Web Design Talk » SEO

W3C Validation and SEO Benefits – My Opinion

Rob — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 21:40:23 +0000

The link between full W3C Validation and it’s important upon SEO is commonly discussed topic and a huge taboo. This is the notion that having a valid site according to the W3C Standards is either critical (or not) to your website’s SEO.The first thing to note that a site passing W3C Validation will have met the following criteria: will not use depreciated tags and will not have syntax errors – essentially a syntax check.

I physically cringe when I hear quotes such as ‘valid xhtml will help your users’. Valid xhtml will not help your users, to help your users a site needs to adhere to web coding standards – this is an entirely different beast. The main difference here is the practice of seperating content from presentation, thus giving the content increased meaning. For example, a page using tables to layout the whole web page would not adhere to web coding standards because using tables for layout is semantically incorrect and requires a lot more code. Tables should be used for tabular data, simple. Another example is the use of paragraph and header tags. Visually they are very similar but have a very very different meaning sementically. However, yet again, semantically incorrect pages will pass validation. The main Google webpage doesn’t even validate (interestingly, Google does’t even quote html attributes in order to save on page size). In my opinion, as long this is the case W3C validation will be a none issue, SEO wise.

Understanding which semantic elements add value to the document will affect the onsite of a website and is an SEO ranking factor.I have read several artuicles that describe W3C validation and SEO as a match made in heaven, this simply isn’t the case, although web semantics and SEO are.

There are many websites (40% is a figure thrown around a lot) that do not validate, yet perform quite well in search engines as they have a range of high quality content. Take a quick example. I searched for a very competitive term “houses”. The number one result was rightmove.co.uk. Rightmove even has an authorative listing for that term too – SEO wise there can’t be too many issues here. Running that site through the validator throws up 33 errors and 22 warnings. – see the result. These are mainly smaller syntax errors that quite rightly, the developers of that site have ignored. There are endless examples where sites a lot worse appear at the top of the SERPs, even though they fail to validate and sometimes, don’t follow web standards at all.

There is also another camp that stresses that W3C validation is important for page presentation, in turn page presentation affects your reputation and thus your SEO (the number of people willing to backlink to you). Well again, here I’d quote the subtle difference between validation and semantics. YOu can also have a perfectly presented and formatted page that fails to validate.

The addictive, green “congratulations” message that appears is far too often used to lure unknowledgeable clients into a false sense of trust and can go a very long way into building trust between the SEO and client. As Google uses over 200 ranking factors when indexing your website, I find it very hard to believe that minor syntx errors play much role at all. Whenver I see SEO companies that associate “100% valid xHTML code” and SEO I run a mile. It’s clear they have little knowledge of SEO from this one ststement.

Validator error severity

My next hate is the severity of these errors are often mis-quoted. Don’t get me wrong, validating your website is good practice, but not critical for SEO. A random unclosed paragraph tag, or site that uses ‘b’ tags instead of ‘strong’ tags is of little worry to me. I can spend my time of much more important, valuable areas – at the end of the day this won’t effect your SEO or the way the page displays. However, when there are more serious (or hard) errors iccur these could very well stop the page from rendering all together. The latter is of course an erro you should take note of and fix quickly. However, minor syntax errors are of little concern. At the end of the day, pages that have an expected layout and content that the bots can consume easily is my major concern. However, pages that validate fully don’t give you SEO benenfit at all, however nice it is to have.

Full validation isn’t always possible

Another point is that full validation isn’t always possible. For instance, getting your site to display correctly across the plethora of browsers available can cause validation errors. This brings me to another issue. At lot of people seem to assume that a page that doesn’t pass the W3C validation is badly coded. I’ll use the example of the Google home page here. This page doesn’t validate due to a numbers of reason including the numbers of browsing devices it needs to cater for and page size (saving them a lot of money). By the latter logic, Google is a badly made webpage, I think not. I’m really not going into this anymore as it infuriates me so much. There is a trend where someone checks a page through the validator, if it fails they instanyly make a judgement that the site is badly made.

