1

I'm trying to add semantic markup to my website through schemas. I want to list the services of a Hotel so I'm taking a look at the LocationFeatureSpecification. I have the following example, which is a list of hotel features:

<ul>
<li itemprop="amenityFeature" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/LocationFeatureSpecification">
 <span itemprop="name">Sauna</span>
 <meta itemprop="value" content="True">
</li>
<li itemprop="amenityFeature" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/LocationFeatureSpecification">
 <span itemprop="name">Gym</span>
 <meta itemprop="value" content="True">
</li>
</ul>

So my question is, why is a value here necessary? Can it be omitted to imply a default "true" value?

Also, I'd like to give information on whether the service is free or paid (without saying any amount). How can I do that with this property when its description clearly states:

This generic property does not make a statement about whether the feature is included in an offer for the main accommodation or available at extra costs.

ithil
  • 1,758
  • 1
  • 19
  • 37
  • There may be another issue here. Google SDTT does not appear to properly handle `amenityFeature` as a property of `@Place`. @unor is the authority here and we may want to wait until he weighs in on this. As an aside, the `` definition is optional. If you want to markup pricing information, you'll need to use `@Offer`. Offer has flexible terms for expressing price. – Jay Gray Aug 10 '16 at 12:03
  • thanks for your answer, now I'm wondering what if schema.org has a certain specification and Google SDTT has another? which one should you use? but I guess this should be posted as another question... – ithil Aug 11 '16 at 09:22
  • The terms `amenityFeature`/`LocationFeatureSpecification`/etc. are only two days old, and Google’s SDTT typically needs some time until they recognize new terms. -- If Google decides to offer a related search feature (e.g., displaying a hotel rich snippet), they would ideally conform to the definition in Schema.org. Otherwise, what’s the point of using Schema.org in the first place? And they are a Schema.org sponsor after all. But Google would of course require certain properties/types -- Schema.org says "you can use this", Google says "you have to use this and this, *if* you want our feature" – unor Aug 11 '16 at 13:39

1 Answers1

1

You may omit the value property, just like you may omit every other property, as Schema.org never requires any.

It’s not explicitly defined how a LocationFeatureSpecification without a value should be interpreted (i.e., there is no "default" value defined), but I think it’s conceivable that consumers will interpret it as a feature the location has.
But it’s of course also possible that some consumers will require the value property, so if you want to be on the safe side, you might want to provide value even in case its value is true. If you have many amenity features, you could use Microdata’s itemref attribute: only provide one meta element and reference it from all LocationFeatureSpecification items (example).

There doesn’t seem to be a way to explicitly state which amenity feature is gratis/included or non-gratis/optional. You can create corresponding Offer items for the features, like the Schema.org Hotels documentation suggests:

For modeling the fees of optional room features, you can link the offer for the room to an offer for the feature or service via the addOn property.

Community
  • 1
  • 1
unor
  • 92,415
  • 26
  • 211
  • 360