#1
  1. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    97
    Rep Power
    13

    Valid html - on every page?


    Hi,

    I just worked hard to get my html to validate, but as my site has tons of pages, often created with varying templates, and user input, I just cleaned the major parts of the site (which was a pain in the neck, but it's done).

    Now the less important parts of the site still don't validate.

    How much of a trust-drain would that be´for google? Is site wide validation a real plus, or is every page looked at individually for that? Any speculation or evidence you might have is appreciated.

    thx
    Cri
  2. #2
  3. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ahmedabad,Gujarat,India
    Posts
    140
    Rep Power
    13
    I think you talked about w3c html validation. IMO html validation is not cumplesory and not help in SERP of google.

    But, if your html code is clean then bot can crawl your links fast & easy way.

    Hope this will help you.
    Originally Posted by cristine01
    How much of a trust-drain would that be´for google? Is site wide validation a real plus, or is every page looked at individually for that?

    Comments on this post

    • gunjanp agrees : PK is right
    • raz agrees : Very true!
  4. #3
  5. SEO Gawdess
    SEO Chat Adventurer (500 - 999 posts)

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    711
    Rep Power
    138
    The html of the site I am working on is a complete mess. Includes inside of includes inside of includes. Pages end up with 3 HEAD sections, Ad tables above the <html> tag, 2 titles: A total mess.

    To my astonishment, Google lists these pages. They don't rank all that well, but they aren't yet optimized either. I'm correcting the monsterous code as I optimize the pages. Surely two titles, two or three heads and everything can't help. Spiders probably only take the info of one and ignore all others. I want to make sure it's the right one.

    I concentrate on cleaning up the basics.. the head, body, no code outside of it... move big blocks of javascript external, and offer up the textual content, easy for the taking by search engines. How the rest of the page validates, I don't bother with and it seems to work great Google-wise.

    Comments on this post

    • raz agrees : right approach
  6. #4
  7. from the horses mouth
    SEO Chat Hero (2000 - 2499 posts)

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,105
    Rep Power
    556
    While w3c compliance isn't necessary to rank , I am one of those people who believes that if a page is w3c compliant it will get a boost in it's ranking potential.

    Comments on this post

    • raz agrees : It is obviously good practice. But so long as the pages are displayed properly in the main browsers they are good enough to rank!
  8. #5
  9. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Hero (2000 - 2499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    2,071
    Rep Power
    262
    I can only repeat what I've said before. The last time I tried to validate my main site's home page, it returned 196 errors.... I've been threatening myself to fix it ever since (was it 04, or 05?)... Procrastination always gets in the way!

    BTW, that site is in a dominant position in all 3 majors for a niche money market.

    raz
    Last edited by raz; Apr 19th, 2007 at 01:45 PM.
    #include <Cognac.h> -The only code I know How to Write!
  10. #6
  11. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Hero (2000 - 2499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    2,071
    Rep Power
    262
    Originally Posted by Swirleigh
    ...................................
    I concentrate on cleaning up the basics.. the head, body, no code outside of it... move big blocks of javascript external, and offer up the textual content, easy for the taking by search engines. How the rest of the page validates, I don't bother with and it seems to work great Google-wise.
    I'd approach it that way.

    raz
  12. #7
  13. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    97
    Rep Power
    13
    And I've been so proud I got this thing to validate. You destroy me:-(

    But seriously, no bonus TR-wise for a validating page/site?

    Cri
  14. #8
  15. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    109
    Rep Power
    13
    well it's good your getting rid of duplicate titles and head though, cause as far as I know that's considered a black hat approach to increasing your keywords for the title tag. I'm sure google wouldn't like that.
  16. #9
  17. Roll the dice.. and live
    SEO Chat Mastermind (5000+ posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    6,570
    Rep Power
    2495
    Originally Posted by cristine01
    And I've been so proud I got this thing to validate. You destroy me:-(

    But seriously, no bonus TR-wise for a validating page/site?

    Cri
    If there is it must be very small and easily outwieghed buy other factors. There certainly from my research is no evidence in SERPs that it is making any obvious difference.

    I do agree with other posters sloppy code probably doesnt help but most pages on web are not complient.
    Live the moment
  18. #10
  19. Super Moderator
    SEO Chat Genius (4000 - 4499 posts)

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    4,033
    Rep Power
    920
    Validation is a standard that has been loosely adopted by the 'web'. What you should concern yourself with when you submit to validators is errors in code, red flags are a problem. The rest, meh, don't worry about it, but if you're rebuilding a new web site you best use the latest standards. Any coder/designer who still uses tables and can't figure out CSS is a putz.

    Comments on this post

    • channel5 agrees : i share your sentiments
  20. #11
  21. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    47
    Rep Power
    13
    in fact valid html is not good for search engine. seo based on your content and the html code.
  22. #12
  23. from the horses mouth
    SEO Chat Hero (2000 - 2499 posts)

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,105
    Rep Power
    556
    Originally Posted by djstreet
    Any coder/designer who still uses tables and can't figure out CSS is a putz.
    hehe, like the way you put it, I agree with you

Similar Threads

  1. Rookie REALLY Needs Your Help Testing Web Page HTML!!
    By Rookie1973 in forum Web Design, Coding and Programming
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: Nov 15th, 2006, 05:01 AM
  2. SEO view of Page content versus HTML Formatting code
    By Ken.Nelson in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Oct 27th, 2006, 03:05 AM
  3. Valid HTML -> Impact on SERPs
    By tstolber in forum Google Optimization
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: Mar 23rd, 2006, 11:53 AM
  4. My 100th post
    By craige in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Jan 6th, 2005, 03:12 AM

IMN logo majestic logo threadwatch logo seochat tools logo