoGame", "MobileApplication"]).
• vs. Product schema (the clé confusion): separate types, separate requis fields, separate rich-result surfaces. SoftwareApplication cares à propos de operatingSystem/ applicationCategory; Product cares à propos de gtin/mpn/shipping/merchant feeds. Utiliser SoftwareApplication pour installable/runnable software with an OS and category; utiliser Product seulement quand it’s genuinely a generic sellable bon (e.g. boxed software as a retail SKU).
• Ratings: doit be genuine and user-sourced; don’t aggregate autre sites’ ratings; si vous montrer individual reviews, inclure an aggregate. The self-serving-reviews ineligibility rule is scoped to LocalBusiness/Organization, pas SoftwareApplication — app ratings on votre propre page are eligible, but doit be réel. Fake/incentivized ratings risk a manual action, and a rich-result manual action peut escalate into a broader ranking-affecting un (general Google policy, pas app-specific).
• Spec-valid but SEO-inert: downloadUrl, fileSize, screenshot, permissions, featureList, softwareVersion — fine to ajouter pour autre consumers, but ils don’t affecter the Software App rich result.
• Bing: supports schema.org/JSON-LD generically; aucun dedicated app rich-result spec.
• Eligibility ≠ afficher: valid markup seulement rend lune page eligible — pas guaranteed downloads, rankings, CTR, or AI-search citations.
• VideoGame exception: Google won’t montrer the rich result pour VideoGame alone — co-type it with un autre eligible application type (e.g. MobileApplication).

Documentation officielle

Primary-source documentation from the moteur de recherches and the spec.

Google — the Software App rich result

• Software App (SoftwareApplication) données structurées — the requis/recommended property liste, the applicationCategory enum, the free-app price: 0 rule, the VideoGame co-typing requirement, and the worked exemple.
• Examiner snippet (Examiner, AggregateRating) données structurées — the rating rules incorporated by référence: user-sourced ratings, aucun cross-site aggregation, and the self-serving-reviews scope (LocalBusiness/Organization).
• General Données structurées Guidelines — the spam-policy backbone; aucun guarantee of afficher même with correct markup, and the prohibited practices behind manual actions.
• Résultats enrichis Tester — validate the markup and vérifier rich-result eligibility.

Spec — schema.org

• schema.org/SoftwareApplication — the type definition, subtypes (MobileApplication, WebApplication, VideoGame, OperatingSystem, RuntimePlatform), and the complet property liste.
• schema.org/applicationCategory and schema.org/operatingSystem — the two recommended properties.

Bing / Microsoft

• Marking up votre site with données structurées — Bing’s general schema.org/JSON-LD prise en charge.

Quotes from the source

On-the-record statements from Google and the spec. Où a source page exposes the text, the lien is a deep lien que jumps to the quoted passage.

Google docs — requis and recommended fields

• “The name of the app.” — Recherche Google Central, Software App données structurées (name). Jump to quote
• “An offer to sell the app. For developers, offers can indicate the marketplaces that carry the application.” — Recherche Google Central (offers). Jump to quote
• “If the app is available without payment, set offers.price to 0.” — Recherche Google Central. Jump to quote
• “The type of app (for example, BusinessApplication or GameApplication).” — Recherche Google Central (applicationCategory). Jump to quote
• “The operating system(s) required to use the app (for example, Windows 7, OSX 10.6, Android 1.6).” — Recherche Google Central (operatingSystem). Jump to quote

Google docs — the VideoGame co-typing rule

• “Google doesn’t montrer a rich result pour Software Apps que seulement have the VideoGame type. To assurez-vous que votre Software App is eligible pour afficher as a rich result, co-type the VideoGame type with un autre type.” — Recherche Google Central, Software App données structurées. Jump to quote

Google docs — reviews and ratings (incorporated by référence)

• “Ratings must be sourced directly from users.” — Recherche Google Central, Examiner snippet docs. Examiner snippet docs
• “Don’t aggregate reviews or ratings from other websites.” — Recherche Google Central, Examiner snippet docs. Examiner snippet docs
• On self-serving reviews (scoped to LocalBusiness/Organization, pas SoftwareApplication): “If the entity that’s being reviewed controls the reviews about itself, their pages that use LocalBusiness or any other type of Organization structured data are ineligible for star review feature.” Examiner snippet docs

