Forum Moderators: open
result 1st place from about 4,560,000
What are the factors of these sites being so highly ranked? at what point are too many words in alt tags considered spam? and is this built into googles algorithm to check?
Thanks,
Core
No, you can't just put lots of alt text on a page and get to be #1 for your chosen phrases. That would be too easy.
at what point are too many words in alt tags considered spam?
To whit: ciml wrote:
No, you can't just put lots of alt text on a page and get to be #1 for your chosen phrases.
Allow me to elaborate a specific instance.
There is one area of 'verbiage in alt tags' which is acceptable...writing for the visually impaired.
In this case and only in this case - complete discriptive sentences - designed and written to explain the content of the image for the visually impared are acceptable.
So, if you can design a complete descriptive sentence (devoid of repetitive keywords) that might be of some help.
Remember, there is a fine line between describing something for a cause (the visually impared) and cramming alt tags with keywords solely for increased ranking.
Use keywords in alt tags sparingly and wisely.
Pendanticist.
Before you assume that keyword stuffed alt attributes are what is causing the ranking, ask yourself if you have considered ALL the 100+ factors that go into the algorithm, both on page and off page.
As I have said before:
NOTHING counts as much as most people assume that it does. That is why there is so much confusion about what is important. Concentrating on any one thing is as stupid as ignoring any one thing.
So, don't ignore your own alt attributes, but assume that google wants you to use them as intended. Then go on to worry about other things on your site.
Just my 2 cents,
CF
Obvously there aren't many people with special browsers for visually-impaired out there -
To assume that the visually impared do not have 'special browsers' isn't the case at all. It isn't the browser, but the software application which resides on the individual's machine that 'reads' the website content through the browser.
According to http*//www.tr.wou.edu/dblink/about.htm The National Information Clearinghouse On Children Who Are Deaf-Blind...
Provide information that will assist education, medical, and service personnel in their efforts to deliver comprehensive services nationwide to the approximately 10,000 infants, toddlers, children, and youth who are deaf-blind in the U.S.
That's just an approximation of the children who are deaf-blind (dual diagnosis) in the USA and does not take into account those (children and/or adults) who are singularly diagnosed as blind throughout the USA, much less the World.
The http*//www.afb.org/info_document_view.asp?documentid=1453 American Foundation for the Blind gives us these two tips (et., al.):
<img src="graphic.gif" alt="Acme logo - supplying widgets since 1945" width="50" height="20">
That said, providing "alt" text for spacers or placeholding graphics subjects the speech user to meaningless information. Spacers or graphics used only for positioning should be labeled with alt=" " (quote, space, quote).
...and...
Leaving the image unlabeled (i.e., without a space between the quotes) subjects the speech user to hearing the file name of the image. However, if you are in doubt as to whether or not to describe an image with an alt tag, do it.
I' sure you've seen some really funky file names out there. For a moment, imagine how they might sound to a visitor using 'reading' software.
[webmasterworld.com...]
Where a link to a BBC article dated: Monday, 9 December, 2002, 13:23 GMT states, in part:
In the UK two million people are blind or have impaired vision...
and that's in the UK alone.
Additional reading:
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
Any Webmaster who doesn't optimize his/her site for all manner of viewers isn't looking at the broader picture, which - not only limits the power and potential of his/her work - but systematically denies accessability to folks who are much more deserving than any bot or spider.
In closing, I must point out that I am only attempting to expound on the importance of alt tags attributes and in no way do I wish to appear to be flaming you. :)
Pendanticist.
Bye, CF
7.1 Short text equivalents for images ("alt-text") [w3.org]
There is a more effective way of using your alt tags. You can make use of the longdesc attribute. That is getting really deep in to the spec, but, if you have a need for longer descriptions in your alt tags, the longdesc may be the solution.
Since text content can be presented to the user as synthesized speech, braille, and visually-displayed text, these guidelines require text equivalents for graphic and audio information. Text equivalents must be written so that they convey all essential content. Non-text equivalents (e.g., an auditory description of a visual presentation, a video of a person telling a story using sign language as an equivalent for a written story, etc.) also improve accessibility for people who cannot access visual information or written text, including many individuals with blindness, cognitive disabilities, learning disabilities, and deafness.Equivalent information may be provided in a number of ways, including through attributes (e.g., a text value for the "alt" attribute in HTML and SMIL), as part of element content (e.g., the OBJECT in HTML), as part of the document's prose, or via a linked document (e.g., designated by the "longdesc" attribute in HTML or a description link). Depending on the complexity of the equivalent, it may be necessary to combine techniques (e.g., use "alt" for an abbreviated equivalent, useful to familiar readers, in addition to "longdesc" for a link to more complete information, useful to first-time readers).
