Re: [css-d] Generally: CSS and SEO

Many thanks for replies. I have a partially formed view. I mention partially because until sitting down in an Edinburgh pub with a knowledgeable blind person I'd had a complete view. I believe content comes first. It should read well, both in screen readers and SE bots. Accordingly, a detailed

Re: [css-d] Generally: CSS and SEO

tedd wrote: Using anything /may/ cause problems -- it's the experience/skill of the user that makes the difference. If by user you mean 'the visitor', then no particular experience/skill should matter. The basics should just work, and the rest should not prevent it from doing so. If, OTOH, by

Re: [css-d] Generally: CSS and SEO

At 4:49 AM +0200 5/30/06, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: tedd wrote: Pitfalls: - repositioned bits and pieces may not scale well when subjected to font-resizing. Use em's. Using 'em' for dimensioning and positioning works just fine in some cases, but not at all in others. It all depends of what

[css-d] Generally: CSS and SEO

I've mostly lurked on this list for more than three years but had this niggling issue going round in my mind. As I understand it, best search engine results are obtained by placing content nearest the top of page code - matching key words in h1, alt, title tags and first sentence of content is

Re: [css-d] Generally: CSS and SEO

My question is this: is it more search engine friendly to use a mark-up format of Columns / Header / Footer and use CSS position:absolute to place Header above Columns and Footer? If so, what are the pitfalls, if any? TIA for response. Mike A. Hi Mike, I think thelist

Re: [css-d] Generally: CSS and SEO

Robert O'Rourke wrote: My question is this: is it more search engine friendly to use a mark-up format of Columns / Header / Footer and use CSS position:absolute to place Header above Columns and Footer? If so, what are the pitfalls, if any? I think thelist (http://lists.evolt.org) would

Re: [css-d] Generally: CSS and SEO

Thanks Robert, My apologies, I wasn't specific enough. My question was intended to point towards CSS issues of using flow in the way under consideration. So I should have written, what are the CSS pitfalls, if any? I accept, of course, there are other issues, especially accessibility ones,

Re: [css-d] Generally: CSS and SEO

At 2:23 PM +0100 5/29/06, Mike A wrote: I've mostly lurked on this list for more than three years but had this niggling issue going round in my mind. As I understand it, best search engine results are obtained by placing content nearest the top of page code - matching key words in h1, alt,

Re: [css-d] Generally: CSS and SEO

Conventional mark-up and layout results in the typical HTML page format of Header / Columns / Footer format for natural page flow. My question is this: is it more search engine friendly to use a mark-up format of Columns / Header / Footer and use CSS position:absolute to place Header

Re: [css-d] Generally: CSS and SEO

Pitfalls: - repositioned bits and pieces may not scale well when subjected to font-resizing. Use em's. Simple example with composite header: http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_1_02_02.html With css you can display things one-way for the viewer and another way for SE's -- no problem. I see

Re: [css-d] Generally: CSS and SEO

tedd wrote: Pitfalls: - repositioned bits and pieces may not scale well when subjected to font-resizing. Use em's. Using 'em' for dimensioning and positioning works just fine in some cases, but not at all in others. It all depends of what those bits and pieces are and where they're going,