In order for Google to recognize a hyper-link on your website, does it have to be written in a specific java script?
-
Does it have to read as the following script?
-
Not a problem I find that all too often, if the question is a bit ambiguous - people will ignore it. If there are only a handful of interpretations, I will still try to answer
-
Thank you, that was extremely insightful and helpful.
-
Just so you are aware, the code-sample which you supplied is HTML and not JavaScript (or for that matter, any type of script. Scripting languages include JavaScript, Python, Ruby, Perl etc).
You may be asking one of two things (I think!):
1) Is there a set HTML format for hyperlinks which Google knows how to read?
Yes, and you can find **information all about ** conventional use of the <a></a><a>(HTML) tag here:</a>
<a></a>
<a></a>
HTML is a static language and is not (unlike many scripting languages) 'object oriented'. You don't define "<a>" and as such</a> <a>is not interpreted based upon your programmed parameters.</a> <a>always means the same thing (to a a web browser). Sure stuff like CSS can style links in different ways, JavaScript can modify</a> <a>tags by injecting event-tracking attributes etc (also a common use of jQuery) but fundamentally the usage of</a> <a>is</a> <a>(mostly) universally agreed. So yes - links are coded according to conventions and Google will interpret those widely accepted conventional use-cases, as well as a few more experimental deployments (possibly through error handling in Google's algorithms). In general, you should follow W3C / W3 Schools guidelines. There are many forms of link (no-followed links, text links, image links) and all are valid but yes - they are predetermined</a>
<a>2) This is the HTML which my JavaScript will output - is it ok?
Yeah it's fine dude. If you can handle JS, you can handle HTML (it's way simpler). One thing though, although Google can deploy rendered (JS-enabled) crawling, that involves using headless browsers and such to render the 'modified' source code (so, what you see in 'inspect element' is the modified source. What you see in "view page source" is different, that's the pre-modified or base-source code).
Usually speaking this takes 10x longer than simple DOM / base-source scrapes. As such if Google were to deploy that tech on every crawl for every page on the web, the efficiency hit to their 'index the web' mission would be colossal. Many studies show that Google will not render JS on all sites (especially one perceived to be low value). Even on sites where they will use this tech, they won't deploy it all of the time. There really is no substitute for forcing your links and content to be readable in the base-source code (un-modified). It's way better for crawlers, way more efficient for them to work with. Just because Google ' can' do something, it doesn't mean they always will. It doesn't mean it's a good idea to ignore basic SEO principles!
Hope that helps</a>
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
-
When we use 'link:' for who get the link, how come google show us the same domain as a link.
the search result show the domain of its own. what is is? and is it meaningful as a link?
Link Building | | onedaykorea0 -
When pitching a whitepaper as Push Content for Link Building, is it ok to give the person I'm pitching a link to a landing page with a form on it?
When pitching a whitepaper as Push Content for Link Building (i.e. pushing out content that my client has created), is it ok to give the person I'm pitching a link to a landing page with a form on it? Or should I create a landing page with the whitepaper included on it? I’m not sure if the client will be ok with this b/c I know they use the whitepaper for sales purposes to gain leads. For example, my pitch email would include a line such as this, "the whitepaper can be found at LINK and I'd love if you could share it with your readers." I think it may be weird/a little wrong to ask a webmaster to include a link on his site to a landing page with a form to get the whitepaper. Does this make sense? What have others done with whitepapers as Push Content for link building?
Link Building | | ArketiGroup1 -
1000 of links on my website ? is it good or bad
Hi guys my site: www.dorchdanola-netbutik.dk is a e-commerce store, and generally we have many links on all pages because of the many products and categories. Im not sure if this is actually bad or good? I've been told that it will definately harm my site when google crawls it. The thing is that google visit my site often and I still have good pageranks in google. So does it actually harm my site having all these products and categories? And what can I do about it if google see every page as duplicate content? I also link to my social pages like FB, G+, e.g. Should I put rel="nofollow" or rel="me" on these social links? Thanks guys!
Link Building | | Dorchdanola0 -
HELP - Should I Disavow SEO, Site Analysis, and Website Worth Links?
I have a gadget site and have MANY links to my site from sites that offer web analysis or SEO tools. For example, the site chkme.com has over 1,000 links to my home page. I don't know who they are, why they are linking to my site, and their site is irrelevant to my industry. Should I disavow links from sites like these? My site seems to be linked to from a lot of "website worth" type sites as well. I think I may have been hit with an unnatural site penalty but I do NO blackhat or any type of link building whatsoever. Thanks in advance 😉
Link Building | | Humanovation0 -
Root Domain Link for Affiliate's Link
It seems my affiliate link: http://www.hrmsplugins.com?partners=21 is not being considered as a "root domain" backlink when this link is used on their website. Is there a reason for this?
Link Building | | delphia0 -
How Would Google Approach Devaluing Infographic Links?
How do you think Google would go about devaluing infographic links? Suppose the infographic image itself is not hyperlinked to the creator's site but there is a paragraph that mentions the creator and links to their site. How would Google distinguish the infographic creator's link from other external links on the page?
Link Building | | ProjectLabs0 -
Does Google use link CTR as a factor?
Been wondering for a while if Google might be using CTR of links pointing your site? Anyone run any tests or have any clues?
Link Building | | Crunchii0 -
Link building / baiting in the Google zoo
I work for a consultancy, and in the past most of our links have been acquired by giving away privacy statements etc for websites, including a link back in the body of the document, and making it a licensing requirement that the link be kept. We're launchinga new site. We want this one to be whiter-than-white, and would appreciate some advice on the following options. Option 1: no links Remove the links from the documents, and don't require links for the use of the documents. Leave a non-linking credit in the documents. Perhaps ask nicely for links from other pages. Option 2: links on other pages Remove the links from the documents, but make it a licensing requirement that users will link to our site from another page on their site. I appreciate that most won't, but some will. Option 3: retain the links Keep the links in the document, using domain name (with and without http and www) and business name anchor text. Option 4: script the links Use scripts to generate randomized links in the documents, so that no two are the same, but with relevant linking text for the most part. We're risk-adverse with the new site, and it will pick up some links "naturally". We're therefore tending toward option 1, on the basis that it may well generate as many links as option 2. Which of these options would you choose? Are there any other options we should be considering?
Link Building | | seqal0