Inches or " Feet or ' Does Google translate the symbols?
-
I have a client who sells things that the size is important. In their industry some people say "15 Inch Blue Widget" and others say "15" Blue Widget" using the symbol " for inches. On the page I know we could say both to cover all the bases but I want to get the title right. In their industry there is not one more preferred than the other. Does anybody know if Google translates ' to feet and " to inches. Should I work both into the title for a product or only one?
-
Joshua,
It's my experience that Google disregards punctuation of that sort, however, I'd use both of them on the page. I'd use "inches" in your written description of the product and the " in the technical spects of the product.
-
I never heard that Google use any specific version more important than the other one but as a user I would advise you to use one format so that when user land on your page they see a single format though out the website.
I personally don’t think this will impact rankings in any way!
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
-
How long does Google take to reduce the index size?
A few months ago, we have incorporated our custom search in our website www.ergodotisi.com . We hadn't been paying a lot of attention to our webmaster analytics, to find out a few months later than the Google Index had grown from 2K- 3K pages to one million because it was crawling all combinations of search filters. We have now followed the right instructions to add noindex meta tags and blocked most search result pages from the robot.txt. We allow indexing of some main categories by setting new seo-friendly url structures. A few weeks have passed and the index size has only reduced to 700K. How long does it take before it removes most of the duplicated search result pages from the index? Is it still crawling those pages but has not fully decided to remove most of them? How bad is this for SEO?
On-Page Optimization | | cplastiras840 -
Should I be worried about our 'Duplicate' content
Hi guys... I've just been working through some issues to give our site a little cleanup. I'm working through our duplicate content issues (we have some legitimate duplicate pages that need removing, and some of our dynamic content is problematic. Are web developers are going to sort with canonical tags this week.) However... There are some pages that are actually different products, but are very similar pages that are 'triggering' MOZ to say we have duplicate pages. Here an example... http://www.toaddiaries.co.uk/filofax-refills/filo-12-month-inserts-personal-size/fortnight-view-filofax-personal and http://www.toaddiaries.co.uk/filofax-refills/filo-12-month-inserts-personal-size/week-to-a-view-filofax-personal They are very similar refill products, it's just the diary format is different. Question: Should I be worried about this? I've never seen our rankings change in the past when 'cleaning up' duplicate content. What do you guys think? Isaac.
On-Page Optimization | | isaac6630 -
Do these items affect Google ranking or Quality Score?
Hi community, After my first crawl of a site that I'm working to improve the SEO on, I find that I have about 500 issues regarding missing Alt Text and Title text for images on my site, as well as about 175 issues with regard to duplicate meta description, missing meta descriptions, and too short/too long meta descriptions. My client is not sure it matters to fix these items and only wants to do so if they have an affect on Google ranking or Quality Score. Does anyone know? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | gataninc0 -
Any idea how Google is doing this? Is it schematic? http://techcrunch.com/2014/02/28/google-adds-full-restaurant-menus-to-its-search-results-pages/
Google is now showing menus on select searches. Any idea how they are getting this information? I would like to make sure my clients get visibility this way.
On-Page Optimization | | Ron_McCabe0 -
Rel="canonical" link should they be to or from an "SEO friendly" url
Thanks for taking the time to review this. So for our example, lets use the following SEO friendly link: http://hiu.calibermediagroup.com/undergraduate-on-campus/academics/colleges/pacific-christian-college-of-ministry-and-biblical-studies/BA-biblical-studies We'll call this link the SEO VERSION The title of the college is" Pacific Christian College of Minstry and Biblical Studies" The title of the program is "BA Biblical Studies" The QUERY version of the link to this page would be something like: http://hiu.calibermediagroup.com/undergraduate-on-campus/academics/colleges/index.php?collegeid=22&programid=34 Keep in mind that the meta title, description, and keyword tags for the page are all administerable The SEO VERSION is automatically created from the title of the college, and the title of the program. Each one of these titles can be overidden with a URL slug individually. For instance, the admin could make the link: http://hiu.calibermediagroup.com/undergraduate-on-campus/academics/colleges/pacific-christian-college-of-ministry/biblical-studies by changing the slug for the college to "pacific-christian-college-of-ministry" and the slug for the program to "biblical-studies". Let's call this version the SLUG VERSION So now we have multiple ways to get to the same content. The question on the table is what is best practice for the rel="canonical" link to keep from getting dinged for duplicate content. Let's say that our SEO VERSION is the canonical link for 1 year. Then the choice was made to optimize the links thru the slugs creating the SLUG VERSION. My assumption is that we would keep the SEO VERSION as the canonical link. But then let's say 6 months later that the title of the program is changed in the admin. Now the SEO VERSION has changed and so has the canonical link. Do we lose the link juice garnered over the last 18 months? It would seem to me, that if we use the QUERY version as the canonical link, then any optimizations or changes affect everything except the canonical link, thus keeping the previous link juice earned. But is having an ugly URL as the canonical link detrimental to SEO? Please advise.
On-Page Optimization | | robertdonnell0 -
Rel="canonical" on home page?
I'm using wordpress and the all in one seo pack with the canonical option checked. As I understand it the rel="canonical" tag should be added to pages that are duplicate or similar to tell google that another page (one without the rel="canonical" tag) is the correct one as the url in the tag is pointing google towards it. Why then does the all in one seo pack add rel="canonical" to every page on my site including the home page? Isn't that confusing for google?
On-Page Optimization | | SamCUK0 -
Does having a "+" in a URL hurt SEO? Would much value be gained changing it to a hyphen?
There's a site that contains "+" signs in the URL in order to call different information for the content on the page. Would it be better to change those to hyphens (-), or not that much value will be gained, so leave them as is? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | MitchellStoker0 -
Should my client remove "SEO" from the XML sitemap name?
I have suggested to a client with limited content on their site (considering it's in a very competitive sector with oceans of content possibilities!) that they probably shouldn't name the XML sitemap featuring their "seo content pages" (I hate that terminology BTW!) - google_sitemap_seo.xml My reasoning is that if I was a Google engineer or Google bot, I would probably ignore and disregard those pages because they are most likely poor quality content/doorway pages/boiler plate pages/ "enter your descriptive phrase here" pages. The push back from tech is that it doesn't make a difference so we're not going to do it.
On-Page Optimization | | Red_Mud_Rookie0