Improvement in Page Speed worth Compromise on HTML Validation?
-
Our developer has improved page speed, particularly for Mobile. However the price for this improvement has been a HTML validation error that cannot be removed without compromising on the page load speed. Is the improvement in speed worth the living with the validation error? The concern is paying a high SEO price for this "fatal error". Or perhaps this error is in fact not serious?
-
Fatal Error: Cannot recover after last error. Any further errors will be ignored.
From line 699, column 9; to line 699, column 319
>↩ ↩
`OUR DEVELOPER'S COMMENT:
| This was made following Google page speed insights recommendations. If we remove that, will loose on page load performance |
The domain URL is www.nyc-officespace-leader.com`
-
-
Yeah sequence of load is also important when its time to go granular to find the true opportunities. Because the up-front evaluation time that can identify issues, can often result in faster-easier-more template-driven ways to speed up everything on a larger scale with less effort needed.
That doesn't mean its okay to ignore other bottlenecks. Just that the more clarity of understanding, the more likely real, sustainable success can be achieved.
-
I agree with Alan's points. I have also found WebSiteTest.com really useful. It allows for multiple runs on multiple devices and you can download the results in CSV. Expanding on Alan's point around looking at bottleneck points, when you use these tools, you need to take time to understand the waterfall chart as that is where you can see how the browsers interact with all of these files (html, css, js, images etc).
I have been doing a ton of reading on front end optimization recently. Aside from all of the above, you could have issue with the critical rendering path (great resources here and here). Many times folks look at a single asset and say, "This javascript file is too big, lets minify it and get faster!" That is a good thing and will help you. That said, you have to look at the render path as you may have that same smaller JS file blocking other downloads that need to be downloaded first to render the page faster. Optimizing the render path can give you some additional gains.
Good luck!
-
Kingalan1
I'm not a programmer by trade - the way I begin even considering these things is by running tests on various tool platforms.
For example, put a page you think is slow into URIValet.com - test as Googlebot. The resulting report has a block of information in it regarding total size of files processed. It breaks that data down to file types. Look at the CSS/JS lines - if they are more than 50k to 100k total for either CSS or JSS, there is almost certainly inefficiency in there, and likely unnecessary bloat.
Go to WebPageTest.org and do the same - put in the URL you want to check - choose a server location and DSL (which gives a fair mid-range speed evaluation), and Chrome as the browser emulator. The resulting report gives you a lot of information, however the one page in that report that may be most helpful in this situation is the "Details" report - if you go there, and scroll down, you'll get to the section that lists, line by line, every single file, script, image and asset processed for that page, and all of the data on speed of processing each step of the way (such as First Byte Time, DNS lookup, SSL lookup, and more). Those can reveal several individual bottleneck points.
-
Thanks for your excellent, highly detailed response!!
Is there a way to test the CSS files that my developer has created to see if they are coded in an efficient and concise manner?
We use a virtual private server at Inmotion Hosting and Amazon CDN for for images. So I would think that the hosting service is adequate. Traffic does not exceed 3000 unique visitors a month so the load on the server is minimal.
-
1. Taking shortcuts that are not sound sustainable based methods to gain value somewhere else is almost certainly going to become a problem when you least expect it at some future date and this is a great example. Moving CSS and or JS to below the proper location is a recipe for complete page display failure on any number of devices that may or may not current exist.
Have you tested your pages with Google's Fetch and Render to ensure they properly load, or where they may get a "partial" result? If they get a "partial" result, that's a red flag warning that you ignore at your own peril.
2. You haven't provided numbers - is the page speed improvement a case of going from 20 seconds to down to 5 seconds? Or is it going from 8 seconds to 6 seconds? Or what? This matters when evaluating what to care about and expend resources on.
3. If just moving those to their proper place in the page header section is causing speeds to slow down dramatically, you have bigger problems. First one that comes to mind is "why do those scripts / CSS files cause so much speed slowdown? Its likely they're bloated and need to be reduced in size, or they're housed on a pathetic cloud server that is itself doing you more harm than good.
-
I'm not sure if it would affect the current page speed but it would fix the invalid HTML error from the validator. If the validation errors concern you it might be worth giving it a try and testing the result? It's good to make sure that pages validate all the high issues at least to be sure of no possible display or rendering issues in different browsers now or in the future.
-
Would correcting the code in this manner so the html validates result in a slower page load timE?
-
That error is coming up from the validator because the links to your stylesheets are outside the ending body and html tags. The stylesheet links normally go within the tags at the top but I understand from what you've said for page speed these have been moved to the bottom page however no tags / html / stylesheets / javascript etc should be outside the ending and tags.
If you move the CSS stylesheet references and the comments so they are where the javascript files are (before the ending tags) that would fix the fatal error you are seeing.
Hope that helps!
-
Thanks so much. I understand most errors are not too important. However I wonder if a "fatal" error should not be of grater concern.
Thanks, Alan
-
I am not a developer so any developer with a SEO background can tell you better but in general page load speed is important both from user point of view as well as search engine rankings and as far as W3C validation is concern, there are quite a few errors that you can ignore in order to stick with your page load speed.
Hope this helps!
