Do you validate you websites?
-
Do you consider the guidelines from http://validator.w3.org/ when setting up a new website?
As far as I know they don't influence rankings ... What is your opinion about that topix?
-
I am with you on this. Good to check for any issues. Before focusing on SEO, functionality if my main concern.
-
I always validate HTML with sites I'm working on, particularly if has been coded by a third party. My reasons for doing so are a careful balance between ensuring spiders can crawl the page without bumping hideous html errors and ensuring a website is accessible on as many devices/browsers.
If the webpage doesn't adhere to standards it could indicate issues with viewing the pages correctly in the myriad of browsers and devices out there. So theres a User Experience issue to consider.
-
It depends on the project. I find that it is sometimes plugins that make my code not validate. If the plugin is so useful and that site renders fine in all the major browsers, I stick with the what I have, even if it doesn't validate.
-
We don't bother, I know we probably should but half of the sites we work on are CMS which just don't validate well anyway. Plus it takes time, which could be spent on more SEO
-
Like I said.... Google doesn't validate their website... Of course, Danny answered this question for Matt, sooooo.... there is no official statement from Google on this one.
-
New webmaster video from Matt Cutts about that topic:
-
I find the w3 validator to be more of an accolade than anything else. You're right about them not influencing rankings - there's so many practices that don't validate but actually lead to an unchanged or even improved UX.
IMO, getting w3 validation is like getting MozPoints, except MozPoints are worth something But that's not to say I'm knocking anyone who does follow validator guidelines - fair play to them!
-
Sure.
We do it because it's a great sales tool. Rarely do we ever find a competitor that builds W3C valid websites. In our sales pitch we talk about how our websites are W3C valid, it's adhering to a set of rules and guidelines and it's cleaner code generally which can increase load times.
We tell them they can display a W3C valid button on their site, most of them like that.
It's also a matter of doing things the right way... you can build a frame out of anything but there is a right way and a wrong way to build a door frame. We choose to do it all according to standards and best practices.
It's almost like a committment to excellence type of thing.
-
Hi David, thank you for your reply.
Would you mind sharing your arguments why you find it is important? I would be curious how many pros you find - I like your point of view.
-
It's very important to my company that all websites for our clients validate. Why? Because we feel they pay for a service and we want to provide the highest quality service.
It's like building a house and not sticking to code. We'd rather stick to code and do it the "right" way, rather than just have something that "works".
It's also a sales tool! Because none of our competitors build sites that are compliant, our sales guys use this and it works well. We explain what W3C is, why it's important, and although it doesn't help rankings, we feel it's important because it's simply a matter of doing it the right way. They like that!
-
I don't validate my website... but neither does Google.
-
I don't think it effects rankings, but perhaps the ability to be crawled. It is also good practice for the user when visiting the site. As with most SEOs today, we are not just responsible for getting to the page, but making sure they stay on the site and convert. : )
-
I have one guy in the company who is obsessed with it so no matter what I do he will go back and ensure we comply! I've seen at least one W3C nazi in each web company I have had a chance to work with
-
Even though w3c errors will not influence SEO directly there could be instances where some CSS issues could impact page speed resulting in slower spider crawls causing page speed ranking influence. We do tend to look at these reports once every quarter.
-
To use Google or any of its websites as an SEO example is by itself a mistake
-
lol - yes the resamblance is remarkable! That's the name of my boss :-).
It would be interesting if there were 2 exact same websites with just minor differences which causes some validation issues ... if the one without "faults" would rank better.
I think I even remember that Matt Cutts once said that this is not a ranking factor. Even if you put in google.com in the validator - you get several faults.
The "normal" person who looks at the webpage doesn't care either which faults are indicated in the background. So whom should I please with a w3c.org clean website? I suppose "just" to have a proper webpage....
-
Personally it is not my first worry.
But to run a validation check up doesn't cost a lot of time, so I usually do it. If it finds red marked problems, I solve them. But I don't get crazy with the many less important ones.
-
Hehehe... this old profiles database give weird result.
-
Hansj, you look remarkably like Petra!
As a former designer wannabe, I would always shoot for validation if possible. But since concentrating more on SEO issues these days, like you, I personally don't think it affects rankings.
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
-
Using one robots.txt for two websites
I have two websites that are hosted in the same CMS. Rather than having two separate robots.txt files (one for each domain), my web agency has created one which lists the sitemaps for both websites, like this: User-agent: * Disallow: Sitemap: https://www.siteA.org/sitemap Sitemap: https://www.siteB.com/sitemap Is this ok? I thought you needed one robots.txt per website which provides the URL for the sitemap. Will having both sitemap URLs listed in one robots.txt confuse the search engines?
