joined:Jan 4, 2001
A recent study by Raven Tools and sent to my email via Moz, claims that incorrect management of images is by far and away the single biggest SEO "mistake" found in a sample of over 2 million URL's. Missing alt and title tags were listed as being the most common error.
I was under the impression that SE's attach no importance to those tags because they are so easy to abuse. I was somewhat surprised to see in this day and age that anyone is claiming these tags have SEO value. I understand the reason for the tags and feel that they should be used.... but that is nothing more than a personal opinion. It's hard to see that having, or not having, the tags has an SEO effect.
So I started to do a bit of a refresher... and immediately came upon a counter argument, also from a respected source, claiming that the use of alt and title tags on decorative images will/can/might lead to problems with duplicate content! eg... a simple bullet marker with alt and title tags used 4 times per page across a 500 page site generates 2000 "duplicates".
And there I was thinking that duplicate content actually referred to "content"... the stuff that gets put into sentences and paragraphs.
Clear as mud.... I think I'll persevere with a routine of adding alt and title tags on larger, single (or at least infrequent) images and dispense with the tags on repetitive, decorative images.
Is there a "current best practice" for alt and title tags on images, and if so, what is it?