Msg#: 4632773 posted 4:26 am on Dec 22, 2013 (gmt 0)
Isn't that a reference to 'itemprop="name"'? Without a name the whole markup ceases to function. They also insist on, I think, itemscope. (That's the one you make into a div enclosing the whole package. And hope your css doesn't have any :first-child or > selectors, because you've just broken them ;) )
There's definitely no block on dot org sites using schema.org markup. In fact it's the only place I have ever used it.
First time I used Structured Markup I had to tweak it about six times before the markup validator was happy. But they stop complaining eventually.
Msg#: 4632773 posted 6:56 am on Dec 22, 2013 (gmt 0)
Isn't that a reference to 'itemprop="name"'? Without a name the whole markup ceases to function. They also insist on, I think, itemscope.
That's for using schema.org markup, which is not what's being used if fn is missing.
First, I don't understand why you're using microformats rather than schema.org when schema.org is the accepted standard being developed and supported by all 3 major search engines.
Error: This information will not appear as a rich snippet in search results, because it seems to describe an organization. Google does not currently display organization information in rich snippets
Error: Missing required field "name (fn)".
The first "error" is a "nothing error". It's simply letting you know the markup will not be used to generate a rich snippet, yet at least -- Why they confuse the issue by calling it an error is beyond me, because it's really not an error; it's simply not supported for rich-snippets currently.
The second error is because you need class="fn org" to declare the organization name using microformatting -- See the microformats hCard page for more: [microformats.org...]