Technical SEO | | ciehmoz0 -
Is Tag Manager a good option to insert text in websites?
Is Tag Manager a good option to insert text in websites? When a website doesn't have an administration panel adding text is a very big problem.
Technical SEO | | propertyshark0 -
Page Authority for localized version of website
Hello everyone, I have a case here were I need to decide which steps to take to improve page authority (and thus SEO value) for the German pages on our site. We localized the English version into German at the beginning of 2015. www.memoq.com - English de.memoq.com - German By October 2015 we implemented href tags so that Google would index the pages according to their language. That implementation has been successful. There is one issue though: At that time, all our localized pages had only "1" point for Page Authority ("PA" in the Moz bar). At the beginning we though that this could be due to the fact that localization was done using subdomains (de.memoq.com) rather that subfolders (www.memoq.com/de). However, we decided not to implement changes and to let Google assess the work we had done with the href tags. Its been a while now, and still all our German pages keep having only "1" point for page authority. Plus we have keywords for which we rank in the top 10 in English (US Google Search), but this not the case for the translated version of the keywords for German (Germany Google search). So my question basically is: Is this lack of page authority and SEO value rooted in the fact that we used subdomain instead of subfolder for the URL creation. If so is it likely that Page Authority for German pages and SEO value will increase if I change the structure from subdomains to subfolders? Or is it that the problem in PA is rooted somewhere else that I am missing? I appreciate your feedback.
Technical SEO | | Kilgray0 -
SEO for a a static content website
Hi everyone, We would like to ask suggestions on how to improve our SEO for our static content help website. With the release of each new version, our company releases a new "help" page, which is created by an authoring system. This is the latest page: http://kilgray.com/memoq/2015/help-en/ I have a couple of questions: 1- The page has an index with many links that open up new subpages with content for users. It is impossible to add title tags to this subpages, as everything is held together by the mother page. So it is really hard to for users to find these subpage information when they are doing a google search. 2- We have previous "help" pages which usually rank better in google search. They also have the same structure (1 page with big index and many subpages) and no metadata. We obviously want the last version to rank better, however, we are afraid exclude them from bots search because the new version is not easy to find. These are some of the previous pages: http://kilgray.com/memoq/2014R2/help-en/ http://kilgray.com/memoq/62/help-en/ I would really appreciate suggestions! Thanks
Technical SEO | | Kilgray0 -
Product meta tags are not updating in my Magneto website!
I need some help! For some reason, each time I update the product meta tags in my Magento website, it doesn't change on the current website? Could someone help me understand why that is?
Technical SEO | | One2OneDigital0 -
Two companies merge: website A redirect 301 to website B. Problems?
Hi, last december the company I work for and another company merged. The website of company A was taken offline and the home page was 302 redirected to a page on website B. This page had information about the merger and the consequences for customers. The deeper pages of website A were 301 redirected to similar pages on website B. After a while, the traffic from the redirected home page decreased and we thought it was time to change the redirect from a 302 into a 301 redirect to the home page. Because there are still a lot of links to the home page of website A and we wanted to preserve the link juice. Two weeks ago we changed the 302 redirect from website A into a 301 redirect to the home page of website B. Last week the Google webmaster tools account of website B showed the links from the 301 redirected website A. The total amount of links doubled and the top anchor text is the name of company A instead of company B. This, off course, could trigger an alarm at Google. Because we got a lot of new links with a different anchor text. A tactic used by spammers/black-hats. I am a bit worried that our change will be penalized by Google. But our change is legit. It is to the advantage of our customers to find us if they search for the name of company A or click on a link to website A. We didn´t change the change of address of domain A in Google webmaster tools yet. Is it a good idea to change the change of address of domain A into domain B? Are there other precautions we can take?
Technical SEO | | NN-online0 -
Proper way to 404 a page on an Ecommerce Website
Hello. I am working on a website that has over 15000 products. When one of these is no longer available - like it's discontinued or something - the page it's on 302s to a 404 page. Example - www.greatdomain.com/awesome-widget Awesome widget is no longer available www. greatdomain.com/awesome-widget 302s to -www.greatdomain.com/404 page. For the most part, these are not worthy of 301s because of lack of page rank/suitable LPs, but is this the correct way to handle them for search engines? I've seen varying opinions. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Blenny0 -
What is the best way to broaden the reach of our website?
We were specifically targeting the Capital Region of New York and environs and now our goal is to broaden the net to reach potential clients. Should I to drop the location terms we already have baked in to the copy and add broader location terms? OR just add newer terms? We're developing a new design that sharpens our focus, but here is what we have now: http://www.behancommunications.com Thanks for any suggestions
Technical SEO | | PatDowd0