How important is w3c validation for mobile sites???
-
So mobile sites are all the rave, but how many are doing it correctly and with all the different options which is correct or the best?
For example I have a guy telling me that the mobile site must validate here http://validator.w3.org/mobile/ or here http://ready.mobi/launch.jsp?locale=en_EN
However I have run many so called mobile sites like nike (m.nike.com) and those built by dudamobiles and all dramatically fail the above tests!
Responsive is another key element of web design and the guys at twitter came up with bootstrap, so I ran these sites through the above validators and all have failed.
I take this site as an example from ilovebootstrap.com, please note this is not my site but was top of thelist on here.
Mobi Ready
2 / 5 - result poor mobile experience
Results from google pagespeed
Mobile 62 / 100
Desktop 83 / 100
So while it looks good on mobile devices it does not score well
If you look at the google site: http://www.howtogomo.com/en-gb/d/why-get-mo/
The case studies listed all fail the validation tests, so my question is is it worth getting our mobile sites validated and will this affect rankings?
-
Hi Andrew,
Passing or not W3C won't mean your site is mobile friendly or not, there are other, far more meaningful criteria and validations you should do. Foe example:
- Your site is correctly shown and accessible through the most popular devices used by your users. You can use Opera Mobile Emulator to test it.
- Your site loads fast in mobile devices (that usually have also more speed restrictions). You can use PageSpeed Insights to test it.
In dependance of what type of mobile site approach you have followed (parallel mobile web under a different URL structure, dynamic serving or responsive Web design) you also have good practices and additional recommendations that you should assess.
Please take a look at this Moz post where I shared the answers to the most common questions during a Mobile SEO process, you will likely find the answers to your questions there.
I hope this helps!
-
I would look at it the other way around., am I concerned about what it fails me for.
yes I would go with responsive design, bootstrap is a good for layout,
yes I would try to get a good score on page speed,
-
So you would stick with responsive design and work on making the site load as fast as possible and getting highest possible score on google page speed?
-
There is no direct benefit from w3 validation for SEO.
Having a functional, fast site has usability benefits. Google does factor engagement/usability into the search algorithm. For mobile sites, Google is more interested in how mobile users are redirected (if necessary) and if the page loads reasonably fast.
-
So if we looking at optimisation then Google Pagespeed is the only point we should worry about?
You don't think there is any SEO benefit from having a w3c valid mobile site?
-
don't bother with w3.org for the reasons you point out.
I don't try to pass validation for the sake of passing, If the validation has logic behind it that concerns me then I take note.
I use Microsoft Visual Studio code analysis(fxcop) for server side code for performance and reliability , I use the JSHint and Web essentials (css) for client side code, I use the Bing SEO API for SEO, all of these are built into Visual Studio, I also use the IIS Bing SEO Tools for a more detailed look at the SEO.
I just ran a site of mine though w3.org and they gave me 3 errors, all nonsense
for example
Line 5, Column 59: Bad value X-UA-Compatible for attribute http-equiv on element meta.This is the correct tag to tell Internet explorer how to render the page, if you listen to the w3.org, then you page will not render correctly in IE.
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
-
DNS Prefetching for wordpress site
We have given below as DNS prefetch in our website. CMS is wordpress. Are these okay? I wonder why fonts.googleapis.com is not working. One of our competitors is using youtube. Can we improve it any how?
Web Design | | vtmoz0 -
404's and a drop in Rank - Site maps? Data Highlighter?
I managed an old (2006 design) ticket site that was hosted and run by the same company that handled our point of sale. (Think, really crappy, customer had to click through three pages to get to the tickets, etc.) In Mid February, we migrated that old site to a new, more powerful site, built by a company that handles sites exclusively for ticket brokers. (My site: TheTicketKing. - dot - com) Before migration, I set up 301's for all the pages that we had currently ranked for, and had inbound links pointing to, etc. The CMS allowed me to set every one of those landing pages up with fresh content, so I created unique content for all of them, ran them through the Moz grader before launch, etc. We launched the site in Mid February, and it seemed like Google responded well. All the pages that we had 301's set up for stayed up fairly well in rank, and some even reached higher positions, while some took a few weeks to get back up to where they were before. Google was also giving us an average of 8-10K impressions per day, compared to 3000 per day with the old site. I started to notice a slow drop in impressions in mid April (after two months of love from Google,) and we lost rank on all our non branded pages around 4/23. Our branded terms are still fine, we didn't get a message from Google, and I reached out to the company that manages our site, asking if they had any issues with their other clients. They suggested that I resubmit our sitemaps. I did, and saw everything bump back up (impressions and rank) for just one week. Now we're back in the basement with all the non branded terms once again. I realize that Google could have penalized us without giving us a message, but what got me somewhat optimistic was the fact that resubmitting our sitemaps did bring us back up for around a week. One other thing that I was working on with the site just before the drop was Google's data highlighter. I submitted a set of pages that now come back with errors, after Google seemed to be fine with the data set before I submitted it. So now I'm looking at over 300 data highlighter errors when I'm in WMT. I deleted that set, but I still get the error listings in WMT, as if Google is still trying to understand those pages. Would that have an effect on our rank? Finally I do see that our 404's have risen steadily since the migration, to over 1000 now, and the people who manage the CMS tell me that it would have no effect on rank overall. And we're going to continue to get 404's as the nature of a ticket site would dictate? (Not sure on that, but that's what I was told.) Would anyone care to chime in on these thoughts, or any other clues as to my drop?
