Adding Meta Languange tag to xhtml site - coding help needed
-
I've had my site dinged by Google and feel it's likely several quality issues and I'm hunting down these issues.
One of Bing's Webmaster SEO tools said my xhtml pages (which were built in 2007) are missing Meta Language and suggested adding tag in the or on the html tag.
Wanting to "not mess anything up" and validate correctly, I read in **W3C's site and it said: ** "Always add a lang attribute to the html tag to set the default language of your page. If this is XHTML 1.x you should also use the xml:lang attribute (with the same value). Do not use the meta element with http-equiv set to Content-Language."
My current html leads like:
QUESTION:
I'm confused on how to add the Meta Language to my website given my current coding as I"m not a coder.Can you suggest if I should add this content-language info, and if so, what is the best way to do so, considering valid w3c markup for my document type?
Thank you!!!
Michelle -
thank you!
-
Yeah, I don't think you'll go wrong with "en". Glad to help, hope that answers your question
-
Thanks again George. So, I guess "en" or "en-us" is ok. Most of our customers are in the US by far, but we also have a smaller percent in Australia, Canada and the UK. But they all speak English.
That being said, maybe "en" is best?
Michelle
-
At least with Google, I doubt it makes a difference unless there are multiple languages on a page. If you use Chrome you'll see it auto-detects the language and offers to translate. It may only rank the page in a specific country or locale though. If you're aiming at Spanish speakers in the UK, it may be a little different.
-
Hi Michelle, "ll-cc" stands for "language-countrycode". So in the case of English, you can use "en-us" for English United States or "en-gb" for British English. I don't believe case matters (I have seen "en-US" and "en-GB" used too).
For your question, yes you can use:
You could also use:
Either one will work fine :). Which language are you targeting?
Here is some more reading from w3.org that seems more up-to-date, though I think you would be fine using one of the above methods.
-
The Bing Webmaster Central article where they discuss how to set the language for your pages is here.
-
Hi George,
Thanks for your prompt reply - and I agree - I'm sure this isn't a big factor, but when finding reports saying things are "wrong" - I'm trying to fix them for overall improvement.I noticed w3c says: Always add a lang attribute to the html tag to set the default language of your page. If this is XHTML 1.x you should also use the xml:lang attribute (with the same value).
So, is it best practice to add it (xml:lang) to this tag you suggested (is applicable to my document)?
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en">And is "en" preferred over "ll-cc"?
Thanks again,
Michelle -
This is likely what you are looking for, but I don't think this is causing you any SEO problems.
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
-
Does we need to add a canonical tag with the mobile url in each desktop version as a result of mobile first index?
Hi, Does we need to add a canonical tag with the mobile url in each desktop version as a result of mobile first index? Thanks Roy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kadut0 -
Recommendations for the length of h1 tags and how much does it matter. What is the major disadvantage if the h1 tags are slightly longer.
recommendations for the length of h1 tags and how much does it matter. What is the major disadvantage if the h1 tags are slightly longer.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MariaMcGrath0 -
Merging Two Unrelated Sites into a Third Site
We have a new client interested in possibly merging 2 sites into one under the brand of a new parent company. Here's a breakdown of the scenario..... BrandA.com sells a variety of B2B widget-services via their online store. BrandB.com sells a variety of B2B thing-a-majig products and services (some of them large in size) not sold through an online store. These are sold more consultatively via a sales team. The new parent company, BrandA-B.com is considering combining the two sites under the new brand parent company domain. The Widget-services and Thing-A-Majigs have very little similarity or purchase crossover; so just because you're interested in one doesn't make you a good candidate for the other. We feel pretty confident that we can round-up all the necessary pages and inbound links to do proper transitioning to a new, separate third domain though we're not in agreement that this is the best course of action. Currently the individual brand sites are fairly well known in their industry and each ranks fairly well for a variety of important terms though there is room for improvement and each site has good links with the exception of the new site which has considerably fewer. BrandA.com DA = 73 - 19 years old
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | OPM
BrandB.com DA = 55 - 18 years old
BrandA-B.com DA = 40 - 1 year old Our SEO team members have opinions on what the potential outcome(s) of this would be but are wondering what the community here thinks. Will the combining of the sites cause a dilution of the topics of the two sites and hurt rankings? Will the combining of the domain authority help one set part of the business but hurt the other? What do you think? What would you do?0 -
Is my site being penalized?
I've gone through all the points on https://moz.com/blog/technical-site-audit-for-2015 but the site only ranks for its brand name after months. The website is not ranking in the top 100 for any main keywords (2,3,4 word phrases), only for a handful of very long phrases (4+). All of the content is unique, all pages are indexed, the website is fast and doesn't contain any crawl errors and there are a couple of links pointing to it. There is a sitewide follow link in the footer pointing to another domain, its parent company and vice-versa. This is not done for any SEO reasons but the companies are related and also the products are supplementary of each other. Could this be an issue? Or is my site being penalized by something else?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Robbern0 -
Meta Robot Tag:Index, Follow, Noodp, Noydir
When should "Noodp" and "Noydir" meta robot tag be used? I have hundreds or URLs for real estate listings on my site that simply use "Index", Follow" without using Noodp and Noydir. Should the listing pages use these Noodp and Noydr also? All major landing pages use Index, Follow, Noodp, Noydir. Is this the best setting in terms of ranking and SEO. Thanks, Alan
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan10 -
Site migration from non canonicalized site
Hi Mozzers - I'm working on a site migration from a non-canonicalized site - I am wondering about the best way to deal with that - should I ask them to canonicalize prior to migration? Many thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Webmaster Tools Content Keywords & Meta Tagging
In Webmaster tools , Content keywords give an indication of what Google thinks a site is about. This site is a health site ( online shopping - health supplements ) - but one of the terms it thinks the site is about is "Dollar" . I'm guessing this is because on every page there is Currency Selection from multiple currencies. How do I tell Google that this part of the page is nothing to do with what my site is about? Thanks for your reply in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | s_EOgi_Bear0 -
Canonical Tag Uses Source Title and Meta Data?
When optimising a regional same language micro site within a sub folder of a .com it dawned on me that our use of the hreflang and canonical meta elements will render individual elements such as H1 and title obsolete. As a canonical tag takes the canonical source title and meta right? It would still have value in optimising localised headings though? Appreciate any thoughts, suggestions (o:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 3wh0