Structured Publication Dates: Testing Cross-Surface Consistency

Research question: How often does one controlled date field prevent disagreement across public article surfaces?

Method: Render forty-eight synthetic routes using repeated manual dates, a shared field, or a shared field plus live extraction; seed stale values, locale shifts, omissions and prior-day defaults. Preserve every failed, unavailable and ambiguous observation in the denominator, and record who reviewed it and when.

Analysis should separate prevention from detection and technical conformance from editorial quality. Report results by defect type rather than reducing unlike failures to one score.

Scope and limitations: Compare intended ISO date with visible text, time markup, JSON-LD datePublished, index order and reported count for each route. Synthetic cases, a narrow Philippines employment-operations vocabulary and one application architecture limit generalization. The study cannot establish legal obligations, search performance or provider quality.

The evidence can inform a publishing control, but the authorized editor retains claim and release decisions. A useful conclusion states what was observed, what remains unknown and which owner must resolve exceptions.

Sources consulted: Google Search Central, Article structured data (https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/structured-data/article); Google Search Central, canonical URLs (https://developers.google.com/search/docs/crawling-indexing/consolidate-duplicate-urls); Sitemaps protocol (https://www.sitemaps.org/protocol.html); NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 (https://www.nist.gov/cyberframework). These sources provide general web and control concepts. They do not measure this site, guarantee indexing, certify content quality, or replace editorial, legal, or employment judgment.