Web Design | | Ticket_King0 -
Average Time to Conversion on Site
I am curious to know if there is a way to view or calculate the average time it takes site visitors to convert per session. For example, based on a current website design, the average time on site might be 3 minutes and the number of conversions might be 100. is there a way to say that for the current website design, it takes 3 minutes for the average site visitor to submit a web form? Then, as I redesign the site, my goal would be to improve the average time to conversion by making the web form more accessible and require less information within the form itself. I don't think this is currently possible in GA. Has anyone figured out a way to accomplish this by use of traditional tracking tools? Or, am I facing having to code my site to record each visitor's time on site from the second they enter and then stop the clock when they submit the form?
Web Design | | dsinger0 -
Ecommerce Site - SEO
We have a Business Catalyst Site with the Same product Listed in 2 different catalogs. Each product page is the same page with different URLs you can see it here: http://www.yourpharmacy.co.nz/beauty/clarins-skincare/clarins-advanced-extra-firming-eye-contour-cream-20ml http://www.yourpharmacy.co.nz/clarins/clarins-advanced-extra-firming-eye-contour-cream-20ml Any suggestions welcome
Web Design | | OnlineAssetPartners0 -
Is it cloaking/hiding text if textual content is no longer accessible for mobile visitors on responsive webpages?
My company is implementing a responsive design for our website to better serve our mobile customers. However, when I reviewed the wireframes of the work our development company is doing, it became clear to me that, for many of our pages, large parts of the textual content on the page, and most of our sidebar links, would no longer be accessible to a visitor using a mobile device. The content will still be indexable, but hidden from users using media queries. There would be no access point for a user to view much of the content on the page that's making it rank. This is not my understanding of best practices around responsive design. My interpretation of Google's guidelines on responsive design is that all of the content is served to both users and search engines, but displayed in a more accessible way to a user depending on their mobile device. For example, Wikipedia pages have introductory content, but hide most of the detailed info in tabs. All of the information is still there and accessible to a user...but you don't have to scroll through as much to get to what you want. To me, what our development company is proposing fits the definition of cloaking and/or hiding text and links - we'd be making available different content to search engines than users, and it seems to me that there's considerable risk to their interpretation of responsive design. I'm wondering what other people in the Moz community think about this - and whether anyone out there has any experience to share about inaccessable content on responsive webpages, and the SEO impact of this. Thank you!
Web Design | | mmewdell0 -
Best Way To Have HD Videos On Site That Will Work On Mobile Devices
Hi, I hope someone can help me with this. I am working on a site for a client who works at a video production company. They want to have a fair few HD videos on there site but also for the site and videos to be viewable on mobile devices. I have got a responsive wordpress theme and the site is beginning to take shape. I am wondering however how I can best get the videos to display on mobile devices while maintaining a good load speed. Until now I have been using amazon S3 which stores and feeds the videos and I use Easyvideoplayer to embed the videos. The problem is they do not appear to show up from mobile devices when using wordpress. can anyone suggest the best way for me to still feed the videos from S3 but get them to display on mobile devices. oh, they are private videos so they cannot be placed on youtube.
Web Design | | jensonseo0 -
Development site accidentally crawled - Will this cause problems?
We are currently developing a new version of our website and to make it easy to access for all team members, we just set it up on a server accessible via a publicly accessible domain name (ie devsite.com). There has been no SEO and no links created to this site, or so I thought. Recently, I found out that Google somehow found its way to this development site and has been indexing the pages! I was a little alarmed, as there are no links to the domain and we'll soon be transitioning all the content over to our primary production domain. I immediately created a robots.txt file to disallow access to the entire development domain. My fear is that there may be some duplicate content penalty if Google sees that the content that is on our new site (once it goes live and is pushed to our REAL domain name) was previously indexed on our test domain. We're slated to launch in 2-3 weeks. Is there anything else I should do? Should I even be worried? I'm probably a bit paranoid, but given the amount of time and effort that has gone into this new site, I love any advice or thoughts. Thank You!
Web Design | | AndrewY0 -
Best way of conserving link juice from non important pages
If I have a bunch of non important pages on my website which are of little use in the SE's index - IE contact us pages, pages which are near duplicate and conflict with KW's targetting other pages etc, what is the best way of retaining the link juice that would normally be passed to these pages? Most recent discussion I have read has said that with nofollow you effectively just loose link juice, as opposed to conserving it, so that doesn't seem a great option. If I do "noindex" on these pages, would that conserve the link juice in the site, or again would it be just lost? It seems quite a tricky situation as many pages are legitimate for customer usability, but are not worth having in the SE's index and you better off consolidating link juice - so it seems you are getting penilised for making something "for users". Thanks
Web Design | | James770