Make schema breadcrumb urls absolute

What does this MR do?

In !46991 (merged) we include the logic to create the schema markup for breadcrumbs. For that we use the same info we use to build the regular HTML breadcrumb, including the link. These links are usually relative ones.

Although it's not totally certain, it seems tools that check schema markup, like the Google one, indicates that the url is invalid because it's relative.

In this MR we ensure to convert all relative links to absolute ones when creating the schema markup for the breadcrumb.

Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

Conformity

• Changelog entry
• Code review guidelines
• Merge request performance guidelines
• Style guides
• Separation of EE specific content

Related to #281378 (closed)

changed milestone to %13.6

added SEOImprovement [deprecated] Accepting merge requests backend devopscreate featureenhancement frontend groupeditor [DEPRECATED] sectiondev typefeature labels

Reviewer roulette

Changes that require review have been detected! A merge request is normally reviewed by both a reviewer and a maintainer in its primary category (e.g. frontend or backend), and by a maintainer in all other categories.

To spread load more evenly across eligible reviewers, Danger has picked a candidate for each review slot, based on their timezone. Feel free to override these selections if you think someone else would be better-suited, or the chosen person is unavailable.

To read more on how to use the reviewer roulette, please take a look at the Engineering workflow and code review guidelines. Please consider assigning a reviewer or maintainer who is a domain expert in the area of the merge request.

Once you've decided who will review this merge request, mention them as you normally would! Danger does not automatically notify them for you.

Category	Reviewer	Maintainer
backend	Andy Soiron (@Andysoiron) (UTC+1, same timezone as @fjsanpedro)	Sean McGivern (@smcgivern) (UTC+0, 1 hour behind @fjsanpedro)
test Quality for spec/features/*	Tomislav Nikić (@tomi) (UTC+1, same timezone as @fjsanpedro)	Maintainer review is optional for test Quality for spec/features/*

If needed, you can retry the danger-review job that generated this comment.

Generated by Danger

added 1 commit

• 42390dcc - Make schema breadcrumb urls absolute

Compare with previous version

Bundle size analysis [beta]

This compares changes in bundle size for entry points between the commits 04dedd27 and fd4d18ef

Special assets

Entrypoint / Name	Size before	Size after	Diff	Diff in percent
average	3.11 MB	3.11 MB	-	0.0 %
mainChunk	1.88 MB	1.88 MB	-	0.0 %

---

Note: We do not have exact data for 04dedd27. So we have used data from: fd0d447c.
The target commit was too new, so we used the latest commit from master we have info on.
It might help to rerun the bundle-size-review job
This might mean that you have a few false positives in this report. If something unrelated to your code changes is reported, you can check this comparison in order to see if they caused this change.

Please look at the full report for more details

---

Read more about how this report works.

Generated by Danger

marked the checklist item Changelog entry as completed

@vij can you review this MR?

assigned to @vij

added workflowin review label

removed [deprecated] Accepting merge requests label

removed frontend label

removed featureenhancement label

approved this merge request

@fjsanpedro LGTM, only a few non-blocking comments/questions

unassigned @vij

resolved all threads

added 1 commit

• 89d3c28b - Make schema breadcrumb urls absolute

Compare with previous version

assigned to @smcgivern

unassigned @smcgivern

added 220 commits

• 89d3c28b...fd0d447c - 219 commits from branch master
• fd4d18ef - Make schema breadcrumb urls absolute

Compare with previous version

assigned to @smcgivern

approved this merge request

resolved all threads

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for 5c0d3113 succeeds

merged

mentioned in commit 3af7048f

The qa-smoke job looked like it was stuck, so I cancelled it. Hopefully that wasn't a legitimate failure, although the previous pipeline (with fundamentally the same logic) passed.

mentioned in issue gitlab-com/gl-infra/scalability#662

added workflowverification label and removed workflowin review label

added workflowstaging label and removed workflowverification label

added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging label

added workflowproduction label and removed workflowcanary label

added releasedcandidate label

added releasedpublished label and removed releasedcandidate label