Forum Moderators: open
I just read on the net, that Google ignores Text between a <font size="1"> Tag?
Is that correct?
Does Google use the <font size="x">-Tag in order to check a Text's Priorty?
Greez,
Syco
Is that correct?
As far as I can see, it isn't correct. Webmasterworld uses <font size="1"> for the subhead and these pages are displayed in the results.
[google.com ]
I know for a fact that the AdSense algo does takes into account the font size. Whether that's an artifact of the Applied Semantics algo, or a Google tweak to the AdSense algo is anybody's guess.
I came across that tidbit while researching the AdSense algo.
Does anyone else know if font size=X affects the way Google ranks sites?
Nobody can say for certain. People can make inferences based upon observation, but nobody can say that they know for certain. That is why I qualified my above statement with the word may.
The algorithm is a secret.
Can I say that if it was size 2 it would or would not do better? No, but I feel STRONGLY it does not matter in this plarticular place.
My personal preference is to set the css file for 11px and Verdana... its quite easy to read even by us senior citizens with poor eyesight.
I find it hard to believe that Google, or anyone else, would automaticlly assume that a small font must equate to lesser importance. There are many legitimate uses which are all quite valid.
I find it hard to believe that Google, or anyone else, would automaticlly assume that a small font must equate to lesser importance.
[google.com...]
Based on an algorithm that includes such factors as keyword analysis, word frequency, font size, and the overall link structure of the web, we know what a page is about, and can precisely match Google ads to each page.
Believe...
just an example.
If 95% of the text on a page is font 1 and the other 5% is larger
2, 3.. , or bold, strong, or has some H tag around it then it will rate these words of more impotance.
maybe?
A search for a specific phrase returns "1 result of about 6". That one page is the size="1" page. Most likely conclusion: no discrimination for font size.
The other issue to consider here is that the <font> tag is now deprecated. As we move forward with CSS, those <font> tags will continue to disappear forever. I just can't see any logical algo taking into consideration actual font size. I can see the algo taking those tags mentioned above into consideration when weighing page relevancy.
I do believe that certain html markup can add emphasis to content...
With all due respect, those tags do not add emphasis so much as they are indicating the hierarchical importance of the text. It's not about adding emphasis: It's about establishing what is, and what is to a lesser extent, important to the message of the page.
It's already been established (see post#9) that Google takes font size into account for the AdSense program.
What role would font size play in the algorithm?
We all know the role that hierarchical structure plays within the Google Algo. H1,H2, title, etc. Hierarchy even plays a role within the H1, H2, title tags themselves: For instance, the first words within the H1 or title tags are given more importance than the last words within those tags. Information at the top of the page is given more weight than information at the bottom of the page. The main index page, as the main point of entry to the site, is generally given more weight than inner pages located five clicks down into the site. Hierarchy is one of the most fundamental elements of the Google algo.
So, assuming that Google takes font size into account, what role would it play? Naturally, in an algo concerned with hierarchical structure, font size would play a role in determining how important the information is relative to the meaning of that particular page- and the surrounding text. Naturally, if the entire page is written in a small font, then there is no hierarchical function for the smallness to play so it won't make a difference in that scenario. Additionally, in HitProf's case, he has a duplicate content page that is in smaller text: again, the smaller text makes no impact for the reason listed above- it's not the smallness that makes it less relevant- you are missing the point- it's the smallness in relation to the surrounding text in consideration of the web page's hierarchical ordering of information.
We normally encounter smaller fonts as footnotes denoting minimum software requirements for using a software, notes about shipping terms or availability- things that are nominally related to what the entire page is about.
Within the context of using small fonts to establish a hierarchy of importance of text to it's surrounding text within an individual web page- it makes complete sense. That Google has already acknowledged to be using it for the task of establishing relevancy in the AdSense program makes it even more likely that font size may be one of the elements used by the algo.
