Re: [css-d] Standrards Compliance -fine-tuning
Neal, at a minimum for SEO, include keywords/phrases searchers might use: 1. Expand your title tag (currently just Construct Web) to include the tagline: Standards-Compliant Web Design / Development 2. Add a description tag Think of these in terms of the highlighted words/phrases that might show in a search engine results page. On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 1:53 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: apologize for the cross post. I created a page (pages) for a client and they will be used mostly for SEO This is the (very simple) page: http://www.constructweb.com/seo/ It validates! - anything else that be suggested from the css/html (maybe SEO if it's not too OT) perspective that would make this page even more web standards compliant? Thanks Neal life is certain death is short ~furry lewis __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/ -- Pat C [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Standrards Compliance -fine-tuning
Thanks Pat but I was referring to a different page Now I have two of them: http://www.constructweb.com/seo/a http://www.constructweb.com/seo/b which one do most people think is better for SEO and web standards http://www.constructweb.com/seo/b has a IRT (Image replacement Technique) implemented I do not think that is a problem with google? Neal Neal, at a minimum for SEO, include keywords/phrases searchers might use: 1. Expand your title tag (currently just Construct Web) to include the tagline: Standards-Compliant Web Design / Development 2. Add a description tag Think of these in terms of the highlighted words/phrases that might show in a search engine results page. On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 1:53 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: apologize for the cross post. I created a page (pages) for a client and they will be used mostly for SEO This is the (very simple) page: http://www.constructweb.com/seo/ It validates! - anything else that be suggested from the css/html (maybe SEO if it's not too OT) perspective that would make this page even more web standards compliant? Thanks Neal life is certain death is short ~furry lewis __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/ -- Pat C [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/ life is certain death is short ~furry lewis __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Standrards Compliance -fine-tuning
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: anything else that be suggested from the css/html (maybe SEO if it's not too OT) perspective that would make this page even more web standards compliant? There doesn't seem much seriously wrong here, but here's some best practice issues for whatever they're worth: * Provide textual equivalents for the logo and tag line in the site banner. Ensure the information doesn't disappear when the users' color choices are enforced and/or background images are not displayed. IMG with ALT is generally preferable to using background-image-based text replacement for this reason: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#text-equiv (The tag line should probably just be straight text.) * Specify color, background-color, and (optionally) background-image all together, in order not to conflict with user's chosen color defaults: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-CSS-TECHS/#style-color-contrast * Indicate language with lang=en on html: http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-lang-why * Explicitly specify the encoding in your HTTP header (Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1) to discourage user agents trying to guess (HTTP headers take precedence over http-equiv markup, though the later is used when a document is loaded locally). http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/charset.html#h-5.2.2 * Move meta http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 / to be the first child of head, since it could affect how later content is interpreted: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/charset.html#h-5.2.2 * If this page is meant to attract search traffic, link text beginning with Back to seems odd (non-optimal for users and SEO). * It's a small and debatable point, but I think hyphenated-class-names have the slight edge over camelCaseClassNames of matching microformat conventions and compressing very slightly better: http://microformats.org/ http://www.websiteoptimization.com/speed/tweak/lowercase/ -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
[css-d] Standrards Compliance -fine-tuning
apologize for the cross post. I created a page (pages) for a client and they will be used mostly for SEO This is the (very simple) page: http://www.constructweb.com/seo/ It validates! - anything else that be suggested from the css/html (maybe SEO if it's not too OT) perspective that would make this page even more web standards compliant? Thanks Neal life is certain death is short ~furry lewis __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Standrards Compliance -fine-tuning
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.constructweb.com/seo/ It validates! - anything else that be suggested from the css/html (maybe SEO if it's not too OT) perspective that would make this page even more web standards compliant? Thanks Neal As far as the Web Standards stuff is concerned: 1/ The document is valid so you're good to go on that. 2/ It uses CSS instead of tables for layout so you're good to go on that, too. 3/ Whether it is properly structured and semantically marked up-- I'll leave that to others, and the other list you posted on, to answer. 4/ Works in any Web browser. Hmm, guess that might depend on how one defines works and exactly what means by any. As far as what works my opinion is, your page should: -- make sense with css disabled -- not let the header links become hidden from view with font-scaling. -- not allow heading h1 to become hidden from view with font-scaling. -- not set primary content less than user default -- make sense with images disabled -- A thin red line and a salmon-color ampersand forthcoming. http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