To conclude, at the minute there really is no evidence to suggest that Google factors in the validity of your code. In time search engines use it as a ranking factor, simialr to how Google began to use loading speed as a minor ranking factor. Validating or not is NOT the same thing as serious HTML errors that hinder crawling and indexing – this is one huge SEO scam in my opinion and is pushed upon unsuspecting an unknowledgable clients. Furthermore, I’m yet to see a site built so badly that it has failed to be included in search engines.For me, quality, quthorative content will always be at the heart of SEO, not coding syntax.

I’m also not saying that W3C validation should be ignored. Tomorrow, Google could well decide that W3C validation is a must and a suddenly a major ranking factor. However, for the time being, is a bit of a none issue for me.

Is W3C validation good practice for web developers, definately. Is W3C validation a must for SEO, not right now. Are SEO and W3C validation highly linked right now, very unlikely.

Enhanced Visitor Event Tracking With Google Analytics and JQuery

Rob — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 19:59:44 +0000

Google Analytics has fast become the industry standard to track a plethora of web based information about your website. Whilst being totally free and easy to setup, you are limited to tracking elements that physically render in the browser – so items such as PDF, ZIP and RSS feeds links are not tracked, this because Google Analytics has a great reliance upon JavaScript. However, tracking such links can be achieved with a small amount of extra work.

Personally, I wasn’t aware you could track specific links with Analytics and only ever considored this when a client asked ‘why doesn’t Google show me the numbers of times my marketing report (read: a PDF file) has been clicked?’ – a totally valid request that I wanted to investigate.

Use JQuery to improve Google Analytics and track downloads, RSS, Email & external links

First things first, make sure you have a google Analytics account, the latest version of JQuery and the latest version of the analytics code running on your website

As with the majority of the JQuery magic, everything happens within the doc ready event listener – this will used to capture various clicks to select elements.

Tracking Download Link Clicks (PDF, ZIPs etc.)

$(document).ready(function() {

	$("a[rel=download]").click( function() {
		var fileName = $(this).attr("href");
		pageTracker._trackPageview(fileName);
		return true;
	});

});

Then on every link you wish to track, simply add the rel attribute to your non HTML files as follows:

Download My ZIP Data File

Tracking Downloads of Specifc File Types (E.g. PDF files)

Using the dollar sign to match against links that end in .pdf (or any extension you wish to track).

$(document).ready(function() {

	$("a[href$=pdf]").click( function() {
		var myPDF = "/pdfDownloads/" . $(this).attr("href");
		pageTracker._trackPageview(myPDF);
		return true;
	});

});

The /pdfDownloads/ is used to identify and seperate report data within Google Analytics.

Tracking the click of a specific link such as an RSS feed

Simply add an identifier to your RSS feed link (in this example the link was given an id of ‘rssFeed’):

$(document).ready(function() {

	$("a#rssFeed").click( function() {
		pageTracker._trackEvent("RSS", "RSS Subscriber Link Clicked");
		return true;
	});

});

Tracking mailto: Link Clicks

$(document).ready(function() {

	$("a[href^=mailto:]").click( function() {
		pageTracker._trackEvent("Mail", "User clicked on mailto link");
		return true;
	});

});

Tidying up….

You should also disable the clicked element to prevent multiple event recording and provide feedback. To do this, simple add the following at the start of each piece of code – disbabling the element and changing the cursor to an egg timer (although you could display a small graphic to make things look prettier):

$(this).css("cursor", "wait");
$(this).attr("disabled", true);

Improve SEO Through Home Menu Anchor Text Optimisation

Rob — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:16:55 +0000

It’s a widely known fact that link anchor text is rated YH2Z675VXTC5 highly by search engines and is often the deciding factor in your SERP position for competitive terms, mainly because it gives meaningful information to users (amongst others). Correct use of anchor text (on both inbound and outbound links) will give your page increased meaning.

I’m sure you use this fact throughout your website while performing onsite SEO. Any tutorial will rightly tell you that keyword relevancy is of upmost importance here. However, a lot of the time you end up with a ‘Home’ link on your menu, linking to your main page.

This is bad for SEO for a number reasons. Firstly, the anchor text ‘home’ is very poor choice of word to use as it’s meaning is highly diluted nowadays. Now unless you have a site relating to homes, the keyword isn’t very useful at all, as we don’t want to rank highly for the term ‘home’. However, at the same time users are familiar with such a link and it makes sense to name such a link to your main page. The situation is worsened if your site is large with a great number of internal links. Imagine having a 100 page site, all with the anchor text ‘home’ – this is a lot of inbound links telling search engines each page is related to ‘home’! Furthermore, the menu link’s are usually towards to the top of the page, giving them inscreased relevancy to search engines.