[edited by: martinibuster at 7:25 pm (utc) on Aug. 6, 2003]
That Google has already acknowledged to be using it for the task of establishing relevancy in the AdSense program makes it even more likely that font size may be one of the elements used by the algo.
So, you are saying that the millions of us who have converted to CSS and have removed all font tags are missing out on an important element of the algo? For some reason, I just cannot bring myself to even consider that.
I'm in total agreement with you on structure, but will disagree vehemently about font size being a factor in the public search engine. It may have some impact with AdSense, but I doubt very seriously that it has any impact with the main algo we are all so attracted to.
It just wouldn't make sense. Especially since the <font> tag is deprecated and will soon find its place in html markup heaven. I have no proof to back any of this up other than the fact that I've not used a font tag for over two years now and have had no adverse effects. In fact, after removing all that garbage markup, there was an overall improvement in rankings across the board.
P.S. Now, if I were an algo engineer, I'd be programming my crawlers to look for font sizes in CSS and on page that are less than readable sizes, maybe 8px and below, 6pt and below, .5em and below, etc.
I've not used a font tag for over two years now and have had no adverse effects.
Of course not. If Google uses font size to determine hierarchical importance relative to surrounding text within a particular page, then in your case, where there are no font tags, it would not be regarded by the algo as a factor to help it determine what your page is about because there is nothing there to regard.
In other words, it doesn't make your page less relevant than any other page on the web, if the algo within it's bag of tricks, is using the smallness of text to help it understand what a page is all about.
P.S. Have you looked at Google's coding standards...
<font size=-1>
Now, if I were to follow the advice given above, a -1 would tell me that the content wrapped inside that -1 has less than 0 relevancy, am I understanding this correctly?
<added> I just did a quick review of the top ten sites in three various industries. 80% of them are without font tags. I would definitely like to see some real world examples of where <font size> has an effect on anything other than AdSense. And even then, their reference to font size can mean any number of things.
[edited by: pageoneresults at 7:45 pm (utc) on Aug. 6, 2003]
Font size may be one of many considerations for determining what is or is not important on a page.
It would have less to do with ranking in the serps, and more to do with extracting the Context, the Meaning, of that page- precisely it's role within AdSense.
If there are no font tags on the page, then font tags aren't a consideration for understanding the Meaning of that particular page.
The way I see it, and this is pure conjecture on my part, there are at least two functions to the algo:
1- To extract the meaning of the page.
2- To calculate rank
I believe that font size may be one way- among many- of determining the meaning of a page. If it's missing from the page it uses all it's other methods.
And even if it's using font size as a determinant of hierarchical importance, I really doubt it plays any role in ranking that page against another page on the web, a role that the title tag is generally said to play.
Like a detective: If a crime happens on a beach the detective would look for the footprints in the sand. The detective wouldn't try to dust the sand for fingerprints- that would be innapropriate...
[edited by: martinibuster at 9:02 pm (utc) on Aug. 6, 2003]
If it doesn't exist, then it isn't a consideration for understanding the Meaning of a page.
But, you see, there is a fundamental flaw with the statement above, CSS. If I am understanding what you are saying, it is basically that a page without <font size="1,2,3,4,5,etc."> generally has no meaning. Sorry MB, I'm still not understanding the concept of the page not having any meaning without font size being assigned in the actual html.
generally has no meaning.
No. You are misunderstanding what I am saying.
Meaning is determined by many factors, title, text, h1, proximity to the top- all these factors plus the other more advanced factors.
Removing the heading tags will not make a page meaningless, so why should removing font tags make a page lose meaning?
If the heading tags h1, h2, etc. are missing, then the algo will not use that as a consideration for determing what your page is about, there are other factors that can be considered. If h1 doesn't exist on the page, then it isn't a consideration for understanding the Meaning of a page.
As I already said above, I am not advocating the use of font tags, I am not saying that they are useful for seo. I am saying that font tags could be used within certain situations to clarify the meaning of a page.
