| 6:02 pm on Feb 2, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I heard the whistling sound right after I pressed the Submit Button. I should have known better. That whistling sounds comes from a topic that gets posted and then sinks to the depths of WebmasterWorld never to be seen again. Tis a shame too, this "could have" been a good one. ;)
| 9:34 am on Feb 16, 2009 (gmt 0)|
One thing i don't understand is the error messages.
I don't know if they are reporting problems withing the document or the network
| 10:05 pm on Feb 17, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I have been experimenting with this for several days and think it's worthy of adding to the toolbox. At least until I create a better one. The frigging error codes don't help much when all you want is semantic information.
Thanks for the link.
| 10:41 pm on Feb 17, 2009 (gmt 0)|
which error codes are you seeing?
are you validating your document first?
| 10:49 pm on Feb 17, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|One thing i don't understand is the error messages. I don't know if they are reporting problems withing the document or the network. |
|The frigging error codes don't help much when all you want is semantic information. |
Would that be this particular error?
|Using org.apache.xerces.parsers.SAXParser |
Exception net.sf.saxon.trans.DynamicError: org.xml.sax.SAXParseException: Content is not allowed in prolog.
org.xml.sax.SAXParseException: Content is not allowed in prolog.
That is because you are invoking the tool a second time and sending an encoded URI on that second trip. You may have to enter the URI into the field again and clear up the encoding issues. Even then, there appears to be a caching mechanism at play. I've had to restart me session to get that thing to extract the latest document changes. ;)
Pssst, we already built a better one. It just needs to be converted to jQuery and is in the pipeline for production. That tool gave me all sorts of ideas back in the day. :)
| 3:25 pm on Feb 18, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I am getting all kinds of errors. Typically, they are validation errors. For my pages I can control that, but for competitive analysis... I just want the semantic data - not a lesson in validation.
| 11:22 pm on Feb 18, 2009 (gmt 0)|
i'm guessing it's hard to understand the semantics of an invalid document, which might give you a hint about the importance of validation.
if your competitor is "doing well" on that page, it's probably not the semantics.
| 3:43 pm on Feb 19, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I haven't seen too much evidence that validation makes a large impact on search ranking. I am not discounting that it can have an effect - just that it's often not large enough to see by itself.
Anyhow, I already rolled my own semantic analyzer. I use a lot of "small ball" tactics when it comes to my flavor of SEO and these semantic elements have the look of something that can make a difference -- when combined with other techniques.
| 3:08 pm on Feb 25, 2009 (gmt 0)|
It's a nice tool to see the important parts of your pages. In the "Outline of the document" bit.
As to validation not helping with SERPs... It doesn't but it sure is nice to see that green bar :)