Google docs — aucun guarantee of afficher

• “Google does not guarantee that your structured data will show up in search results, even if your page is marked up correctly.” — Recherche Google Central, General Données structurées Guidelines. Jump to quote

Danny Sullivan, Google (general rich-result manual-action policy, via Moteur de recherche Roundtable — pas SoftwareApplication-specific)

• A rich-result manual action peut lead to the removal of votre résultats enrichis from displaying dans la recherche Google, and peut aussi escalate into a broader spam manual action que involves ranking. Lire the coverage

SoftwareApplication schema cheat sheet

The minimum pour the Software App rich result

name + offers (with price; 0 pour free apps) + au moins un of aggregateRating / review.

Recommended (ajouter every temps)

Pick the la plupart spécifique type

SoftwareApplication vs. Product — qui un?

applicationCategory enum valeurs

GameApplication · SocialNetworkingApplication · TravelApplication · ShoppingApplication · SportsApplication · LifestyleApplication · BusinessApplication · DesignApplication · DeveloperApplication · DriverApplication · EducationalApplication · HealthApplication · FinanceApplication · SecurityApplication · BrowserApplication · CommunicationApplication · DesktopEnhancementApplication · EntertainmentApplication · MultimediaApplication · HomeApplication · UtilitiesApplication · ReferenceApplication

Spec-valid but SEO-inert (don’t affecter the rich result): downloadUrl, installUrl, fileSize, screenshot, featureList, softwareVersion, permissions, memoryRequirements, storageRequirements.

Fast facts

• Format: JSON-LD (Google’s recommended format).
• Valid markup = eligible, pas guaranteed to montrer.
• Ratings doit be genuine + user-sourced; fabricated stars = manual-action risk.
• Self-serving-review ban = LocalBusiness/Organization seulement, pas SoftwareApplication.

SoftwareApplication vs. Product schema — qui un pour my app or SaaS page?

Fonctionner bas the questions to land on the correct type pour lune page you’re marking up.

SoftwareApplication schema Mythes et erreurs à éviter

Myth: “Quelconque star-rating markup on an app page qualifies pour the Software App rich result.” Ratings doit be genuine and user-sourced per the Examiner snippet guidelines que the Software App docs incorporate by référence. Fabricated, incentivized, or editorially-curated ratings aren’t simplement a rendering échec — they’re a manual-action risk. Google’s guidelines section warns que “Google may take manual action” contre sites que violate les, and a rich-result manual action peut escalate into a broader, ranking-affecting un.

Myth: “SoftwareApplication is just Product schema for a paid app.” They’re distinct schema.org types with différent requis/recommended fields (operatingSystem and applicationCategory vs. gtin/mpn/brand/shipping) and différent Google rich-result surfaces. Marking up a SaaS product as Product signifie Google checks pour fields votre page doesn’t have and skips the ones the Software App result en réalité reads.

Myth: “Vous besoin every schema.org/SoftwareApplication property (downloadUrl, fileSize, screenshot, permissions…) to obtenir the rich result.” Google’s eligibility définir is narrow — name, offers, un of aggregateRating/review, with applicationCategory/operatingSystem recommended. The rest of the big property liste is spec-valid but SEO-inert pour ce result. Don’t burn temps polishing fields que don’t déplacer the snippet.

Myth: “applicationCategory accepts quelconque descriptive text comme ‘Productivity Software’.” Google seulement recognizes its fixed enum (BusinessApplication, UtilitiesApplication, and so on). Anything outside the liste is silently ignored, pas flagged — so the field semble fine and ne fait pashing. Pick the closest enum valeur.

Myth: “SoftwareApplication ratings are exempt from the self-serving-reviews rule, so anything goes.” Vrai que SoftwareApplication isn’t swept into the LocalBusiness/Organization-scoped ineligibility rule — but it’s encore bound by the general genuine-rating, user-sourced, no-aggregation requirements and by Google’s broader fake-review enforcement. “Eligible” n’est pas “unpoliced.”

