- 52
- Sphinn It!
Posted By: Glendz 700 Days ago
Source: http://www.seocontest2008.com
Category: SEO
10 Comments
10 Comments
Search Engine Land produces SMX, the Search Marketing Expo conference series. SMX events deliver the most comprehensive educational and networking experiences - whether you're just starting in search marketing or you're a seasoned expert.
Join us at an upcoming SMX event:
Learn more about search marketing with our free online webcasts and webinars from our sister site, Search Marketing Now. Upcoming online events include:
Comments
A claim backed up by Googles own documentation:Does validating my site (with a tool such as the W3C validator) help my sites ranking in Googles search results pages?http://groups.google.com/group/Google_Webmaster_Help/web/faqs-for-crawling-indexing-and-ranking-2#valid-codeNo, at least not directly. However, to the extent that cleaning up your HTML makes your site more accessible to people with disabilities or folks accessing your pages on portable or other devices, it can improve the popularity of your site... increasing natural links to your site (which can help with your Google ranking), traffic, and so on.
Thanks John, I wonder if the indirect benefit is worth doing for most of my clients who have sites that really dont validate. If it is worth spending the time?
Glendz, that would depend. If there are other more important factors that can be fixed those should be done first. Also, if there are egregious errors that break the crawler you should clean those up. After the important stuff is done you can go back and clean up the code. It wont hurt and may make things easier for the crawlers but there are many more important things to work on before you start worrying about validation.
Look at the cached version of your page on Google. If it looks OK, validation is nice but not necessary. If you only see part of the page, you have a problem and the validation process will probably fix it - if the page looks ok in IE and FF, its probably invalid code that is making the spider break.
I still make sure my site validates well, but it is more of a superstitious belief that it will help ranking *LOL* But I like MattWas test. If cached version does not show a complete page, then it can be a broken tag somewhere. Something open and not properly closed. I think web designers and web developer with good XHTML habits would rarely encounter this problem. I think validation is a good QA step in general for any web company before making their site go live. Whether or not there is an SEO benefit.
I try to validate everything, as long as I can do it quickly. If I have a problem getting a page to validate, I usually dont bother. I have some sites that are completely validated, some that are a mess, and there is no apparent pattern to their rankings. So for me, validation is gravy: great to have but nonessential.
Bad code can stop parts of a page being indexed, or prevent certain links from being followed.Really bad code can cause wierd rendering problems in certain browsers. In some cases it can even crash the browser.Why even bother to add a DOCTYPE declaration to the page if you dont validate the code to that standard?
g1smd is right, partially at least.Really bad code can mean that a crawler cant make sense of the page to read content or links.However, theres absolutely no need to satisfy all the requirements of these high and mighty standards. As long as the main tabs such as tags, etc are there (and closed) then a crawler should have no problem finding that it needs.http://www.crawlscore.com/blog/make_your_website_easier_to_crawl1. Well structured HTML This doesnt mean that your site has to adhere to W3C standards but at the very least, one set of tags will help and generally ensuring your HTML tags are closed.
I think its always worth making sure the site validates just to make sure you havent made any big cock-ups which might be visible to search engines but not users.
We better make site validation an important step in web publication