Added datePublished field to comment schema to fix GSC warning #126
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR fixes the Google Search Console warning: "Field 'datePublished' missing (in 'comment')".
Currently, the
DiscussionForumPostingschema for replies (comments) lacks the required timestamp, which causes warnings in GSC.Changes
event/listener.php: Extracted thepost_timefrom the event row. If available, it is formatted as an ISO 8601 string. If the timestamp is missing, the field remains empty (to avoid invalid data).includes/helper.php: Updated the logic to pass thedatePublishedfield through to the final JSON output.Result
The generated JSON-LD now correctly includes the
datePublishedproperty for forum replies. If a post time is not available, the property is omitted entirely to prevent errors, effectively resolving the GSC validation warning.Fixes #125