Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Does blogging with a wysiwyg negatively affect SEO (vs. hand coding)?
-
Many bloggers use a wysiwyg editor to write posts. Are there any drawbacks to wysiwyg vs plain text? When I write blogs I prefer to hand code my text to be sure everything is optimized. My feeling is that wysiwyg leads to code bloat and generally fewer optimization opportunities. I have no real evidence. Is there any reason not to use the wysiwyg editor?
-
Thomas, I agree with you about a copywriter's role and expertise. My point is that there ARE differences in the copy produced by a capable wordsmith versus a writer that understands and considers things like SERP features, semantic scope, mobile vs desktop experience, the role of supporting assets, etc. I've spent so much time massaging professional copy that, by the time it was passably optimized, I had basically done it myself. So yes, I already pay 2x for optimized web copy (and code). The problem is that_ half of that cost is my time_. I would definitely pay a premium for a copywriter with SEO chops.
I digress... The question is whether decent web page / blog copy published via wysiwyg is any more or less successful, SEO-wise, than the same copy coded by hand (by which I mean foundational SEO, not ninja guru jedi sh*t). I'm asking a specific technical question; wysiswyg vs hand coding.
There is clear consensus here that coding by hand (done well) has a better chance to rank on the Google. That's pretty obvious, really. That is not the thrust of the question. Good copywriters write good copy. Good SEOs do good SEO.
Copywriting is tough. We ask these professionals to become experts in topics (and their page-level details) in a matter of just a few (billable) hours. On the other hand, we SEOs spend weeks, months, and years with our clients. We understand their market, audience, vernacular, and differentiating nuance. I don't envy the copywriters' challenge, but I will pay a premium for a unicorn who can do it all.
...I digress again... This is a technical question: What is the delta for the same copy produced via wysiwyg vs. by hand?
-
What a copywriter does best though is writing copy. Any time spent doing something like coding a blog post would not be an effective use of their time. It would probably be more cost effective to get the copywriter to do the writing and then get a web designer to design the blog post itself. Otherwise you're paying a higher hourly rate (if hourly, obviously) to a copywriter to do something they aren't efficient at.
-
Thanks everyone. It would be great if copywriters knew basic html and code. If you know anyone send them to me!! In my experience they don't and won't (HUGE opportunity here). You have all touched on the implications if wysiwyg IS a problem. If so I have to ask myself 1) how big is the problem, 2) how big is the opportunity, and therefore 3) how much are we willing to invest to hire or train these unicorns? Even bringing it up with some writers may be enough to ruffle their feathers so I'm looking for some data.
-
I really doubt. This comment section seems to somehow prove it as it also uses wysig editor. I can't really see co-relation between wysig editor and hand coding as in almost every editor you can switch to source code and manualy alter anything you need.
-
“Professional Service Provider”
No, but I agree to the fact that handing over your code to someone who may or may not know about SEO and SEO friendly codes is simply the worst idea ever. I think SEOs and content producer (in your example) have to learn at least that much of a code that they can fix their things by themselves instead of handing over it to someone who might make things worse for you!
Just a thought!
-
My feeling is that wysiwyg leads to code bloat and generally fewer optimization opportunities. I have no real evidence. Is there any reason not to use the wysiwyg editor?
If you are working really hard to make great content and a great website, then you want to be sure that your code is as good as you can make it. When wysiwyg is used, you are trusting your SEO to a coder who many or may not know anything about SEO.
Because SEO is a competitive endeavor and because one screw-up in the code can be fatal, one must either check to be sure that the wysiwyg code is perfect of take control of the coding yourself.
I found a long time ago that I can only bet on myself for certain things. My work isn't perfect, but my work on a bad day is often better than the work of many "professional service provders" on a good day. So I bet on myself.
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
-
URL Path. What is better for SEO
Hello Moz people, Is it better for SEO to have a URL path like this: flowersite.com/anniversary_flowers/dozen_roses OR flowersite.com/dozen_roses Is it better to have the full trail of pages in the URL?
On-Page Optimization | | CKerr0 -
"translation" of code in htaccess file
Hi everyone! I am a newbie to the whole SEO and html thing and I am trying to get a better understanding of the "behind the scenes" part of my website. I hope I can find someone here who can translate a piece of code for me that I have in my htaccess file: Options -Multiviews
On-Page Optimization | | momof4
Options +FollowSymLinks
rewritecond $1 !^(index.php|public|tmp|robots.txt|template.html|favicon.ico|images|css|uploads)
rewritecond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f
rewritecond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d
rewriterule ^(.*)$ index.php?link=$1 [NC,L,QSA] I know that something is getting redirected to the index file, but what (or when) exactly? Does the word "robots"mean that search engine crawlers are getting redirected here? And is this good or bad (in terms of SEO)? Or is this redirecting people who try to get to my robots/ template or image files?? Thanks in advance for any answers!0 -
Using Escaped Fragments with SEO
Our e-commerce platform is in the process of changing to what we call app based stores (essentially running in a browser as single page web-app) With these new stores they are being built in HTML 5 and using escaped fragments.
