homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.205.144.54
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi

Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

    
What is "on page factors"
Rlilly




msg:4338945
 12:32 pm on Jul 13, 2011 (gmt 0)

Is it possible to define 'on page factors' in terms of what Google looks for specifically and likes. It cannot be the design of the page!

So if you have a page with just text. If you ad an image, or an out bound link to an authority site, is that page now more powerful in G eyes?

 

Forbin001




msg:4338970
 1:41 pm on Jul 13, 2011 (gmt 0)

On page is many factors, the heading, keywords in title, size of fonts, keyword density, etc.

There are about 200 signals that google checks for rankings. Think of it in 4 groups, Positive on page, positive off page, negative on page, negative off page. All are constantly monitored to see if youre up to good, or no good.

tedster




msg:4338978
 1:48 pm on Jul 13, 2011 (gmt 0)

It cannot be the design of the page!

I do not assume that. Google and Microsoft both do simulations of the visual page. It's often mentioned here that backlinks in the footer or a sidebar don't carry as much weight as links in the body content. That can only happen if Google knows something about the design your mark-up creates.

In addition, two years ago there was a thread in Google's own forum about a site getting a penalty because it was seen as having too big of an empty area (whitespace) on the page. In that case, the algorithm was wrong and the penalty was reversed. However, the message was clear - Google's algorithms do measure something about the design of the page.

pageoneresults




msg:4339078
 5:08 pm on Jul 13, 2011 (gmt 0)

What is On-Page SEO?


It starts at <html> and ends at </html> and covers everything inbetween.

For many, On-Page SEO is focusing on <title>, META Description and <h> Elements, a simple process that when done properly used to produce respectable results and in many instances, still do. But, we've come a long way from optimizing a few HTML Elements.

Did you know that HTML5 has 108 HTML Elements and a host of Attributes that can be applied to those Elements?

Did you know that Microdata has 300+ Schemas/Types that can be applied to many of those HTML Elements?

Did you know that HTML5 has Elements to define the navigational structure of the document? e.g. <aside>, <footer>, <nav>

Did you know that Microdata has Schemas to further define the navigational structure of the document? e.g. http://schema.org/WebPageElement [schema.org]

Here is what many would typically do when formatting (visually optimizing) an address for a business, I'll use Google's address as an example...

20th Century On-Page SEO

<p>Google Inc<br>
1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy<br>
Mountain View CA 94043-1351 US</p>


21st Century On-Page SEO

<div itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress">
<span itemprop="name">Google Inc</span><br>
<span itemprop="streetAddress">1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy</span><br>
<span itemprop="addressLocality">Mountain View</span>
<span itemprop="addressRegion">CA</span>
<span itemprop="postalCode">94043-1351</span>
<span itemprop="addressCountry">US</span>
</div>


As you can see, today's On-Page SEO is not what it used to be, not for me anyway. Ya, I know, "there are sites ranking very well who don't use all of that." And they will most likely continue to rank due to other reasons. That shouldn't stop YOU from retrofitting existing HTML markup and strengthening the semantic signals you're sending. Who knows, you may be able to nudge your way up a spot or two and/or lock in those top positions you currently enjoy.

I look at each document individually. Once you've optimized your navigational elements which are normally reused on x number of documents, now you have your primary content to optimize, the stuff that really counts. That content can contain basic HTML Elements and Attributes or it can be micro-optimized using HTML5 along with Microdata.

Every primary HTML Element you are used to working with has the potential to be micro-optimized. For example, you may have a product name in an <h2> element...

20th Century On-Page SEO

<h2>2010 Dodge Challenger SRT8</h2>
<p>Description</p>


If we optimize further, using Microdata, it would look like this...

21st Century On-Page SEO

<div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Product">
<h2 itemprop="name">2010 Dodge Challenger SRT8</h2>
<p itemprop="description">Description</p>
</div>


You can learn more about On-Page SEO from a different perspective here...

6. HTML elements
The complete set of HTML elements is the set of elements described in the following sections.
[Dev.W3.org...]

3.2.1 Semantics
Elements, attributes, and attribute values in HTML are defined (by this specification) to have certain meanings (semantics). Authors must not use elements, attributes, or attribute values for purposes other than their appropriate intended semantic purpose.
[Dev.W3.org...]

3.2.5 Content Models
Each element defined in this specification has a content model: a description of the element's expected contents. An HTML element must have contents that match the requirements described in the element's content model.
[Dev.W3.org...]

Start thinking about programmatically determinable content and machine readable grammar.

