Does the Structured Data Testing Tool support GoodRelations?

+AJ Kohn started a thread asking (http://bit.ly/XKmeTB) about GoodRelations validation on Google's Structured Data Testing Tool (http://bit.ly/124iyle).

If not (or if no-one knows) +Martin Hepp might be able to suggest the best way of validating GoodRelations markup (or, more specifically, of validating resources marked up with schema.org that includes GoodRelations properties)?

Over on the SDTT side, I have a lot of questions, open to anyone who might know (or even just better clarify my questions).

- The SDTT is Google-centric, so it makes sense that it might (and does) generate Google-specific errors, such as requiring certain properties in order to generate certain types of rich snippets.  But shouldn't it validate the vocabulary and syntax used, distinguishing between markup that's malformed, and markup that is well-formed but does not support Google Rich Snippets?

- Is there a process by which updates to schema.org are queued for handling by the SDTT?

- Is there a preferred method of reporting SDTT errors?

- Bing and Yahoo, wouldn't it be nice if we had a method of cross-checking SDTT output with those from a Bing and/or Yahoo validation service (not including Yandex simply because I don't know Russian:)?  +Duane Forrester has there been any talk of making the Bing WMT Markup Validator a standalone product as well (and probably adding some bells and whistles at the same time)?

AJ's excellent last point in the thread bears repeating:

... I'm less concerned about my personal situation for this client and more concerned about the long-term confidence people have in the tool, because the tool will lead to greater adoption which is what we all (Google included) want.
Shared publiclyView activity