Divs Vs Table for styled data\
-
Hello,
We're in the process of launching MultipleSclerosis.net and are a bit confused with how to present some specific information.
Looking at pages such as http://multiplesclerosis.net/symptoms/, http://multiplesclerosis.net/what-is-ms/courses-patterns/ and http://multiplesclerosis.net/treatment/prescription-nonprescription-medications/ is it better to keep this data structured as divs, and style them as tables or to keep them as tables and style them accordingly.
Though not technically "tabular" data, i'm not too sure how to handle this. The text to code ratio is quite high with the divs in the markup, which though i'm not overly worried about, it could cause some issues with the site's indexability.
Thanks I appreciate any feedback.
-
My opinion would be that DIV-based markup is the better choice here. As you said yourself, it's not really tabular data, so in using DIVs you can use semantic markup which is a positive for SEO.
You could improve/cleanup the markup of that data though, by:
-
Use
,
,
tags. Even the bolded text in the lefthand column are basically headers for the text in the righthand column.
-
You should remove the empty class="hr">tags, which I assume are in there to create the horizontal lines. It's nit picky, as if you remove them, you'll need to add a 'wrapper DIV' surrounding each row, so you won't really be cutting down on the code used that much. But having empty tags that are only there for presentation purposes is generally frowned upon. You could create the same visual effect by using a border or by using a background image (if you want the line to not fully extend across the row).
That's all pretty nitpicky coding stuff though. For SEO purposes, I think the only thing that might have an affect is using the <hx>tags.</hx>
-
-
Hey Oliver
Looking at those tables I can't see that you would have any problems with how you have done it. We do have a lot of mark up but it is all seemingly well structured with divs, unordered lists, list items etc.
I certainly would not worry about it in this case.
Marcus
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
-
Rel=Canonical Vs. 301 for blog articles
Over the last few years, my company has acquired numerous different companies -- some of which were acquired before that. Some of the products acquired were living on their previous company's parent site vs. having their own site dedicated to the product. The decision has been made that each product will have their own site moving forward. Since the product pages, blog articles and resource center landing pages (ex. whitepapers LPs) were living on the parent site, I'm struggling with the decision to 301 vs. rel=canonical those pages (with the new site being self canonicaled). I'm leaning toward take-down and 301 since rel=canonicals are simply suggestions to Google and a new domain can get all the help it can to start ranking. Are there any cons to doing so?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mfcb0 -
Title Length Vs Keywords
Hello all, I've been talking with an SEO expert who convinced me to add more keywords to my titles of a section of our site which is updated with products daily. I can see the logic and I do prefer having these additional keywords. The problem now is in Moz it says we have over 2,000 pages with title elements that are too long, which is true they are all over the 70 character limit. Is this a problem SEO wise? Speaking to our SEO expert they said it's not ideal from a user point of view as you can't see the full title, but are we going to be upsetting Google by having 150+ character titles? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HB171 -
Generating Rich Snippets without Structured Data
I noticed something in Google search results today that I can't explain. Any help would be appreciated. I performed a real estate based search and the top result featured a rich snippet showcasing the following... Address Price Bd/Ba
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RyanOD
912 Garden District Dr #17. Charlotte, NC 28202 $179,990 3 / 2
222 S Caldwell St #1602. Charlotte, NC 28202 $389,238 2 / 2&1/2 However, when I visit the page associated with this information, there is no Schema to be found. In fact, the page is, for the most part, just a large table listing homes on the market. The table headings are Address, Price, and Bd/Ba. Is it common for Google to use table based data to generate rich snippets? What is the best way to influence this? In the absence of Schema (as the page we are talking about has no Schema implementation), does Google default to table data? Has anyone seen this behavior before and, if so, can you point me to it? EDIT: I've now come across a few other examples where the information is not in a table, but rather in divs. Why are such sites (you can find some by searching for "[ZIPCODE] real estate") getting this treatment?0 -
Website.com/blog/post vs website.com/post
I have clients with Wordpress sites and clients with just a Wordpress blog on the back of website. The clients with entire Wordpress sites seem to be ranking better. Do you think the URL structure could have anything to do with it? Does having that extra /blog folder decrease any SEO effectiveness? Setting up a few new blogs now...
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PortlandGuy0 -
Relative paths vs absolute paths for links - is there a difference?
Is it better to use links like: some link VS some link is there a difference for the search engine algorithms? Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cdolek1 -
Unsure where Google has sourced this inaccurate Product Data
Hi, This is a slightly odd one I was hoping someone could shed some light on. One of our staff just did a Google search and located these listings on Google UK Product Search: http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=ink+cartridges&hl=en&sa=X&biw=1074&bih=499&tbm=shop&prmd=imvns#q=ink+cartridges&hl=en&sa=X&tbs=store:3287803270081455254&tbm=shop&prmd=imvns&ei=xp5pUP6uN8i_0QXUuoHADQ&ved=0CI0BEMcMMAE&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=333b49ec245f6031&biw=1074&bih=499 Do you happen to have any idea where Google is getting this regionalised data from and in particular the pricing which is incorrect? We have a Google (UK) Product Feed however the prices given are different than those being displayed in this localised search. Additionally the product feed that we supply relates to our main website and not a specific store. If you click through to compare prices from multiple merchants you'll see our prices being listed correctly under our company name and website rather than the incorrect pricing attributed to a specific store. I have checked our Google Places Account and our Google Product Feed Account but I just can't figure out where this data and incorrect pricing is coming from and indeed why it only affects our physical stores and not the more generalised website pricing. If someone could point me in the right direction so I can get this corrected I’d appreciate it! Many thanks Chris
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ChrisHolgate0 -
.co vs .com
hello Mozzers. question - does it make a big difference between having a .co vs a .com . I am tryign to get a URL, with the actual keywords in the URL . for example blackboots.com/ I see that the .com is taken but the .co is available, is it a good idea to buy it? also what about hyphens in urls - do they hurt or help if you actually have the keywords in the url. thanks much - you rock, V
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vijayvasu0 -
Maximum of 100 links on a page vs rel="nofollow"
All, I read within the SEOmoz blog that search engines consider 100 links on a page to be plenty, and we should try (where possible) to keep within the 100 limit. My question is; when a rel="nofollow" attribute is given to a link, does that link still count towards your maximum 100? Many thanks Guy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Horizon0