Cantags within links affect Google's perception of them?
-
Hi, All!
This might be really obvious, but I have little coding experience, so when in doubt - ask...
One of our client site's has navigation that looks (in part) like this:
<a <span="">href</a><a <span="">="http://www.mysite.com/section1"></a>
<a <span="">src="images/arrow6.gif" width="13" height="7" alt="Section 1">Section 1</a><a <span=""></a>
WC3 told us the
tags invalidate, and while I ignored most of their comments because I didn't think it would impact on what search engines saw, because thesetags are right in the links, it raised a question.
Anyone know if this is for sure a problem/not a problem?
Thanks in advance!
Aviva B
-
Thanks, Ryan. Good ideas, and we'll see what "the authorities" choose to do.
-
If they would have to pay a significant amount of money to have it redone, though, would it be worth it in this kind of case? What would the odds be?
Without having any information about the site, it's not possible to offer any credible details, odds or measurements of worth. If you are asking for a guess, I would say it is very unlikely for the div tags to cause any SEO problems, but that's the problem with invalid code, you don't know how it will be handled.
The bigger concern I have is if that line of code was coded so poorly, there are likely other coding issues with the site.
May I suggest asking a couple developers for an estimate on how much it would adjust the site's code so it validates?
-
Thanks, Ryan. Point well taken. I think I may copy and paste this for the client in question. If they would have to pay a significant amount of money to have it redone, though, would it be worth it in this kind of case? What would the odds be?
Aviva
-
Thanks, Kyle. We're not the design/webmaster team, so while it might not have been a good idea to do that in the first place, our job here is just to tell our client what MUST change for SEO and what doesn't need to change, even though it might not have been ideal. The challenges of not having unlimited budget...
Thanks,
Aviva
-
Simply from a front-end development perspective, why would you place a
inside of an <a>? If you are trying to force a block element style, why not simply apply it through the CSS sheet to the</a> <a>tag?
If you supply a URL i can give more specific coding advice
Thanks - Kyle</a>
-
The problem with using invalid code is every browser may handle it differently. Even if your current browser handles it fine today, the next time it updates the results may change.
Code validation is representatives from all the major browsers getting together and agreeing on coding rules. The biggest problem with invalid code is people thinking their site is fine but then later finding out (or worse not finding out) their site does not appear correctly in various browsers.
You have ie6, ie7, ie8, ie9, ie10, Chrome, FF, Opera, Safari and other browsers on the market. You have a variety of phones, ipads and other devices. It is more important then ever to use valid code. If your page doesn't fully validate, it should still be almost valid and the couple errors which remain have been thoroughly researched and you consciously choose to not validate on those particular items. An example would be if you are using HTML 5 and the validation tool has not fully been updated for all the latest changes.
With the above noted, I am not aware of any problem with your code. The challenge is since it is not valid, you cannot predict how it will be handled by Google. Even if it is handled correctly today, a change can be made at any time which can impact you.
-
Thanks, Andy. You've seen sites that have used the tags the same way?
-
To be honest, I can't see, from an SEO perspective, how Google would view these in a negative way. I can only tell you that from all of the sites that I have seen, I have never seen this as a problem.
Someone else might come up with a definitive answer, but I would say that there is nothing wrong with
tags for SEO.
Cheers,
Andy
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
"non-WWW" vs "WWW" in Google SERPS and Lost Back Link Connection
A Screaming Frog report indicates that Google is indexing a client's site for both: www and non-www URLs. To me this means that Google is seeing both URLs as different even though the page content is identical. The client has not set up a preferred URL in GWMTs. Google says to do a 301 redirect from the non-preferred domain to the preferred version but I believe there is a way to do this in HTTP Access and an easier solution than canonical.
