Do you validate you websites?
-
Do you consider the guidelines from http://validator.w3.org/ when setting up a new website?
As far as I know they don't influence rankings ... What is your opinion about that topix?
-
I am with you on this. Good to check for any issues. Before focusing on SEO, functionality if my main concern.
-
I always validate HTML with sites I'm working on, particularly if has been coded by a third party. My reasons for doing so are a careful balance between ensuring spiders can crawl the page without bumping hideous html errors and ensuring a website is accessible on as many devices/browsers.
If the webpage doesn't adhere to standards it could indicate issues with viewing the pages correctly in the myriad of browsers and devices out there. So theres a User Experience issue to consider.
-
It depends on the project. I find that it is sometimes plugins that make my code not validate. If the plugin is so useful and that site renders fine in all the major browsers, I stick with the what I have, even if it doesn't validate.
-
We don't bother, I know we probably should but half of the sites we work on are CMS which just don't validate well anyway. Plus it takes time, which could be spent on more SEO
-
Like I said.... Google doesn't validate their website... Of course, Danny answered this question for Matt, sooooo.... there is no official statement from Google on this one.
-
New webmaster video from Matt Cutts about that topic:
-
I find the w3 validator to be more of an accolade than anything else. You're right about them not influencing rankings - there's so many practices that don't validate but actually lead to an unchanged or even improved UX.
IMO, getting w3 validation is like getting MozPoints, except MozPoints are worth something
But that's not to say I'm knocking anyone who does follow validator guidelines - fair play to them!
-
Sure.
We do it because it's a great sales tool. Rarely do we ever find a competitor that builds W3C valid websites. In our sales pitch we talk about how our websites are W3C valid, it's adhering to a set of rules and guidelines and it's cleaner code generally which can increase load times.
We tell them they can display a W3C valid button on their site, most of them like that.
It's also a matter of doing things the right way... you can build a frame out of anything but there is a right way and a wrong way to build a door frame. We choose to do it all according to standards and best practices.
It's almost like a committment to excellence type of thing.
-
Hi David, thank you for your reply.
Would you mind sharing your arguments why you find it is important? I would be curious how many pros you find - I like your point of view.
-
It's very important to my company that all websites for our clients validate. Why? Because we feel they pay for a service and we want to provide the highest quality service.
It's like building a house and not sticking to code. We'd rather stick to code and do it the "right" way, rather than just have something that "works".
It's also a sales tool! Because none of our competitors build sites that are compliant, our sales guys use this and it works well. We explain what W3C is, why it's important, and although it doesn't help rankings, we feel it's important because it's simply a matter of doing it the right way. They like that!
-
I don't validate my website... but neither does Google.
-
I don't think it effects rankings, but perhaps the ability to be crawled. It is also good practice for the user when visiting the site. As with most SEOs today, we are not just responsible for getting to the page, but making sure they stay on the site and convert. : )
-
I have one guy in the company who is obsessed with it so no matter what I do he will go back and ensure we comply! I've seen at least one W3C nazi in each web company I have had a chance to work with
-
Even though w3c errors will not influence SEO directly there could be instances where some CSS issues could impact page speed resulting in slower spider crawls causing page speed ranking influence. We do tend to look at these reports once every quarter.
-
To use Google or any of its websites as an SEO example is by itself a mistake
-
lol - yes the resamblance is remarkable! That's the name of my boss :-).
It would be interesting if there were 2 exact same websites with just minor differences which causes some validation issues ... if the one without "faults" would rank better.
I think I even remember that Matt Cutts once said that this is not a ranking factor. Even if you put in google.com in the validator - you get several faults.
The "normal" person who looks at the webpage doesn't care either which faults are indicated in the background. So whom should I please with a w3c.org clean website? I suppose "just" to have a proper webpage....
-
Personally it is not my first worry.
But to run a validation check up doesn't cost a lot of time, so I usually do it. If it finds red marked problems, I solve them. But I don't get crazy with the many less important ones.
-
Hehehe... this old profiles database give weird result.
-
Hansj, you look remarkably like Petra!
As a former designer wannabe, I would always shoot for validation if possible. But since concentrating more on SEO issues these days, like you, I personally don't think it affects rankings.
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
-
Spam score on a clean website assistance
Hi there, I wondered if someone could help please? I have a site http://www.thecybermagician.com which since I last looked now has a Spam score of 33% I have gone through my links and also read the MOZ articles describing the 27 things which it may be article here: https://moz.com/help/link-explorer/link-building/spam-score but am still struggling to see why my spam score is 33% as it doesn't have any spam links coming into the site. One of the of 5% spam score I have asked for it to be removed. I wondered if you could help me please? Thanks again Duncan
Technical SEO | | derire91 -
Sitemap generator partially finding list of website URLs
Hi everyone, When creating my XML sitemap here it is only able to detect a portion of the website. I am missing at least 20 URLs (blog pages + newly created resource pages). I have checked those missing URLs and all of them are index and they're not blocked by the robots.txt. Any idea why this is happening? I need to make sure all wanted URLs to be generated in an XML sitemap. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Taysir0 -
Http urls on a new https website
Hi, If a site is quite new and setup as https from the beginning why would http variations exist? There are 301 redirects in place from the http to the https variation and also canonical tags pointing back to the http variation? This seems contradictory to me. I'm not sure why the http variations exist at all but they have gone to the trouble of redirecting these to the https variation indicating that it is the variation of choice but at the same time using a canonical tag that indicates the http variation is the original/main url? Thanks
Technical SEO | | MVIreland0 -
Finding websites that don't have meta descriptions
Hi everyone, as a way to find new business leads I thought about targeting websites that have poor meta descriptions or where they are simply missing. A quick look at SERPs shows this is still a major issue for many businesses. Is there any way I can quickly find pages for which meta description is lacking? Thank you! Best regards, Florian
Technical SEO | | agencepicnic0 -
Website analysis for SEO
Hi, We have been trying to gain ranking for 7 keywords for a year now but have been unsuccessful We are not sure where we are going wrong, if someone could please help us out, we are happy to pay for your time.
Technical SEO | | mframing0 -
Duplicate Pages on GWT when redesigning website
Hi, we recently redesigned our online shop. We have done the 301 redirects for all product pages to the new URL (and went live about 1.5 week ago), but GWT indicated that the old product URL and the new product URL are 2 different pages with the same meta title tags (duplication) - when in fact, the old URL is 301 redirecting to the new URL when visited. I found this article on google forum: https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/webmasters/CvCjeNOxOUw
Technical SEO | | Essentia
It says we either just wait for Google to re-crawl, of use the fetch URL function for the OLD URLs. Question is, after i fetch the OLD URL to tell Google that it's being redirected, should i click the button 'submit to index' or not? (See screengrab - please note that it was the OLD URL that was being fetched, not the NEW URL). I mean, if i click this button, is it telling Google that: a. 'This old URL has been redirected, therefore please index the new URL'? or
b. 'Please keep this old URL in your index'? What's your view on this? Thanks1 -
Hreflang and canonical for multi-language website
Hi all, We're about to have a new website in different languages and locations, which will replace the existing one. Lets say the domain name is example.com. the US version will be example.com/en-us/ and the UK version will be example.com/en-uk/. Some of the pages on both version share the same content. So in order to solve it, we're about to use hreflang on each page + a canonical tag which will always use the US address as canonical address. My question is - since we are using canonical tag along with hreflang, is there a possibility that a user who is searching with Google.co.uk will get the canonical US address instead of the UK address? Or maybe the search engine will know to display the right localized address since (UK) i've been using hreflang? It is really important for me to know, because i'm afraid we will lose the high rankings that we have right now on google.co.uk. Thanks in Advance
Technical SEO | | Operad-LTD0 -
Website Grader Report - Permanent Redirect Not Found
Have you ever checked HubSpot's website grader at www.websitegrader.com? I usually notice that the tool gives an error namely "Permanent Redirect Not Found" with below explanation: "Search engines may think www.example.com and example.com are two different sites.You should set up a permanent redirect (technically called a "301 redirect") between these sites. Once you do that, you will get full search engine credit for your work on these sites. :(Website Grader) Can we trust this tool?
Technical SEO | | merkal20050