Information, structure, and relationships conveyed through presentation can be programmatically determined.


^ Programmatically referring to that which occurs in the HTML markup. There are a whole bunch of SEOs who won't go there - that's forbidden territory. ;)

ken_b




msg:4339081
 5:14 pm on Jul 13, 2011 (gmt 0)

Did you know that HTML5 has ...

Hmmm, maybe I should upgrade from 3.2 one of these days.

walkman




msg:4339082
 5:14 pm on Jul 13, 2011 (gmt 0)

pageoneresults, I honestly don't think that Google /Bing take points away for using 1996 design elements like tables and such, as long as they can read the page. You can design them as beautiful /useful as you want with tables and with <H1> and <b> too.

pageoneresults




msg:4339108
 5:35 pm on Jul 13, 2011 (gmt 0)

pageoneresults, I honestly don't think that Google /Bing take points away for using 1996 design elements like tables and such, as long as they can read the page.


I don't either but, you don't gain any extra points either.

You can design them as beautiful /useful as you want with tables and with <H1> and <b> too.


Absolutely! But, <b> has a different semantic meaning than <strong>. And so does <i> vs <em>. With HTML5, you can have multiple <h1>s within a single document e.g. a home page for a Blog could have multiple <h1>, one for each Blog Post entry.

I think there is a lot more semantic analysis performed on documents than we really know about and/or discuss in great detail.

Hmmm, maybe I should upgrade from 3.2 one of these days.


Ya, you might want to do that. :)

netmeg




msg:4339123
 6:00 pm on Jul 13, 2011 (gmt 0)

(On Page is pageoneresults' middle name backwards. Sorta. Almost)

g1smd




msg:4339152
 6:55 pm on Jul 13, 2011 (gmt 0)

keyword density

No.

tedster




msg:4339159
 7:16 pm on Jul 13, 2011 (gmt 0)

I personal think everyone should get behind valid mark-up and learn all the goodies that HTML5 and microdata have to offer. But search engines cannot depend on web authors to be all that good at HTML. If they required that, they would miss a lot of the web's top content.

So we might get a small edge using 100% academically correct mark-up, and our page' specifics may certainly be clearer and easier for Google to deal with, but it's not going to be major advantage, it's an incremental "add-on".

As pageoneresults said "you may be able to nudge your way up a spot or two".

sanjuu




msg:4339447
 11:56 am on Jul 14, 2011 (gmt 0)

I've always asserted that valid HTML might not help you rank higher, but it'll certainly help you avoid a lot of issues that could negatively impact on your rankings through errors that you don't see amongst the bad HTML.

Also, if it works for more people across different platforms and browsers, then the people you do attract will stay around longer and convert. So getting it right is a good idea. Can also help with usability and accessibility - and making as many of your visitors happy can only be a good thing, surely?

g1smd




msg:4339459
 12:55 pm on Jul 14, 2011 (gmt 0)

Exactly. If it's not part of the solution, then it's part of the problem.

austtr




msg:4339729
 10:11 pm on Jul 14, 2011 (gmt 0)

OK.... how about a couple of non-techie factors?

If your title, description and keyword tags indicate that the page is about a particular subject, but the content is not about that subject, or only makes a passing reference to the subject, then be prepared to kiss that page good-bye. That seems like a statement of the obvious, but you'd be amazed how much content is written that does not match the stated purpose of the page.

I strongly believe that you MUST provide outbound links to authority sites and that's an opinion based on actual case history across multiple sites. You'll get far more value from seeding your pages with connections to quality than any downside of leaking a bit of PR to another site.

lucy24




msg:4339762
 12:21 am on Jul 15, 2011 (gmt 0)

If your title, description and keyword tags indicate that the page is about a particular subject, but the content is not about that subject

Do you mean all three as a package, or any one of the three? A title can be an awfully subjective thing.

:: wandering off to investigate possibilities of meta tags saying "this page DOES NOT repeat DOES NOT tell you how to {improbable action that g### seems to think the page is about} ::

austtr




msg:4339780
 1:11 am on Jul 15, 2011 (gmt 0)

@lucy24

The three elements together should give an accurate reflection of the real purpose of the page.

A common mistake I see (IMO) is pages with title tags crammed with search terms applicable to the whole SITE. The title tag and description snippet need to accurately indicate the purpose of the PAGE.

Titles and descriptions are first and foremost about telling the searcher what to expect when they open that page. By all means optimise the tags for key words but keep it relevant to the page.

This is all very elemental stuff, but in light of the OP, it might be worthwhile revisiting some of the "on page factor" basics.

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved