Are W3C Validators too strict? Do errors create SEO problems?
-
I ran a HTML markup validation tool (http://validator.w3.org) on a website. There were 140+ errors and 40+ warnings. IT says "W3C Validators are overly strict and would deny many modern constructs that browsers and search engines understand."
What a browser can understand and display to visitors is one thing, but what search engines can read has everything to do with the code.
I ask this: If the search engine crawler is reading thru the code and comes upon an error like this:
…ext/javascript" src="javaScript/mainNavMenuTime-ios.js"> </script>');}
The element named above was found in a context where it is not allowed. This could mean that you have incorrectly nested elements -- such as a "style" element
in the "body" section instead of inside "head" -- or two elements that overlap (which is not allowed).
One common cause for this error is the use of XHTML syntax in HTML documents. Due to HTML's rules of implicitly closed elements, this error can create
cascading effects. For instance, using XHTML's "self-closing" tags for "meta" and "link" in the "head" section of a HTML document may cause the parser to infer
the end of the "head" section and the beginning of the "body" section (where "link" and "meta" are not allowed; hence the reported error).and this...
<code class="input">…t("?");document.write('>');}</code>
The element named above was found in a context where it is not allowed. This could mean that you have incorrectly nested elements -- such as a "style" element in the "body" section instead of inside "head" -- or two elements that overlap (which is not allowed).
One common cause for this error is the use of XHTML syntax in HTML documents. Due to HTML's rules of implicitly closed elements, this error can create cascading effects. For instance, using XHTML's "self-closing" tags for "meta" and "link" in the "head" section of a HTML document may cause the parser to infer the end of the "head" section and the beginning of the "body" section (where "link" and "meta" are not allowed; hence the reported error).
Does this mean that the crawlers don't know where the code ends and the body text begins; what it should be focusing on and not?
-
Google is a different case being run through the validator. I actually read an article on why google's site do not validate. The reason is that they send so much traffic, it actually saves them a good amount of money not closing tags that do not matter. Things like adding a self closing / to an img tag and the sorts.
While I do not think that validation is a ranking factor, I wouldn't totally dismiss it. It make code easier to maintain, and it has actually gotten me jobs before. Clients have actually ran my site through a validator before and hired me.
Plus funny little things work out too, someone tested my site on nibbler and it came back as one of the top 25 sites. I get a few hundred hits a day from it. I will take traffic any where I can get it.
-
I agree with Sheldon, and, just for perspective....try running http://www.google.com through the same w3c HTML validator. That should be an excellent illustration. A page with almost nothing on it, coded by the brilliant folks at Google still shows 23 errors and 4 warnings. I'd say not to obsess over this too much unless something is interfering with the rendering of the page or your page load speed.
Hope that helps!
Dana
-
Generally speaking, I would agree that validation is often too strict.
Google seems to handle this well, however. In fact, I seem to recall Matt C. once saying that the VAST majority of websites don't validate. I think he may have been talking strictly about HTML, though.
Validation isn't a ranking factor, of course, and most prevalent browsers will compensate for minor errors and render a page, regardless. So I really wouldn't be too concerned about validation just for validation's sake. As long as your pages render in most common browsers and neither page functionality nor user experience is adversely affected, I'd consider it a non-issue. As to whether a bot could be fooled into thinking the head had ended and the body had begun, I suppose it's possible, but I've never seen it happen, even with some absolutely horrible coding.
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
-
Index problems, Part 2
Hi Guy's A few weeks ago i posted a question:
Technical SEO | | Happy-SEO
https://moz.com/community/q/index-problems After some good advice, we changed a few things: www.domain.com <<< NL version www.domain.com/fr/ <<<< French version (domain.com/nl/ 301 redirect to domain.com). So the SERPS for keyword ‘shutters’ went from #32 to #8...... for 2 day's.... and gone.... and not comming back anymore.... Did we missed something? Help is much appreciated, thanks 🙂3 -
Homepage 301 and SEO Help
Hi All, Does redirecting alternate versions of my homepage with a 301 only improve reporting, or are there SEO benefits as well. We recently changed over our servers and this wasn't set-up as before and I've noticed a drop in our organic search traffic. i.e. there was no 301 sending mywebsite.com traffic to www.mywebsite.com Thanks in advance for any comments or help.
Technical SEO | | b4cab0 -
Duplicate Page Errors
Hey guys, I'm wondering if anyone can help... Here is my issue... Our website:
Technical SEO | | TCPReliable
http://www.cryopak.com
It's built on Concrete 5 CMS I'm noticing a ton of duplicate page errors (9530 to be exact). I'm looking at the issues and it looks like it is being caused by the CMS. For instance the home page seems to be duplicating.. http://www.cryopak.com/en/
http://www.cryopak.com/en/?DepartmentId=67
http://www.cryopak.com/en/?DepartmentId=25
http://www.cryopak.com/en/?DepartmentId=4
http://www.cryopak.com/en/?DepartmentId=66 Do you think this is an issue? Is their anyway to fix this issue? It seems to be happening on every page. Thanks Jim0 -
Is it a problem to have an image + link in your menu
Hi, My menu has a image with links to some of the main pages on the site and text underneath it explaining what the banner is. Will it be beneficial or harmful to have the text hyperlinked to the same pages the images go to?
Technical SEO | | theLotter0 -
The impact of mulstisite wordpress on seo
hi there, i would talk about a specific topic: The impact of mulstisite wordpress on seo Do you think that penalize seo activity ? i make you an example : a wordpress network of sites, domain based let the possibility to manage two domain on a single wp install, but even if the domains are separete, how does google see them, as separate or as a sigle domain?
Technical SEO | | guidoboem0 -
SEO LINKS
New to S.E.O. so excuse my naivety. I have made lots of new links some of them paid for e.g. Best of the Web but I don’t see any change in the latest competitive link analysis. Some of the links we have been accepted for just do not show. Also the keywords we are trying to promote the most have disappeared off the radar for over 2 weeks now. I think we have followed the optimization suggestions correctly. Please could you enlighten me. Regards Paul www.curtainpolesemporium.co.uk
Technical SEO | | CPE0 -
Australian Web Design and SEO
Hi Guys, I really could do with some gudienace or answers to the following questions: Are the any specific web design or technical issues that are different in Australian search engines compared to the UK? Are there any web design issues that are different to the UK? Are there any useful things I should consider from an SEO point of view if I am launching a website in Australia compared to the UK? Any helpw ould be much apprciated! Thanks Gareth
Technical SEO | | GAZ090