The solution is a compromise, use ‘home’ along with you main keyword(s) – making sure to avoid obvious stop words like ‘and’. For example ‘Graphic Design Home’. Even better use your main keyword directly in the anchor text i.e. ‘Graphic Design’. This is quite a powerful and simple SEO trick that is easy to implement into your site.

Tracking Twitter Performance Using Google Analytics

Rob — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:47:38 +0000

If you use the ever popular twitter there’s a high chance you’ll be linking to your company webiste or personal blog in your tweets or profile link. As the aim is use twitter as a marketing tool to drive traffic, you can use Google Analytics to track the link you placed the twitter profile – just like an email campiagn or PPC advert

If you use Twitter as a marketing tool to drive traffic to your site then you should treat it in exactly the same way as you would a newsletter, a PPC advert or a banner and track each Tweet’s performance beyond simple click data. How many visits do you get, how long do they stay on your site, how deep do they go, what is the bounce rate like and how much revenue do they generate?

The benefit to ‘tagging’ this link is that Google Analytics will record more than use basic click data – you can record a whole host of advanced user data such as how they navigate your site and length of visit. By default Google will track such links, but traffic from services such as bit.ly will be dumped into the direct traffic area of Google Analytics. The steps to get the latter up and running are quite simple:

1: Go to Google’s URL builder to generate an url . Enter the following information:

Website URL: your website address

Campaign Source: enter a relevant source here to identify your campaign E.g. twitter

Campaign Name: enter a name used to identify the campaign, this is used to identify the campaign in Google Anlytics E.g. twittertracking

2: Click generate URL and something similar to the following will be created: http://www.web-design-talk.co.uk/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=twittertrack

3: If posting to twitter you can paste this URL directly in the tweet box, as twitter will automatically shorten this url.

4: After approximately 24 hours data will appear in your analytics account. Simply navigate to Traffic Sources. If you’ve used the same terms to build the url as above you’ll see an entry called ‘twitter / social’. You can also view information by navigating to Traffic Sources > Campaigns where you can click the campiagn name (‘twittertrack’ was used in he example above).

Google Analytics Once Tracking is Installed

Fixing Common W3C Validation Errors and SEO

Rob — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 18:21:00 +0000

Yet another thing to check when doing SEO is that your site validates via the w3c validation checker. A site that is xHTML valid will recieve more frequent search engine crawls and more importantly, longer crawl times. I won’t bore you with further details about why validation is a good thing (it’s a huge subject), but if you must there is a great article about the subject right here. Creating a site to an xHTML valid standard encourages better coding practice and more semantic coding – making your site easier to crawl. You are also giving your site a betttr chance of displaying the same across multiple and future browsers.

Another less known theory is that spiders get full when crawling a page, semantic coding practice will allow for cleaner and more lightweight code. For instance, when crawling a badly coded page with lots of line styles and JavaScript (E.g. content not useful to a spider) the spider may become full too quickly and leave – missing you important content contained further on within the page.

Validating your site to at least xHTML Transaitional 1.0 (the test strict version, compared to xHTMl 1.0 Strict) is highly encouraged and is an area often ignored by developers. Below, I’ll quickly outline some of the common validation errors and how to easily fix them:

cannot generate system identifier for general entity X - 99% of the time this relates to errors with entity references such as ampersands in URLs. E.g. having an url like product.php?id=2&mode=view would result in this error as the ‘&’ wasn;t used within the url.

required attribute “alt” not specified – simply find the line number and add an alt tag for the image. The presence of an alt tag is required for both transitional and strict doc types.

XML Parsing Error: Opening and ending tag mismatch – Depending on how organised you are when coding this fix can take a matter of seconds or a lot longer. It relates to unclosed block level tags, such as a table or div. One plus point is that fixing such an error often results in several validation errors being fixed at once.

required attribute “TYPE” not specified – This relates to no type attribute being specified for things like script and style tags. Solution – use the type tag like this: