Correct Way to Write Meta
-
OK so this is a really, really basic question. However, I'm seeing some meta written differently to normal and I'm wondering if a) this is correct and b) whether there is any benefit.
Normally it's like this:
However, I am seeing it written like this is some places:
So, the content= and name= are swapped around. I assume the people that did this were thinking that bringing the content forward would mean that Google reads keywords first.
Just wondering if anybody knows whether this is good practice or not? Just spiked my interest so apologies for the basic nature of the question!
-
Thanks guys - much appreciated. Personally I didn't think it mattered which way it went round, however just interested to hear if there was a good reason for this. The a href= example is a good example of how it shouldn't really matter.
-
As long as all the informations are there, I don't think the order matters.
Same thing for a link, you can have
And put the target or the title before the href, the link would still work fine.
-
Hi,
In regards to google, I think the best source of determining this would be Google
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=79812
To answer your question though, Google states it should be
There could be other search engines who prefer it the other way, but switching it around in my opinion would not help with rankings or keywords anymore than
the
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
-
Is there a way to get a list of all pages of your website that are indexed in Google?
I am trying to put together a comprehensive list of all pages that are indexed in Google and have differing opinions on how to do this.
Technical SEO | | SpodekandCo0 -
Google No Longer Respecting Javascript Titles & Metas
We implemented title tags and meta descriptions for one of our clients using a GTM and some JS / jQuery. It's been working well for months. Rankings started dropping and nothing had been changed. We tore our hair out. I finally noticed that Google doesn't show our titles/descripts in the SERPs anymore. So I double checked in the developer console that everything was working ok, and you can even see our title in the browser tab. Anyone else see this or have any ideas? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | bbarber570 -
Is there a way to index important pages manually or to make sure a certain page will get indexed in a short period of time??
Hi There! The problem I'm having is that certain pages are waiting already three months to be indexed. They even have several backlinks. Is it normal to have to wait more than three months before these pages get an indexation? Is there anything i can do to make sure these page will get an indexation soon? Greetings Bob
Technical SEO | | rijwielcashencarry0400 -
Is there a way to see Crawl Errors older than 90 days in Webmaster Tools?
I had some big errors show up in November, but I can't see them anymore as the history only goes back 90 days. Is there a way to change the dates in Webmaster Tools? If not, is there another place I'd be able to get this information? We migrated our hosting to a new company around this time and the agency that handled it for us never downloaded a copy of all the redirects that were set-up on the old site.
Technical SEO | | b4cab0 -
Merging two sites into a new one: best way?
Hi, I have one small blog on a specific niche and let's call it firstsite.com (.com extension) and it's hosted on my server. I am going to takeover a second blog on same niche but with lots more links, posts, authority and traffic. But it his on a .info domain and let's call it secondsite.info and for now it's on a different server. I have a third domain .com where I would like join both blogs. Domain is better and reflects niche better and let's call it thirdsite.com How should I proceed to have the best result? I was thinking of creating a new account at my server with domain thirdsite.com After that upload all content from secondsite.info and go to google webmaster to let they know that site now sits on a new domain. Also do a full 301 redirect. Should it be page by page or just one 301 redirect? And finally insert posts (they are not many) from firstsite.com on thirdsite.com and do specific redirects. Is this a good option? Or should I first move secondsite.info to my server and keep updating it and only a few weeks later make transition to thirdsite.com? I am worried that it could be too much changes at once.
Technical SEO | | delta440 -
Is this tabbed implementation of SEO copy correct (i.e. good for getting indexed and in an ok spot in the html as viewed by search bots?
We are trying to switch to a tabbed version of our team/product pages at SeatGeek.com, but where all tabs (only 2 right now) are viewed as one document by the search engines. I am pretty sure we have this working for the most part, but would love some quick feedback from you all as I have never worked with this approach before and these pages are some of our most important. Resources: http://www.ericpender.com/blog/tabs-and-seo http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/thread?tid=03fdefb488a16343&hl=en http://searchengineland.com/is-hiding-content-with-display-none-legitimate-seo-13643 Sample in use: http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors **Old Version: ** http://screencast.com/t/BWn0OgZsXt http://seatgeek.com/boston-celtics-tickets/ New Version with tabs: http://screencast.com/t/VW6QzDaGt http://screencast.com/t/RPvYv8sT2 http://seatgeek.com/miami-heat-tickets/ Notes: Content not displayed stacked on browser when Javascript turned off, but it is in the source code. Content shows up in Google cache of new page in the text version. In our implementation the JS is currently forcing the event to end before the default behavior of adding #about in this case to the url string - this can be changed, should it be? Related to this, the developer made it so that typing http://seatgeek.com/miami-heat-tickets/#about directly into the browser does not go to the tab with copy, which I imagine could be considered spammy from a human review perspective (this wasn't intentional). This portion of the code is below the truncated view of the fetch as Googlebot, so we didn't have that resource. Are there any issues with hidden text / is this too far down in the html? Any/all feedback appreciated. I know our copy is old, we are in the process of updating it for this season.
Technical SEO | | chadburgess0 -
What's the best way to eliminate duplicate page content caused by blog archives?
I (obviously) can't delete the archived pages regardless of how much traffic they do/don't receive. Would you recommend a meta robot or robot.txt file? I'm not sure I'll have access to the root directory so I could be stuck with utilizing a meta robot, correct? Any other suggestions to alleviate this pesky duplicate page content issue?
Technical SEO | | ICM0 -
What's the best way to deal with an entire existing site moving from http to https?
I have a client that just switched their entire site from the standard unsecure (http) to secure (https) because of over-zealous compliance issues for protecting personal information in the health care realm. They currently have the server setup to 302 redirect from the http version of a URL to the https version. My first inclination was to have them simply update that to a 301 and be done with it, but I'd prefer not to have to 301 every URL on the site. I know that putting a rel="canonical" tag on every page that refers to the http version of the URL is a best practice (http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=139394), but should I leave the 302 redirects or update them to 301's. Something seems off to me about the search engines visiting an http page, getting 301 redirected to an https page and then being told by the canonical tag that it's actually the URL they were just 301 redirected from.
Technical SEO | | JasonCooper0