SEO and HTML Tags

KevinJB · 06-25-2006, 10:39 PM

I know google pays extra attention to the and tags, but does it also place emphasis on the and tags as well?

**T0d** · 06-26-2006, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinJB

I know google pays extra attention to the and tags, but does it also place emphasis on the and tags as well?

Same.

KevinJB · 06-26-2006, 12:12 AM

Quote:

Same.

What do you mean, it does?

DotZero · 06-26-2006, 12:21 AM

I actually think tags are better than tags for SEO, same with over tags.

I think it is to do with screen readers knowing how to handle the and tags, making it better coding practice

GoWFB_SEO · 06-26-2006, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DotZero

I actually think tags are better than tags for SEO, same with over tags.

I think it is to do with screen readers knowing how to handle the and tags, making it better coding practice

I think and are CSS related code, correct me if i am wrong

KevinJB · 06-26-2006, 12:32 AM

Well I wouldn't use and anyways, opting instead for their alternates, but I just wanted to know if search engines paid attention to strong and em also. Thanks!

reteep · 06-26-2006, 01:29 AM

are just outdated, but they are still being read by the Crawlers, so right now there's no difference (SEO related) between and , but you shouldn't use the obsolete and for new sites anymore...

spyderscripts · 07-03-2006, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reteep

are just outdated, but they are still being read by the Crawlers, so right now there's no difference (SEO related) between and , but you shouldn't use the obsolete and for new sites anymore...

I still use B and I tags on my client sites. Are they outdated? Sure, but in a way so are STRONG and EM tags. They are being replaced by CSS.

So if you're not using B or BR, why not jump to CSS instead of having to due to deprication in the next few years?

The tags are the same and are read the same from crawlers. It's no harder to read a B tag than a STRONG tag. The syntax is one and the same.

BILZ · 06-26-2006, 12:29 PM

Dont forget about your H1 and H2 tags.

Web Gazelle · 06-26-2006, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BILZ

Dont forget about your H1 and H2 tags.

Right. I think H1 and H2 are given more weight than bold or italic tags.

KevinJB · 06-26-2006, 12:44 PM

Quote:

I think and are CSS related code, correct me if i am wrong

They aren't CSS, but they ARE meant to be used with CSS: their counterpart and are depricated.

Question: Besides , , <title>, meta tags, and header tags, is there anything else SE's look at (of course content as well, but I meant more as in specific tags)?

MagicYoyo · 06-27-2006, 03:53 AM

& are semantic tags. That mean that the tag itself gives information on the text kind.
 & are just display information.
Search engines (could) use this enriched information to give a higher factor to this tags. Some test about 1 years ago shown that & was better than & .

PaulJames · 06-28-2006, 08:21 AM

the most important tags in terms of seo are your title, description and keywords.

dont waste time by thinking whether strong or will be picked up by SE. Build your site around contents and just use web convention when coding,

i fear by spending so much time on thinking what SE's want you guys are ignoring what your users want, remember users will equal to more higher page rank and serp results.

sitionweb · 06-30-2006, 10:55 PM

Don't waste time thinking about which tag should be better... the difference is too minimal...

Instead of tags write contents for your website and keep BL for your website, recis or one way (these last better

)

My 2 cents...

KevinJB · 07-03-2006, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Sure, but in a way so are STRONG and EM tags. They are being replaced by CSS.

Umm... no? Strong and Em are meant to be used with CSS, as CSS can't do anything (read: anything) without markup to apply it's formatting to. Putting markup like "<div class="bold">This text is to be made bold.</div>" is just plain bad CSS.

spyderscripts · 07-03-2006, 09:43 PM

You can use them both without CSS is what I'm saying. is not a CSS tag and neither is . It can be used with CSS, but it's not CSS. So why use it standalone like so many people do?

If you are, you may as well go back in time and us and to save time typing plus all those extra bits of bandwidth if you have a high traffic site.

KevinJB · 07-17-2006, 10:27 AM

Alright, I've got another question about SEO and HTML Tags

Should header tags and emphasis tags be combined? What I mean is, is there anything to be gained by using '<h3>Keyword other words Keyword other other more words</h3>'?

vangogh · 07-17-2006, 04:27 PM

In truth you shouldn't be so worried about trying to squeeze every ounce of benefit out your on page tags. it's really not going to make much difference.

When writing a page write it for your visitors and not search engines. Yes you should use keywords in your page title and if it makes sense use them in page headings. If you want to emphasize a word for your visitors then bold or italicize that word.

The time though you spend trying to get in one more keyword into a tag is better off spent doing other things to promote your site.

KevinJB · 07-17-2006, 04:33 PM

Alright, thanks! Something to chew on, that

netsearch · 07-17-2006, 06:03 PM

I think the most important tags are Heading <h1> <h2> ... and Title <Title>

Thats all I used on my SEO Book challenger site. Currently #14 just 5 days after register for SEO book