W3C validation

[Solicitors Mortgages]

Originally Posted by monaghan

Why not have a page that looks right and validates ?

I think it was a poke at the fact that neither frontpage or dreamweaver creates validating code when producing pages.

I still stand by the old arguement that if Google.com or Yahoo.com doesn't validate then why should anyone?

(note: interesting to see that MSN actually passes)
James.

[lakedaemon]

I've been away for a few months, so it was quite interesting to see a thread that I started still in use. Great information as always.

[Solicitors Mortgages]

Originally Posted by lakedaemon

I've been away for a few months, so it was quite interesting to see a thread that I started still in use. Great information as always.

These things happen when someone has less than 5 posts

..and besides I noticed..... ALL your threads are great! heh.

[lakedaemon]

Originally Posted by Solicitors Mortgages

These things happen when someone has less than 5 posts

..and besides I noticed..... ALL your threads are great! heh.

I'm very particular about asking a question on a forum and I am always very conscious of not appearing like I am asking something just for the sake of it. That makes it more gratifying when a thread that I do start actually runs for a while, it's kind of like a vote of confidence in the question.

Of course it makes it doubly hard when a thread dies a death without any replies...

[lakedaemon]

At the risk of flogging a dead horse, I came accross this blog post about an experimentation with validation and SEO which i found interesting. According to this chap, Google liked valid html and css over others.

full article here at

http://www.hobo-web.co.uk/seo-blog/i...alid-html-css/

[Brian Turner]

Interesting little experiment here - suggests that valid HTML & CSS *may* be a factor.

However, as pointed out in the page comments, there are still a few variables to iron out to ensure that Google did make a selection based on valid code as opposed to document dates:
http://www.hobo-web.co.uk/seo-blog/i...alid-html-css/

[TWD-Tony]

Personally I don't think validation has much weight in SEO - the biggest and best arguement for this I have seen so far is "Do Amazon, Microsft or BBC validate? NO they don't..."

[lakedaemon]

Originally Posted by TWD-Tony

Personally I don't think validation has much weight in SEO - the biggest and best arguement for this I have seen so far is "Do Amazon, Microsft or BBC validate? NO they don't..."

Do they need to worry about SEO though?

[elliot.jones]

Hi all, apologies, I'm new to this, though I do think I can help to shed some light on this.

WC3 validation in relation to SEO is really just a means of looking to ensure you have a clean and tidy website. The simple fact is that the cleaner your code the greater the ease with which the crawler spiders will be able to identify the on-page factors and content of your site. This, together with ensuring your site meets accessibility guidelines (particularly in light of the recent associations between accessibility and algorithm amendments) should mean that this aspect of your on page SEO is sufficiently optimised. Bear in mind this is only a very tiny proportion of any SEO work though...