Myth: “Free apps don’t need offers.” offers is on Google’s requis liste. A free app devrait inclure it with price: 0 — omitting offers entirely parce que the app costs nothing breaks eligibility. Google literally dit “set offers.price to 0,” pas “drop it.”

Mistake: aggregating ratings from app stores or examiner sites into votre propre markup. Google’s rule is a flat “Don’t aggregate reviews or ratings from other websites.” The ratings in votre markup have to be the ones vous collected from votre propre utilisateurs.

Clean vs. broken SoftwareApplication JSON-LD

A minimal free web app (WebApplication subtype)

Free SaaS outil, price: 0, a réel applicationCategory enum valeur, operatingSystem, and a genuine aggregate rating:

{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "WebApplication",
  "name": "Acme Invoice Builder",
  "applicationCategory": "BusinessApplication",
  "operatingSystem": "Web browser",
  "offers": {
    "@type": "Offer",
    "price": "0",
    "priceCurrency": "USD"
  },
  "aggregateRating": {
    "@type": "AggregateRating",
    "ratingValue": "4.7",
    "ratingCount": "1284"
  }
}

A paid SaaS app (priceCurrency définir, price supérieur que zero)

{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "WebApplication",
  "name": "Acme Analytics Pro",
  "applicationCategory": "BusinessApplication",
  "operatingSystem": "Web browser",
  "offers": {
    "@type": "Offer",
    "price": "29.00",
    "priceCurrency": "USD"
  },
  "aggregateRating": {
    "@type": "AggregateRating",
    "ratingValue": "4.5",
    "reviewCount": "612"
  }
}

The même app, broken

Every line flagged ci-dessous is a réel, courant échec:

{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "WebApplication",
  "name": "Acme Analytics Pro",
  "applicationCategory": "Productivity Software",
  "offers": {
    "@type": "Offer",
    "price": "$29.00",
    "priceCurrency": "dollars"
  },
  "aggregateRating": {
    "@type": "AggregateRating",
    "ratingValue": "4.5"
  }
}

What’s incorrect:

• applicationCategory: "Productivity Software" — pas a Google enum valeur, so it’s silently ignored. Utiliser "BusinessApplication" (or the closest listed valeur).
• price: "$29.00" — a currency symbol breaks the numeric parse. Utiliser "29.00".
• priceCurrency: "dollars" — doit be a valid ISO 4217 code: "USD".
• aggregateRating with aucun reviewCount/ratingCount — an aggregate rating nécessite a count to be valid.
• Aucun operatingSystem — recommended; ajouter it (e.g. "Web browser", "Android").

Courant Search Console messages → fixes

Testez vos connaissances: SoftwareApplication Schema

Five rapide questions on schema.org/SoftwareApplication, the Software App rich result, and how it differs from Product schema. Pick an réponse pour chaque, alors vérifier.

Ressources utiles

My writing on ce topic

I haven’t publié a standalone SoftwareApplication schema guide of my propre — so plutôt que point vous at something que doesn’t exist, the honest déplacer is to send vous to the principal sources ci-dessous and to the connexe structured-data fonctionner on ce site. Pour the broader vocabulary and où SoftwareApplication fits, voir the Balisage de données structurées and Données structurées hubs; pour the app-adjacent-but-different cas, the Product schema article; and pour the AI angle, Balisage de données structurées pour AI.

From autour the industry

• Software App (SoftwareApplication) données structurées (Recherche Google Central) — the authoritative requis/recommended property liste, the applicationCategory enum, and the free-app price: 0 rule.
• Examiner snippet données structurées (Google) — the rating rules the Software App docs incorporate by référence (user-sourced ratings, aucun aggregation, self-serving-review scope).
• General Données structurées Guidelines (Google) — the spam-policy backbone and the “no guarantee of display” statement.
• schema.org/SoftwareApplication — the spec: type definition, subtypes, and the complet property liste.
• Google Dit Résultats enrichis Manual Actions Peut Lead To Removal Of Résultats enrichis & Broader Spam Penalties (Moteur de recherche Roundtable) — Danny Sullivan’s general statement on how a rich-result manual action peut escalate.
• Marking up votre site with données structurées (Bing Webmaster Outils) — Bing’s general schema.org/JSON-LD prise en charge.

Journal des modifications