Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

Is it critical to SEO to not have any W3 validation errors?

         

budbiss

4:31 pm on Mar 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I just had a new site made and I realized it has 231 errors when I run it through the W3 HTML Validator. Do you think it's critical (for SEO) that I have these errors fixed? Do you all strive to have 0 errors? Or are some errors not a big deal?

jimbeetle

4:55 pm on Mar 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



No, it isn't critical, indexers are pretty flexible in terms of reading hinky html.

That said, you don't want a critical error stopping all or some of a page from being indexed. 231 errors might seen daunting at first, but as you work through them you'll probably find that many are of the "cascading" variety -- fix one and it will clean up 20 or so others. So, fix the first error, revalidate, rinse, repeat.

buckworks

5:12 pm on Mar 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Not everyone agrees that validation matters for SEO but it certainly won't hurt. Even if you don't validate every page, take the time to make sure your main templates are as close to valid as you can get.

How much you should worry about errors would depend on what the errors were. Some issues flagged as errors can be safely ignored (ampersands or other characters in URLs, for example) but some types of errors could cause a spider to miss or misread some of your content (not closing a tag properly, for instance). Fixing such errors if you had them could indeed help your SEO.

budbiss

5:13 pm on Mar 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Some of the errors are of this nature:

Line 16, Column 125: there is no attribute "text"

…></head><body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000" link="#0000cc" vlink="#666666"

Is the validator saying that the text attribute shouldn't be used in the body tag anymore? If so, is it a big deal if I leave it there?

g1smd

7:15 pm on Mar 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Why not use CSS to define the text colour?

Your HTML will then not be cluttered with style information.

Your HTML will then consist of only headings, paragraphs, lists, tables, forms, images, and links, and maybe a few div and span container tags.

How much easier is that to code and to read (and correct errors in!)?

budbiss

7:37 pm on Mar 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Yeah, CSS would be a much better way to take care of that. Our current website design is built on the Yahoo store platform and we hired a company to do the developement and design work. I'll have to point this out to them. In any case, my biggest concern is if this will have a major impact on SEO. It sounds like it "shouldn't" be a huge deal.

rocknbil

11:16 pm on Mar 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



I doubt validation has a large effect on SEO, as most of the code itself is ignored. Where it makes a really BIG difference is in cross-browser compatibility.

If you work in quirks mode without a valid doctype, you'll always be adding hacks to get browsers to play along. By using a valid doctype and validating, you'll be in standards compliance mode and will find many cross browser problems go away.

Not yet mentioned is the fact that the W3C validator will cascade errors - you may only have 10 real errors but this can kick of other errors when it interacts with elements later in the document, and may wind up with a report that says 200.

It's telling you "text" is invalid because all of these attributes are deprecated for the selected document type:

<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000" link="#0000cc" vlink="#666666">

in favor of

<style type="text/css">
body { background:#ffffff; color: #000000; }
a { #0000cc;}
a:visited { #666666; }
</style>
.........
<body>

Start by using the right document type [webmasterworld.com]. Time and time again I see XHTML doctypes in place where they're not remotely necessary.

g1smd

11:52 pm on Mar 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Validate to HTML 4.01 Transitional as your first target. You might even stick with just that, or you might like to migrate to HTML 4.01 Strict later.

There is little (or NO!) need for XHTML usage for most sites. It is extra complication and hassle for no appreciable benefits, and comes with several major disadvantages.