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
-
Why has my home page replaced my sub-category page for set of keywords? Happened 2x in last 2 weeks for day or so only to fix itself. What is going on?
Today I noticed a really weird problem. Our LED Step Lights page (https://www.pegasuslighting.com/led-step-lights.html) has been replaced in the search results with our home page. See screenshot below. As I started to research what was going on, I noticed that this same thing must have happened on January 26 and 27 because in my Analytics I can see that our LED Step Lights sub-cat page had a sudden drop in traffic on those two days only to bounce back again on the 28th. See screenshot below. Our LED Step Lights page has had no changes in content, meta information, or anything in months. We have done no recent link building to this page in years. I don't understand what is going on. This is a popular page for us generating decent traffic. I really don't understand what is going on or even how to try and resolve this problem. I checked our Search Console. No messages. No manual web spam actions. Nothing to suggest that anything is going on except for the weird drops in traffic. Has anyone ever seen this happen before? Does anyone have any ideas as to what may be going on? serp-led-step-lights.png organic-traffic-drops.png search-console-led-step-lights.png
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cajohnson0 -
Should we show(to google) different city pages on our website which look like home page as one page or different? If yes then how?
On our website, we show events from different cities. We have made different URL's for each city like www.townscript.com/mumbai, www.townscript.com/delhi. But the page of all the cities looks similar, only the events change on those different city pages. Even our home URL www.townscript.com, shows the visitor the city which he visited last time on our website(initially we show everyone Mumbai, visitor needs to choose his city then) For every page visit, we save the last visited page of a particular IP address and next time when he visits our website www.townscript.com, we show him that city only which he visited last time. Now, we feel as the content of home page, and city pages is similar. Should we show these pages as one page i.e. Townscript.com to Google? Can we do that by rel="canonical" ? Please help me! As I think all of these pages are competing with each other.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sanchitmalik0 -
Big discrepancies between pages in Google's index and pages in sitemap
Hi, I'm noticing a huge difference in the number of pages in Googles index (using 'site:' search) versus the number of pages indexed by Google in Webmaster tools. (ie 20,600 in 'site:' search vs 5,100 submitted via the dynamic sitemap.) Anyone know possible causes for this and how i can fix? It's an ecommerce site but i can't see any issues with duplicate content - they employ a very good canonical tag strategy. Could it be that Google has decided to ignore the canonical tag? Any help appreciated, Karen
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Digirank0 -
SEO structure question: Better to add similar (but distinct) content to multiple unique pages or make one unique page?
Not sure which approach would be more SEO ranking friendly? As we are a music store, we do instrument repairs on all instruments. Currently, I don't have much of any content about our repairs on our website... so I'm considering a couple different approaches of adding this content: Let's take Trumpet Repair for example: 1. I can auto write to the HTML body (say, at the end of the body) of our 20 Trumpets (each having their own page) we have for sale on our site, the verbiage of all repairs, services, rates, and other repair related detail. In my mind, the effect of this may be that: This added information does uniquely pertain to Trumpets only (excludes all other instrument repair info), which Google likes... but it would be duplicate Trumpet repair information over 20 pages.... which Google may not like? 2. Or I could auto write the repair details to the Trumpet's Category Page - either in the Body, Header, or Footer. This definitely reduces the redundancy of the repeating Trumpet repair info per Trumpet page, but it also reduces each Trumpet pages content depth... so I'm not sure which out weighs the other? 3. Write it to both category page & individual pages? Possibly valuable because the information is anchoring all around itself and supporting... or is that super duplication? 4. Of course, create a category dedicated to repairs then add a subcategory for each instrument and have the repair info there be completely unique to that page...- then in the body of each 20 Trumpets, tag an internal link to Trumpet Repair? Any suggestions greatly appreciated? Thanks, Kevin
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kevin_McLeish0 -
Cleaning bad pages
We have 10,000 of bad pages, which panda could track and penalize us for that. If we delete them we will get 404 error, and after that we could again get penality from G algo. How can i delete them to follow google rules and avoid penalities? If we make redirect of 10k pages with 301 to index, can 10k old pages be treated as duplicate?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bele0 -
Improvement suggestions - Wanted!
Hi Mozzers, I'm looking for any suggestions on how to improve my on page SEO for www.data-contracts.co.uk Main keyword is 'Concrete repair' which is sitting at around about 20/21 in the SERP's Looking for blatantly obvious ideas that I've missed too Thanks in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Hughescov0 -
Where is the best place for Landing Pages to reside on the Home Page?
On this site http://www.austintenantadvisors.com/ I have my main landing pages listed in the navigation under "Types". The reason why I did this is because I am not sure where to insert those on the home page where it does not look spammy to Google and looks natural for users. Obviously they need to appear somewhere on the home page for Google to be able to continue crawling and indexing them. Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | webestate0 -
Remove Landing Pages?
Howdy Guys, I've just been listening to the latest edition of whiteboard Friday regarding the over-optimization penalty. I'm just wondering if we should remove alot of make specifc landing pages... For instance we have a landing pages for our top 20 cars... For instance "bmw keyword" or "audi keyword" What do you guys think? remove them and 301 the pages to the homepage? Thanks, Scott
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ScottBaxterWW0