Text in Images vs. Alt tags
-
Hi on my homepage i h ave multiple images They have the appropriate alt text for each image, but the text which the image displays is not written into the page and styled using CSS rather than placing text within an image.
Is this a issue worth correcting, or is it sufficient to have just alt text for each image.
Any major pros from having putting the text in the image into the CMS using appropriate CSS styling to achieve the same effect.
-
Don't take chances. Put any text that you want search engines to see out there where visitors will see it - in text.
-
I strongly prefer all text to be displayed as HTML text rather then embedded in images.
PROS:
-
text can be changed very quickly as needed. This is helpful for translations, keyword changes, etc. Changes of images may require a designer and developer whereas a text change can often be done by a site owner.
-
any time an image is updated, you either have to update the site's code or deal with caching issues where some users will see the old image
-
search engines can always read the text and there is a 100% confidence what is being read by the crawler is also being viewed by users
CONS:
- If you desire a very specific font or styling, it could be altered by various browsers at times. This can easily be avoided by either choosing from one of the many popular fonts or using CSS3 to make the font available to the viewer
Tests have been performed to show currently Google evaluates alt text and html text equally. I strongly believe at some point this will change. Google strongly desires to align their evaluations with the user experience. Alt text is very commonly manipulated whereas text can be trusted to a much higher degree.
-
-
Great question. Yes, it would be much better to put the text on the page via the CMS with CSS to achieve the same look as you have right now. The reason is that a SE spider cannot crawl text that is embedded in an image. All the spider will "see" is that it is an image containing whatever is described by your "alt" attributes. If you want search engines to be able to "read" that content, I would recommend going the route of making it actual text styled in conjunction with the image you want via CSS as you propose.
Hope that helps!
Dana
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
-
Bing Indexation and handling of X-ROBOTS tag or AngularJS
Hi MozCommunity, I have been tearing my hair out trying to figure out why BING wont index a test site we're running. We're in the midst of upgrading one of our sites from archaic technology and infrastructure to a fully responsive version.
Web Design | | AU-SEO
This new site is a fully AngularJS driven site. There's currently over 2 million pages and as we're developing the new site in the backend, we would like to test out the tech with Google and Bing. We're looking at a pre-render option to be able to create static HTML snapshots of the pages that we care about the most and will be available on the sitemap.xml.gz However, with 3 completely static HTML control pages established, where we had a page with no robots metatag on the page, one with the robots NOINDEX metatag in the head section and one with a dynamic header (X-ROBOTS meta) on a third page with the NOINDEX directive as well. We expected the one without the meta tag to at least get indexed along with the homepage of the test site. In addition to those 3 control pages, we had 3 pages where we had an internal search results page with the dynamic NOINDEX header. A listing page with no such header and the homepage with no such header. With Google, the correct indexation occured with only 3 pages being indexed, being the homepage, the listing page and the control page without the metatag. However, with BING, there's nothing. No page indexed at all. Not even the flat static HTML page without any robots directive. I have a valid sitemap.xml file and a robots.txt directive open to all engines across all pages yet, nothing. I used the fetch as Bingbot tool, the SEO analyzer Tool and the Preview Page Tool within Bing Webmaster Tools, and they all show a preview of the requested pages. Including the ones with the dynamic header asking it not to index those pages. I'm stumped. I don't know what to do next to understand if BING can accurately process dynamic headers or AngularJS content. Upon checking BWT, there's definitely been crawl activity since it marked against the XML sitemap as successful and put a 4 next to the number of crawled pages. Still no result when running a site: command though. Google responded perfectly and understood exactly which pages to index and crawl. Anyone else used dynamic headers or AngularJS that might be able to chime in perhaps with running similar tests? Thanks in advance for your assistance....0 -
Image with 100% width/height - bad ranking?
Hi, we have some articles like this: http://www.schicksal.com/Orakel/Freitag-13 The main image has a width of 100% and a height of 100%. Today, I've discovered that GWT Instant Preview has some troubles with rendering the page. We have CSS rules to deliver the image with the right dimensions. If a bot like google is not sending any screen height / width we assume the screen size is 2560x1440. Does this harm the ranking of the page? (Content starts below the fold/image) What is a "default" screen size for google? How do they determine if something is "above the fold"? Any tips or ideas? Best wishes, Georg.
