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
-
Moz crawler is not able to crawl my website
Hi, i need help regarding Moz Can't Crawl Your Site i also share screenshot that Moz was unable to crawl your site on Mar 26, 2022. Our crawler was not able to access the robots.txt file on your site. This often occurs because of a server error from the robots.txt. Although this may have been caused by a temporary outage, we recommend making sure your robots.txt file is accessible and that your network and server are working correctly. Typically errors like this should be investigated and fixed by the site webmaster.
Technical SEO | | JasonTorney
my robts.txt also ok i checked it
Here is my website https://whiskcreative.com.au
just check it please as soon as possibe0 -
Website rank 5th position than bounce
Hello A website client won't rank dor branded keyword (site name) for several months, i optimize onpage seo, did some backlinks, the DA jump to 8 (from 1). Yesterday the website rank for branded keyword 5, than 4, tomorrow can't found it.
Technical SEO | | Zidani0 -
Does my website builder/host have an effect on my SEO?
My SEO ranking has been suffering over the last year despite all my efforts. Do you think my website builder/host could negatively effect my SEO? I'm using something called jigsy. They seem really good in the sense that they are very responsive to requests for help, but I have found them to be limiting at times.
Technical SEO | | joebordersmft
I cant:
-edit H1 and H2 tags on individual pages...the same ones are plastered throughout the site as part of a "theme"
-Do any link cannonicalization, which Moz Pro is marking me with 282 critical issues for.
-and I've had numerous times I've had to search out HTML code to paste into my page because they're missing something. ...I may have just answered my question myself, but I'm wondering how much of a problem all of this might be for my SEO? I was looking at switching to something like squarespace recently but it looks like Jigsy has thought of that and doesn't have any way for me to transfer my site to another service..... ugh! site:www.joeborders.com1 -
Http urls on a new https website
Hi, If a site is quite new and setup as https from the beginning why would http variations exist? There are 301 redirects in place from the http to the https variation and also canonical tags pointing back to the http variation? This seems contradictory to me. I'm not sure why the http variations exist at all but they have gone to the trouble of redirecting these to the https variation indicating that it is the variation of choice but at the same time using a canonical tag that indicates the http variation is the original/main url? Thanks
Technical SEO | | MVIreland0 -
How can i improve alexa rank of my website
www.meetuniversities.com Meet Universities - Get connected to your dream university
Technical SEO | | debal0 -
403 forbidden error website
Hi Mozzers, I got a question about new website from a new costumer http://www.eindexamensite.nl/. There is a 403 forbidden error on it, and I can't find what the problem is. I have checked on: http://gsitecrawler.com/tools/Server-Status.aspx
Technical SEO | | MaartenvandenBos
result:
URL=http://www.eindexamensite.nl/ **Result code: 403 (Forbidden / Forbidden)** When I delete the .htaccess from the server there is a 200 OK :-). So it is in the .htaccess. .htaccess code: ErrorDocument 404 /error.html RewriteEngine On
RewriteRule ^home$ / [L]
RewriteRule ^typo3$ - [L]
RewriteRule ^typo3/.$ - [L]
RewriteRule ^uploads/.$ - [L]
RewriteRule ^fileadmin/.$ - [L]
RewriteRule ^typo3conf/.$ - [L]
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-l
RewriteRule .* index.php Start rewrites for Static file caching RewriteRule ^(typo3|typo3temp|typo3conf|t3lib|tslib|fileadmin|uploads|screens|showpic.php)/ - [L]
RewriteRule ^home$ / [L] Don't pull *.xml, *.css etc. from the cache RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !^..xml$
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !^..css$
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !^.*.php$ Check for Ctrl Shift reload RewriteCond %{HTTP:Pragma} !no-cache
RewriteCond %{HTTP:Cache-Control} !no-cache NO backend user is logged in. RewriteCond %{HTTP_COOKIE} !be_typo_user [NC] NO frontend user is logged in. RewriteCond %{HTTP_COOKIE} !nc_staticfilecache [NC] We only redirect GET requests RewriteCond %{REQUEST_METHOD} GET We only redirect URI's without query strings RewriteCond %{QUERY_STRING} ^$ We only redirect if a cache file actually exists RewriteCond %{DOCUMENT_ROOT}/typo3temp/tx_ncstaticfilecache/%{HTTP_HOST}/%{REQUEST_URI}/index.html -f
RewriteRule .* typo3temp/tx_ncstaticfilecache/%{HTTP_HOST}/%{REQUEST_URI}/index.html [L] End static file caching DirectoryIndex index.html CMS is typo3. any ideas? Thanks!
Maarten0 -
Optimizing a website which uses JavaScript and jQuery
Just a quick question (or 2) If I have divs which are hidden on my page, but are displayed when a user clicks on a p tag and the hidden div is displayed using jquery a user clicks on an a tag and the hidden div is displayed using jquery with the href being cancelled in both examples, will the hidden content be optimized, or will the fact it is initially hidden make it harder to optimize? Thanks for any answers!
Technical SEO | | PhatJP0 -
What are SEO factors in re-doing a website?
Most of my work now involves converting older websites to CMS-based sites (in Wordpress) and I'm wondering about best practices here. If I create a "dev" or "sandbox" directory for my development work how do I keep the pages from being indexed while I am working on the new site? Can I "noindex" a directory? What do I do with the old html files when the new site goes live? I'm assuming I will do a 301 redirect from domain.com/index.html to the new domain.com/, and also on all of the inner pages that have equivalent pages in the new site. But there will be a lot of old files left that have no equal in the new site. Do I just delete these, or noindex nofollw them?
Technical SEO | | bvalentine0