What is "evttag=" used for?
-
I see evttag= used on realtor.com, what looks to be for click tracking purposes.
Does anyone know if this is an official standard or something they made up?
-
Well, it's certainly not an SEO thing.
In fact, it's not even a valid HTML thing; here are all of the craziest, acceptable attributes for a DIV in HTML5:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/single-page.html#the-div-element
It among many, many other things, is breaking realtor.com's code through the validator:
In my experience, this one of the easiest ways to assure that Google can't crawl your site well, or put confidence in your user experience. Other crazy new standards, like schema.org do get pretty creative with structured data, but you'll notice that those use itemscope/itemprop/itemtype .... which do still pass the W3 validator:
http://schema.org/docs/full.html
In addition, there's no reference to an outside standard, even one that's totally foreign to what's generally accepted web development (similar to say, Facebook+OpenGraph, which is sometimes used, like this):
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xmlns:fb="http://www.facebook.com/2008/fbml" xmlns:og="http://opengraphprotocol.org/schema/">
I award realtor.com's web developers 0 points, and may the flying spaghetti monster have mercy on their SEO's.
To put that another way: don't copy this.
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
-
Best use of an old domain?
I've discovered that my clients website used to have another domain name, which they still own but don't use. It's doing OK considering its not been used for a few years - almost 6,000 backlinks showing on Majestic. So what's the best way of using this for SEO? I'm presuming some kind of redirecting? A simple redirect of everything on the domain to the new domain index page? Or going trough all the old pages and redirecting them one by one?
Technical SEO | | abisti20 -
"Yet-to-be-translated" Duplicate Content: is rel='canonical' the answer?
Hi All, We have a partially internationalized site, some pages are translated while others have yet to be translated. Right now, when a page has not yet been translated we add an English-language page at the url https://our-website/:language/page-name and add a bar for users to the top of the page that simply says "Sorry, this page has not yet been translated". This is best for our users, but unfortunately it creates duplicate content, as we re-publish our English-language content a second time under a different url. When we have untranslated (i.e. duplicate) content I believe the best thing we can do is add which points to the English page. However here's my concern: someday we _will_translate/localize these pages, and therefore someday these links will _not _have duplicate content. I'm concerned that a long time of having rel='canonical' on these urls, if we suddenly change this, that these "recently translated, no longer pointing to cannonical='english' pages" will not be indexed properly. Is this a valid concern?
Technical SEO | | VectrLabs0 -
Instance IDs on "Events" in wordpress causing duplicate content
Hi all I use Yoast SEO on wordpress which does a pretty good job of insertint rel=canonical in to the header of the pages where approproate, including on my event pages. However my crawl diagnostics have highlighted these event pages as duplicate content and titles because of the instance id parameter being added to the URL. When I look at the pages head I see that rel=canonical is as it should be. Please see here for an example: http://solvencyiiwire.com/ai1ec_event/unintended-consequences-basel-ii-and-solvency-ii?instance_id= My question is how come SEOMoz is highlighting these pages as duplicate content and what can I do to remedy this. Is it because ?instance_id= is part of the string on the canonical link? How do I remove this? My client uses the following plugins "All-in-One Event Calendar by Timely" and
Technical SEO | | wellsgp
Google Calendar Events Many thanks!0 -
Which one should I use Schema.org or Microformats.org
Hi, I would like to know which one is better to use Schema.org or Microformats.org My CMS doesn't support Schema.org attributes, I can only use Microformats.org documentation, but I wanted to knwo if Schema.org is better one, so I will change my CMS and use another one.
Technical SEO | | FisnikSylka0 -
Authorship Markup worth it for "invisible" authors
Greetings everyone! Background I help run multiple continuing education sites for Allied Health professionals. Our editors do a great job of getting some of the best authors in their respective fields to come onto the site and present webinars and we publish articles around those presentations. I would love to be able to use the rel=author tag on these sites as the authors we use help to improve our credibility when a user is on the site and I would like to take advantage of this in the SERPs. The issue is that while most of these authors are leaders in their respective fields and have published in many academic publications, they are not on Facebook or Twitter, let alone Google+. Also, they are probably not interested in setting up a G+ profile. They are "famous" and well published within their fields, yet they are somewhat "invisible" on the web. We are looking to implement author bios on our site and then could use the rel=author tag internally so that seems like a good first step. The question is then around linking out with rel=me to any profiles (FB, Twitter, G+) The issue is that, as I mentioned above, the online profiles are pretty scarce. Question / Discussion Is it worth it to setup all the authorship markup to internal bios on a site when many of the authors are "invisible" on G+, twitter, FB, etc. and so I will be limited in how I can link rel=me to those profiles. If the Google+ profile is not available for an author, what do you prefer to link to. Would you say FB over Twitter as FB has more users, or if a user has both profiles, but uses twitter more often, would you link to the Twitter profile instead? Many of these authors work at the university and have a bio page on the university website, would it be working linking to that profile? How do you judge the "best" place to link to if there is no Google+ profile. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | CleverPhD0 -
Is it OK for a sitemap to appear as a "Top URL" in Google Webmaster?
I'm using Google Webmaster (alongside other tools) to understand how Google is indexing my site. One of the tools is "Content Keywords", where it lists keywords that Google sees as significant for your site. The keywords shown are generally fine, but when I click on an individual word, I am often seeing our sitemap as one of the "Top URLs" that the keyword is found on (our sitemap is at system/sitemap1.xml.gz) - is this OK? Obviously I don't want to add the sitemap URL to robots.txt, but I also want to ensure that 'real' user-focused pages (e.g. our homepage) appear higher in the "Top URLs" list for the keywords, as I'm assuming this is an indicator of how the site is performing in search. Any help appreciated!
Technical SEO | | anilababla0 -
NoIndex/NoFollow pages showing up when doing a Google search using "Site:" parameter
We recently launched a beta version of our new website in a subdomain of our existing site. The existing site is www.fonts.com with the beta living at new.fonts.com. We do not want Google to crawl the new site until it's out of beta so we have added the following on all pages: However, one of our team members noticed that google is displaying results from new.fonts.com when doing an "site:new.fonts.com" search (see attached screenshot). Is it possible that Google is indexing the content despite the noindex, nofollow tags? We have double checked the syntax and it seems correct except the trailing "/". I know Google still crawls noindexed pages, however, the fact that they're showing up in search results using the site search syntax is unsettling. Any thoughts would be appreciated! DyWRP.png
Technical SEO | | ChrisRoberts-MTI0 -
Duplicate Content and Canonical use
We have a pagination issue, which the developers seem reluctant (or incapable) to fix whereby we have 3 of the same page (slightly differing URLs) coming up in different pages in the archived article index. The indexing convention was very poorly thought up by the developers and has left us with the same article on, for example, page 1, 2 and 3 of the article index, hence the duplications. Is this a clear cut case of using a canonical tag? Quite concerned this is going to have a negative impact on ranking, of course. Cheers Martin
Technical SEO | | Martin_S0