On-Page Optimization | | marketing_zoovy.com
Currently merchants are usually running 2 stores until we launch to app site at 100%. My questions are really concerning the app stores which right now show on a subdomain but will essentially take over the primary domain. Here is an example:
app.tikimater.com and app.sportsworld.com Since I am not a developer, I'm really having a hard time understanding the escaped fragments. I'm using this but https://developers.google.com/webmasters/ajax-crawling/docs/getting-started I'm not sure what my actual urls should look like and what the canonical should be set to. Right now they have been removed but previously they had http:app.tikimaster.com#!v=1 Also, and how I should be setting up my meta information for Google so 1) pages are indexed timely 2) pages are indexed with the correct information. I am still setting the meta titles and descriptions but in some instances Google uses other info. With the new platform we are moving away from on page content (written paragraphs) but category pages would have related products embedded. Should I still be pushing to have some type of intro text, since it would solely be for SEO and not the shoppers experience. All product pages have content (product description etc) Thank you for any advice0 -
ECommerce Filtering Affect on SEO
I'm building an eCommerce website which has an advanced filter on the left hand side of the category pages. It allows users to tick boxes for colours, sizes, materials, and so on. When they've made their choices they submit (this will likely be an AJAX thing in a future release, but isn't at time of writing). The new filtered page has a new URL, which is made up of the IDs of the filter's they've ticked - it's a bit like /department/2/17-7-4/10/ My concern is that the filtered pages are, on the most part, going to be the same as the parent. Which may lead to duplicate content. My other concern is that these two URLs would lead to the exact same page (although the system would never generate the 'wrong' URL) /department/2/17-7-4/10/ /department/2/**10/**17-7-4/ But I can't think of a way of canonicalising that automatically. Tricky. So the meat of the question is this: should I worry about this causing issues with the SEO - or can I have trust in Google to work it out?
On-Page Optimization | | AndieF0 -
Do Parent Categories Hurt SEO?
I have parent categories and subcategories. Will it be harder for the subcategories to rank well because they have a parent category? The URL is longer, for one. I am just wondering if I should not have parent categories. I have one category page doing really well and I am trying to boost the others (most of which are subcategories) and this is a concern for me. Thanks! Edit: I also have a category that has 2 parent categories. I want it automatically in those 2 categories and one of its own. By itself it is very important keyword. Is this ok or should I have it be a parent category?
On-Page Optimization | | 2bloggers0 -
What is the most SEO friendly Shopping Cart?
What is the most SEO friendly shopping cart? I have been using zen-cart for 6 years. Seems Google doesn't like it as much as other carts. I started a new site about 6 months ago using Magento. When I build links to this site the terms move. The terms are very similar. So I would imagine the competition is the same. I am curious if anybody has tried with different carts and found anyone to be better than the others. Also the new site has about one tenth the amount of products but has a lot more pages indexed.
On-Page Optimization | | kicksetc0 -
Best SEO structure for blog
What is the best SEO page/link structure for a blog with, say 100 posts that grows at a rate of 4 per month? Each post is 500+ words with charts/graphics; they're not simple one paragraph postings. Rather than use a CMS I have a hand crafted HTML/CSS blog (for tighter integration with the parent site, some dynamic data effects, and in general to have total control). I have a sidebar with headlines from all prior posts, and my blog home page is a 1 line summary of each article. I feel that after 100 articles the sidebar and home page have too many links on them. What is the optimal way to split them up? They are all covering the same niche topic that my site is about. I thought of making the side bar and home page only have the most recent 25 postings, and then create an archive directory for older posts. But categorizing by time doesn't really help someone looking for a specific topic. I could tag each entry with 2-3 keywords and then make the sidebar a sorted list of tags. Clicking on a tag would then show an intermediate index of all articles that have that tag, and then you could click on an article title to read the whole article. Or is there some other strategy that is optimal for SEO and the indexing robots? Is it bad to have a blog that is too heirarchical (where articles are 3 levels down from the root domain) or too flat (if there are 100s of entries)? Thanks for any thoughts or pointers.
On-Page Optimization | | scanlin0