> On Nov 8, 2014, at 9:02 PM, Fritz Anderson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Nov 8, 2014, at 7:49 PM, LuKreme <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> None of that implies that the FORMATTING of the code is relevant. At all. It >> has never been my experience that how the text file is formatted is relevant >> to a search engine, nor how it realistically could be. > > The content of the original post may not have been clear to you. Tidy is not, > and never was, just a pretty-printer. It flags, and optionally corrects, > syntax and best-practice errors.
It is poor at that task, however. BBEdit’s own syntax checks or the W3 valuator’s are far better suited to that task. > It is reasonable to expect an indexing bot to take code quality into account > when assessing the quality of a page. You’d be surprised, but that is neither here nor there. If you are relying on 10+ year old tidy code to validate and syntax check you will be in for a few rude shocks. If the page renders and has content that the search engine can index, then it indexes it. It does *not* go off an check the code for validity. The fact remains, the formatting of the source is a benefit to YOU. To other coders. It means nothing to the search engines. -- 'It's a lovely morning, lads,' he said. 'I feel like a million dollars. Don't you?' There was a murmur of reluctant agreement. 'Good,' said Cohen. 'Let's go and get some.' --Interesting Times -- This is the BBEdit Talk public discussion group. If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email "[email protected]" rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: <http://www.twitter.com/bbedit> --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BBEdit Talk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
