Can DIVS that look like frames hurt?
-
We are working with a site that has what appears to be a frame in the middle but it is not targeting a new html page it is just a div hiding content until you use the scroll bar.
What are best practices for working with this?
-
The answer is... it depends.
In general, Google doesn't like hidden content - but search engines won't penalize you for it unless they find that the hidden content is meant to deceive. In this case it doesn't sound like it's meant to deceive, but there are a few things to check to make sure the content is being indexed properly.
1. Does the content require javascript or flash to become visible? If so, it's possible for search engines to disregard it.
2. While it's common to place content in divs with CSS attributes set to 'hidden' (for usability purposes) and it's common for Google to index this content, it's hard to say how much seach engines will "weight" this content in it's ranking algorithms.
3. Check Google's cache of the page, and click the text-only link (for example, here's Google's text-only cache of this page. Is there any text visible that's not visible to the user under normal circumstances? This text may not be treated the same way by search engines as completely visible text.
Best practice is to view your site with javascript disabled (you can do this with the MozBar) and make sure everything is visible. If not, you may want to make sure everything degrades gracefully to ensure maximum accessibility, and maximum indexation by search engines.
-
Hello,
Hidden Divs or interactive content is okay as long as its there for enhancing the user experience. A good example would be a thumbnail image, upon click or rollover the image enlarges with some text describing the picture. A bad example would be a highlighted word when rolled over provides an tool tip with an ad or keyword spam in it.
Always design with User experience as a priority, then Search Engine. What you will find is that the more people who enjoy and talk about your site, the better the search engines will rank your site. That is how it is suppose to work, search engines want to return the most relative and best website for every query they receive, by focusing on the user first your are in essence doing SEO.
Hope that helps,
Don
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
-
Can you rank without 10 x content
If I create a page about a "Normandy bike tour "and present the same things (pictures, hotels, dates, day by day itinerary, clients reviews, map) as my competitors can I still rank ? Or do I need to add something totally that my competitors don't have on their webpages to rank and compete ? Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
Can Google bypass an AJAX link?
On my company's events calendar page when you click an event, it populates and overlay using AJAX, and then the link that is populated in that overlay then takes you to the actual events page. I see this as a problem with Google because it can't follow the AJAX link to the true event page, so right now nothing on those pages is getting indexed and we can't utilize our schema to get events to populate in the Google rich snippets or the knowledge graph. Possible solutions I considered: 1. Remove the AJAX overlay and allow the link from the events calendar to go directly to the individual event. 2. Leave the AJAX overlay and try to get the individual event pages directly indexed in Google. Thoughts and suggestions are greatly appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MJTrevens0 -
Potential issue: Page design might look like keyword stuffing to a web crawler
We have an interesting design element we might try on our home page. Here's a mockup: https://codepen.io/dsbudiac/pen/Bwrgjd I'm worried web crawlers will interpret this as keyword stuffing and affect our rankings. It features: Mostly transparent/hidden text Repeating keyword list I could try a couple methods to skirt around crawling concerns: Load keywords through an iframe Make the keywords an image (would significantly increase page load) Inject keywords after page load into a container w/ javascript (prob not effective as crawlers are only getting better at indexing javascript) Load the keywords into an svg element Load the keywords into a canvas element via javascript I have a few questions: Should I be concerned about any potential keyword stuffing / SEO issues with this design? Can you comment on the effectiveness (with proof) of the above strategies? Am I better off just abandoning this type of design?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dsbud0 -
Can I duplicate my websites content on Ebay Store?
Our company is setting up a store on Ebay. Is it okay to duplicate our content descriptions on our ebay store with a link going back to our website? Or would this potentially hurt us in Search?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | hfranz0 -
How can i redirect my site to other domain ?
I have been running an eCommerce site since 2008 and have a PR3 with mostly have an authority link from reputed sites, how can I transfer my existing eCommerce site to the new domain so in the new domain i get SEO value from the old domain. Please advice.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | chandubaba0 -
Effect of I-Frame on Google Rank
My commercial real estate web site (www.nyc-officespace-leader.com) allows visitors to search for office space listings. The site sources listings through a third party and they are displayed in an i-frame. The i-frame directs visitors to listing pages such as: http://listings.nyc-officespace-leader.com/getspace.mpl?sp_id=A0173921&cust_id=offspldr Atleast 10,000 of these pages have backlinks to my site. My question is the following: Could these tens of thoudands of alpha numeric URLs be detrimental to my sites ranking on Google after the Panda/Penguin updates? SIte traffic dropped from 7,000 per month to about 3,300 after the April Google update. Rewriting content for dozens of pages and adding a blog have only somewhat mitigated the negative effects of Panda/Penguin. Could Google be viewing these links from the third party lisitng provider as a negative when they viewed these links as a plus before? Any downside to removing the third party links and parsing these listings from landlord websited and displaying them as part of my site with their own URL, title tag, description tag? Obviously the new URLS would not be alphanumeric. If these links have not caused the drop in traffic last April, what could be responsible? Thanks in advance for your opinion!!! Alan
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan10 -
What if you can't navigate naturally to your canonicalized URL?
Assume this situation for a second... Let's say you place a rel= canonical tag on a page and point to the original/authentic URL. Now, let's say that that original/authentic URL is also populated into your XML sitemap... So, here's my question... Since you can't actually navigate to that original/authentic URL (it still loads with a 200, it's just not actually linkded to from within the site itself), does that create an issue for search engines? Last consideration... The bots can still access those pages via the canonical tag and the XML sitemap, it's just that the user wouldn't be able to access those original/authentic pages in their natural site navigation. Thanks, Rodrigo
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AlgoFreaks0 -
Can you explain why the site is dropping off Google every other week?
Can anyone offer any insight into why since the Google Panda update www.bedandbreakfastsguide.com has been fluctuating on Google so much? One week it's ranked as it used to be, the next it's nowhere to be seen? If you take a look at the screenshot of our traffic, this is the traffic after 75% loss (dropped in two stages) you'll see we get traffic for a week and then nothing. This has been happening for months. Some points that might be involved: Around the same time the SEO guys suggested setting the canonical url to www.bedandbreakfastsguide.com (before there wasn't one so traffic was coming from www. and non-www). A lot of the original urls have been consolidated and rel="canonical" added throughout The "pages" of results all have had a rel="canonical" set to page 1 Could it be that the www is competing with the non-www despite the 301 redirects. We're doing everything we can to help this client (and have reduced their site errors from the millions to low tens-of-thousands) so it's not filling them with confidence when their site just keeps plumetting! What's also irritating/odd is that some of their competitors -who used to be ranked lower and have sites which contradict every rulebook still rank high. Hopefully you can spot something we've missed. Tim I8PNL
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TimGaunt0