Technical SEO | | RosemaryB
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/44231?hl=en GWMTs also shows that over the past few months this client has lost more than half of their backlinks. (But there are no penalties and the client swears they haven't done anything to be blacklisted in this regard. I'm curious as to whether Google figured out that the entire site was in their index under both "www" and "non-www" and therefore discounted half of the links. Has anyone seen evidence of Google discounting links (both external and internal) due to duplicate content? Thanks for your feedback. Rosemary0 -
Anyone See This Before? Google Following Links that are Not Hyperlinks
Today I was going through my Google Webmaster URL Errors (404s) info. I came across two links in my URL Errors report that are NOT actually hyperlinks on the source page. Both of these links are from two different forum-type websites. In both cases, the post references a URL on my website (incorrectly, hence the 404 error) in the text of the post but did NOT actually link to my site. I looked at the source code...no href. Both forum posts simply had a tag or tag around the incorrect URL text referencing my site. I have never seen this before or heard that Google will follow a URL that is not actually a hyperlink. Anyone else?
Technical SEO | | cajohnson0 -
Internet Explorer and Chrome showing different SERP's
Well the title says it all really. Same query, different browsers, same computer and different search results. I thought at first it may have differed because I was logged into my google profile on chrome but I logged out and tested and still different results. Is this normal ?
Technical SEO | | blinkybill0 -
What's the best canonicalization method?
Hi there - is there a canonicalization method that is better than others? Our developers have used the
Technical SEO | | GBC0 -
Why aren't certain links showing in SEOMOZ?
Hi, I have been trying to understand our page rank and domains that are linking to us. When I look at the list of linking domains, I see some bigger ones are missing and I don't know why. For example, we are in the Yahoo Directory with a link to trophycentral.com, but SEOMOZ is not showing the link. If SEOMOZ is not seeing it, my guess is Google is not either, which concerns me. There are several onther high page rank domains also not showing. Anyone have any idea why? Thanks! BTW, our domain is trophycentral.com
Technical SEO | | trophycentraltrophiesandawards0 -
Mobile site rank on Google S.E. instead of desktop site.
Hello, all SEOers~ Today, I would like to hear your opinion regarding on Mobile site and duplicate contents issue. I have a mobile version of our website that is hosted on a subdomain (m instead www). Site is targeting UK and Its essentially the same content, formatted differently. So every URL on www exists also at the "m" subdomain and is identical content. (there are some different contents, yet I could say about 90% or more contents are same) Recently I've noticed that search results are showing links to our mobile site instead of the desktop site. (Google UK) I have a sitemap.xml for both sites, the mobile sitemap defined as follows: I didn't block googlebot from mobile site and also didn't block googlebot-mobile from desktop site. I read and watched Google webmaster tool forum and related video from Matt Cutts. I found many opinion that there is possibility which cause duplicate contents issue and I should do one of followings. 1. Block googlebot from mobile site. 2. Use canonical Tag on mobile site which points to desktop site. 3. Create and develop different contents (needless to say...) Do you think duplicate contents issue caused my mobile site rank on S.E. instead of my desktop site? also Do you think those method will help to show my desktop site on S.E.? I was wondering that I have multi-country sites which is same site format as I mentioned above. However, my other country sites are totally doing fine on Google. Only difference that I found is my other country sites have different Title & Meta Tag comparing to desktop site, but my UK mobile site has same Title & Meta Tag comparing to desktop. Do you think this also has something to do with current problem? Please people~! Feel free to make some comments and share your opinion. Thanks for reading my long long explanation.
Technical SEO | | Artience0 -
Webmaster tools lists a large number (hundreds)of different domains linking to my website, but only a few are reported on SEOMoz. Please explain what's going on?
Google's webmaster tools lists hundreds of links to my site, but SEOMoz only reports a few of them. I don't understand why that would be. Can anybody explain it to me? Is there someplace to I can go to alert SEOMoz to this issue?
Technical SEO | | dnfealkoff0 -
How to handle URL's from removed products?
Hi All, I have a question about a fashion related webshop. Every month about 100 articles are removed and about the some amouth is added to the site. Most of the products are indexed on brandname and type (e.g. MyBrand t-shirt blue) My question is what to do with the URL / page after the product is removed. I'm thinking about a couple of solutions: 301 the page to the brand categorie page build a script which shows related articles on the old URL (and try to keep it indexed) 404 page optimized for search term with links to brand category any other suggestons? Thanks in advance, Sam
Technical SEO | | U-Digital0