The Schema.org WebSite type is best used on a website's homepage to define the overall site and help search engines understand its structure and purpose. Previously, Google recommended recommended using WebSite to make pages eligible for SiteLinks Search Box feature. Although that feature is deprecated, WebSite is still useful for point out key actions, entry points and site architecture.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- What is WebSite Markup?
- Where should WebsSite markup deploy?
- Common Questions about WebSite Markup
- Conclusion
What is WebSite Markup?
Website markup refers to the use of the WebSite schema.org type on a homepage to define the website as an entity. This markup typically includes properties such as name, URL, and publisher, helping search engines contextualize the site within the broader knowledge graph. Historically, Google recommended using WebSite and alongside the potentialAction property with a nested SearchAction to enable the now deprecated Sitelinks Search Box functionality.
How does Google use WebSite Markup currently?
Google's documentation states that a Website "name" may influence what Google chooses to display in the SERP. Per the documentation, the WebSite markup should live on a site's homepage.
How To: Define a WebSite and its Connections to Organization markup
Typically, the home page is going to be the best place to define the entity home for a website. The WebSite data item ishould have a URI that matches the indexed homepage URL for that website.
However, per Google's documentation, a website's homepage is also where a company's Organization markup should live. There are two equivalent strategies for how to structure and nest your WebSite and Organization markup. Currently, neither option appears to be "better" than the other.
Option 1: Organization as the Primary Type
This is Schema App's typical recommended approach. The two entities are connected using the mainEntityOfPage property. The primary implication of this is that the WebSite markup will deploy alongside the Organization markup. Although this is not an issue, it can cause confusion for users reviewing markup and needing to scroll past a large volume of markup associated with an Organization.
Option 2: WebSite as the Primary Type
This is an alternative approach that may be more appropriate for affilated sites that are not necessarily "about" the Organization. For example, a Support website or a Application/Login might be more appropriately designated as being primarily a "WebSite". WebSite can be connected to Organization using one or more of the following properties:
- about
- contributor
- mainEntity
- maintainedBy (well suited for community forums, etc)
- owner
Option 3: Organization and WebSite are Both Primary Types
Although this is not necessarily the recommended option, (the more meaningful connections the better), it may a practical reality based on having multiple sources of markup (e.g. deploying both Schema App and auto-generated markup, etc).
Common Questions about WebSite Markup
Does WebSite Markup Generate Rich Results?
No, WebSite markup does not produce a direct rich result in Google Search. Unlike schema types such as Product or Q&A, there is no visual enhancement tied to the WebSite type. Its primary function is to help search engines understand the structure and identity of your website.
What Happened to SearchAction and the Sitelinks Search Box?
Previously, Website markup often included a potentialAction property with a nested SearchAction to support the sitelinks search box feature in Google results, letting users directly access internal search from the Google SERP. Although Google deprecated this result in 2024, structure is still be valid from a schema.org perspective and highlights a website's internal search functionality.
Conclusion
WebSite markup is best suited for a website's homepage, and ideally should be connected to an Organization. Although WebSite does not generate rich results, it plays an important role in defining your website as an entity and supporting a cohesive schema strategy.
Was this article helpful?
That’s Great!
Thank you for your feedback
Sorry! We couldn't be helpful
Thank you for your feedback
Feedback sent
We appreciate your effort and will try to fix the article