Google Ditches IMG Alt Text

Inevitable, but sad.

[ciml]

During January, the Fresh listings weren't matching words in alt text or showing them in snippets, unless they were in a link. Since the update, it seems to be the same for the main listings. Note: a page with "keyword" only in unlinked alt text may still match due to anchor text from incoming links.

IMG alt text has been used for stuffing hidden text for as long as I can remember. Still, it's a shame to loose this key element of allowing robot accessibility for image heavy pages, just as business and even government bodies are starting to take Web accessibility seriously.

With any luck, Google will find that it wasn't a major spam problem and set things back (as they did after ignoring guestbook links for a while this time last year).

[Macguru]

Yes, that is correct. Technically, it will read it but wont index it anymore.

[tbear]

Anyone know how wether this also relates to title tags?

[World Wide Wonder]

So did Google used to index the ALT tags? (as im new to web design)

Also just wondering what people are referring to when they say "Tile tags". I thought it was referring to the obvious page title but i read further back that someone called it an "image title tag". May i ask what the imate title tag is?

Ive looked at all the properties of my images but cannot see anything that relates to the title of it.

thanks

[JayC]

Also just wondering what people are referring to when they say "Tile tags". I thought it was referring to the obvious page title but i read further back that someone called it an "image title tag".

That's a common area of confusion, caused in part because people refer to it as a "tag," which it is not. It should be referred to as the "title attribute." Also commonly misused is "alt tag;" that's actually an attribute as well.

You can use "title" in basically the same way you use "alt," but within a broader range of elements -- alt text should only be used with IMG and AREA elements.

More information: [w3.org...]

[World Wide Wonder]

JayC,
Thanks for the Title tip. Strangely though, with 'Alt' attribute, some keyword density analyzers actually pickup the text within.

However, when i just changed all of these attributes to 'Title' istead of 'Alt', NONE of the keyword density anylisers pickup the text within. It seems therefore in the case of these free anylizers that the 'title' attribute is worse than the 'Alt' one in terms of page content detection.

Does anyone know whether this would also be the case with Google? i would go ahead and change all my Alts to Titles but after this brief experiment, i feel quite reluctant to do so.

Hear your comments soon.

Thanks.

[stevew]

As far as mouseover behaviour is concerned, text in the 'title' attribute over-rides that in the 'alt' attribute in IE (though not in NS4). Though not in the placeholder description if images are turned off.
Try it yourself : with images turned off, you'll get the alt text in place of the image, and the title text on mouseover.

So if you want alt text to appear on mouseover, and use a title attribute, you will need to repeat the alt text in the title attribute. But since alt text should be an image description and title text a (presumably brief) title, this is not a simple decision to make -- apart from leaving out the title attribute altogether.

My understanding is that alt text is indexed by Google only if the image provides a link, and by some other SE's regardless.
Also, that although title attributes are indexed, their benefit is marginal, if at all -- perhaps another argument for not using them?

[World Wide Wonder]

Thanks Stevew,

I suppose therefore that if ALT attributes are of now SEO value to webmasters, where they would not have included them otherwise, its worth not using them since it increases the page size. Not considerable of course but teh smaller the better when considering those poor spiders having to crawl all the way through.

Please correct me if im wrong.

Thanks.

[stevew]

Okay -- you're wrong!

While page size is an issue, it's not as critical as that.

I would always include meaningful alt text, not just for the SE's that do index them, but also for the benefit of visitors with images turned off.

By all means, make your code 'lean and mean' - strip out unnecessary META tags, mousover effects, comments, etc. I also use CSS to virtually strip out all formatting from the code. But keep this in perspective : don't make small page sizes a primary objective -- especially where page content (ie the text on the page) is concerned.

[World Wide Wonder]

Thanks again SteveW

Will bear what you've said in mind.

[GoogleGuy]

Okay, I haven't done an exhaustive check, but I'm pretty sure that Google has not changed its handling of alt tags anytime recently.

[Krapulator]

Hehehe Googleguy - now you tell us.

[GoogleGuy]

I don't know, Krapulator. It's kind of interesting to see what people can convince themselves of. It also serves as a terrific reminder that people should take posts on forums with a grain of salt, and ideally experiment and verify things for themselves.

The strangest threads I've seen recently was one where someone was convinced that ODP editors were now kingmakers, and then in another simultaneous thread someone was saying how duplicate copies of the ODP would hurt a site. As always, the best thing to do is bring your judgment with you as you read.

(I'm not saying something hasn't changed about our alt text processing, but I don't think it has.)

[stevew]

Sometimes more people become aware that something appears to be true, and the process of sharing that knowledge can give the impression that things have changed.
So, it may not be a change in the algo, just a change in awareness.

Whatever the case, it's a good thing if Google has its ways of being selective about the alt text that it indexes.
I look forward to the days when it does the same with the other common spam magnets.

[Powdork]

Okay, I haven't done an exhaustive check, but I'm pretty sure that Google has not changed its handling of alt tags anytime recently.

So when did the alt text get dropped then? It is not playing a part now as far as I can tell. I have an image at the top of my home page with two of the three words in the alt not showing up anywhere else on the page. If I search for these three words the page does not show up in the first 500 results. An interior page with all three words in the body (not close to each other) did show up around #200. Besides that, i've always considered ciml to be an excellent reliable source of info regarding these matters. I know its something he watches as he warned me about this very day several months ago in a sticky on the subject. I trust you too GoogleGuy, so what gives?

[Marcia]

FWIW, on a search for the main keyword phrase of one of the sites I work with, Google is showing the alt text of an image right out in the description snippet. It reads word1 word2, featured item - including the comma. That doesn't mean it helps with ranking, the site dropped back 6 places this past month for the two word phrase.

I did a search for word1 word2 + three word phrase (the three word phrase appears only in alt text) and it comes up for the search, showing that alternate phrase in the description snippet in bold.

[edited by: Marcia at 6:13 am (utc) on Feb. 10, 2003]