Web Design | | GeorgFranz0 -
Title Tag Suggestion
Short title tag is more useful so if we just use our targeted keyword in home page title then is it useful.? for example my website: http://www.topnotchlawsuitloans.com/ i am targeting lawsuit loans keyword so if i use <title>TNF - Lawsuit Loans | Lawsuit Funding</title> is batter to use for main page or <title>Lawsuit Loans | Lawsuit Funding | As Low As 1% | PreSettlement Funding</title> can we have to use main targeting keyword on all webpage title tag ? my website have 200+ page and i have to use different title tag for that pages including targated keyword so if i am targeting lawsuit loans in that title, what is best to divide title pipe, hyphen or comma ? does capitalization in title tag wrong effect ? Lawsuit Loans - As low as 1% Lawsuit Loans | As low as 1% Lawsuit Loans, As low as 1% (or i have to use smaller cash in title) for all different page i want to place this kind of title is it best for SEO purpose Lawsuit Loans - Lawsuit Loans Fargo Lawsuit Loans - Lawsuit Loans Escondido Lawsuit Loans - Lawsuit Loans Erie Lawsuit Loans - Lawsuit Loans Flint Lawsuit Loans - Lawsuit Loans Fort Wayne Lawsuit Loans - Lawsuit Loans Fresno Lawsuit Loans - Lawsuit Loans Gainesville Lawsuit Loans - Lawsuit Loans Grand Rapids Lawsuit Loans - Lawsuit Loans Gilbert Lawsuit Loans - Lawsuit Loans Gresham Lawsuit Loans - Lawsuit Loans High Point Lawsuit Loans - Lawsuit Loans Hialeah Lawsuit Loans - Lawsuit Loans Huntsville if i am using this kind of different title for all page then it can effective for SEO or it will be come in keyword stuffing
Web Design | | JulieWhite0 -
For a real estate website, is a different mobile site warranted vs a responsive site?
I researched the major real estate websites: Zillow, Trulia, Remax, Keller Williams, Century 21, etc. They all have a separate mobile site and not a responsive one. The client wants it to be easy to search for properties from a smartphone. Is it possible to get a responsive version of a real estate website on a smartphone?
Web Design | | MassMedia0 -
Using More Info javascript:toggleDisplay tag for More info text
Is there any harm in using javascript so a user can "toggle" open or closed additional text on a website? For example, if a user wants to read more about something, they can click on "More Info" and the text would then appear. Google is able to read the text, because I chose a random 8 word section of the text within the More Info and pasted it into a Google Search and the website showed up in search results. Just wondering if using this technique would have any negative impact. Here's what the code would look like:
Web Design | | EEE3
<a <span="">title</a><a <span="">="Show Tables" href="</a><a class=" " target="_blank">javascript:toggleDisplay('table1')</a>">More Info style="display: none;" id="table1"> this is where the text would be, and from this section was where I grabbed text to search with in google. Then in the footer, here is the script needed so the more info will work: I am by no means an expert in coding/html/javascript. Thanks!0 -
Does **tag on a product description help?**
Hi, Does using the tag on a line of text in the products description help with SEO for that keyword phrase? **See here: http://www.designerboutique-online.com/tops/passarella-death-squad/passarella-death-squad-t-shirt-white/0/ I have bolded the Passarella Death Squad T-Shirt line. Would this help in any way? Cheers Will**
Web Design | | YNWA0 -
Image Maps vs. Normal Images
Hey Mozzer's, quick question: Does anyone out there have any opinions / research on whether the use of image maps is an effective way of linking to other pages on a site as opposed to using seperate images? Does Google read alternate text from an image map in the same way as a regular image?
Web Design | | MarkLoud0 -
Crawl Budget vs Canonical
Got a debate raging here and I figured I'd ask for opinions. We have our websites structured as site/category/product This is fine for URL keywords, etc. We also use this for breadcrumbs. The problem is that we have multiple categories into which a category fits. So "product" could also be at site/cat1/product
Web Design | | Highland
site/cat2/product
site/cat3/product Obviously this produces duplicate content. There's no reason why it couldn't live under 1 URL but it would take some time and effort to do so (time we don't necessarily have). As such, we're applying the canonical band-aid and calling it good. My problem is that I think this will still kill our crawl budget (this is not an insignificant number of pages we're talking about). In some cases the duplicate pages are bloating a site by 500%. So what say you all? Do we just simply do canonical and call it good or do we need to take into account the crawl budget and actually remove the duplicate pages. Or am I totally off base and canonical solves the crawl budget issue as well?0