Re: [WSG] Page Structure
On Jun 28, 2007, at 8:47 AM, Tony Crockford wrote: Why is the company logo and strap line the most important thing on every page of a web site. OR - why does most important *thing* on the page have to correspond to h1? Take a newspaper: arguably the most important *thing* on the front page is the name of the paper. Does that correspond to h1? I think not: surely h1 belongs to the most important news item on the page? Andrew 109B SE 4th Av Gainesville FL 32601 Cell: 352-870-6661 http://www.andrewmaben.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] In a well designed user interface, the user should not need instructions. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Page Structure
Hi Andrew, I would say the most important _thing_ in a newspaper is the title of lead story for that part of the day. The analogy to a web document would be the topic name of the page and be marked up as the h1. The name of the newspaper itself doesn't offer any timely information or _news_. Thus, I would limit that name to a masthead, along with a tagline if it's part of the identity/logo of the publishing house. Kind regards, Frank From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Maben Sent: Monday, 02 July, 2007 15:17 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Cc: Andrew Maben Subject: Re: [WSG] Page Structure On Jun 28, 2007, at 8:47 AM, Tony Crockford wrote: Why is the company logo and strap line the most important thing on every page of a web site. OR - why does most important *thing* on the page have to correspond to h1? Take a newspaper: arguably the most important *thing* on the front page is the name of the paper. Does that correspond to h1? I think not: surely h1 belongs to the most important news item on the page? Andrew 109B SE 4th Av Gainesville FL 32601 Cell: 352-870-6661 http://www.andrewmaben. http://www.andrewmaben.com/ net [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] In a well designed user interface, the user should not need instructions. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Hi, One thing usability studies HAVE found is that, when people are searching for a particulsr item on the Web, they barely glance at the logo and tag line. What they do is scan the headers on the page. If they find an interesting header, they'll speed-read the associated text to see if it's relevant to what they are looking for. If they don't find anything interesting in the headers, they'll move on to another Website. A company's marketing team generally don't understand this behaviour, and thus the most important thing to them is the branding (they get paid for promoting it - it justifies their existence). So if you stress the importance of the logo, etc above the impportance of the actual content you'll satisfy the company marketing goons, but lose potential customers. The choice is yours. I'm also certain that newspapers think the most important thing on their front page is the banner headlines - this is what attracts new customers and increases circulation. They pay people to come up with a better headline than their competitors. Stuart On Mon, July 2, 2007 2:16 pm, Andrew Maben wrote: On Jun 28, 2007, at 8:47 AM, Tony Crockford wrote: Why is the company logo and strap line the most important thing on every page of a web site. OR - why does most important *thing* on the page have to correspond to h1? Take a newspaper: arguably the most important *thing* on the front page is the name of the paper. Does that correspond to h1? I think not: surely h1 belongs to the most important news item on the page? Andrew 109B SE 4th Av Gainesville FL 32601 Cell: 352-870-6661 http://www.andrewmaben.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] In a well designed user interface, the user should not need instructions. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Stuart Foulstone. http://www.bigeasyweb.co.uk BigEasy Web Design 69 Flockton Court Rockingham Street Sheffield S1 4EB Tel. 07751 413451 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Page Structure
On Behalf Of Frank Palinkas I would say the most important _thing_ in a newspaper is the title of lead story for that part of the day. The I don't know why we're talking about Newspapers and/or Books here. This is not print isn't? There is not such thing that covers and front pages on the web. IMO, because users can get to a document through various ways, I believe the company name is - in fact - the most important thing on the page. --- Regards, Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Page Structure
IF you are doing user-centric design, then the question becomes What's the most important part of the page to the USER? Once you look at it from that viewpoint, then the company name is not the most important. The company name has a visual importance for branding and keeping the clients happy, but it does not have the highest contextual importance for users and SEO. Christie Mason -Original Message- From: Thierry Koblentz I don't know why we're talking about Newspapers and/or Books here. This is not print isn't? There is not such thing that covers and front pages on the web. IMO, because users can get to a document through various ways, I believe the company name is - in fact - the most important thing on the page. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Page Structure
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joseph Taylor Its a matter of convention. And demanded by WCAG When we write documents, we always put the big heading up top and go down from there. Its simple habit. Agreed. Of course the branding shouldn't be an h1. Totally disagree. The opposite is true when making a document on company letterhead. When we do that, we're not stopping to put the company name in big bold letters at the beginning of our document, we're letting the header and footer take care of that information. The corporate documents that I deal with all have the branding very prominently on the front cover, rather like a 'splash screen'. But that is one of the differences with the web - with a paper doc the user always gets to see the front cover. With that notion out in the open, it becomes clear what should truly be a heading. In the past, I've set the company name or logo in an h2, reserving the h1 for the actual page heading. That does not sound like correct ordering to me. To continue your paper document comparison, when did you ever come across a doc where the biggest heading was not the first significant item on the page? Regards, Mike *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of course the branding shouldn't be an h1. Totally disagree. Why? Seriously. Why is the company logo and strap line the most important thing on every page of a web site. isn't the page content more important than the branding? isn't the headline for the page content the most important? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...with a paper doc the user always gets to see the front cover. Unless they're blind. Thing about markup is, we can structure it for many more purposes than hard copy info can be. The most important blind visitor? Google... (Which I think is where this thread started.) Anyway, the web/hard copy comparison is always going to break down sooner or later. The. Web. Is. Not. Print. N ___ omnivision. websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
The company logo is the image image and the representative of the company on the internet. Without the existience of the company the logo won't exist and without the branding the website wouldn't have come anyway! The content should just be readable and not to dominate the site. I think readability is alot different from donimations of content. So, lets even looked at it from this angle the company logo is part of the content :) See ya! On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 13:47:30 +0100, Tony Crockford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of course the branding shouldn't be an h1. Totally disagree. Why? Seriously. Why is the company logo and strap line the most important thing on every page of a web site. isn't the page content more important than the branding? isn't the headline for the page content the most important? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
On 28 Jun 2007, at 11:03 PM, Sunday John wrote: The company logo is the image image and the representative of the company on the internet. Without the existience of the company the logo won't exist and without the branding the website wouldn't have come anyway! The content should just be readable and not to dominate the site. I think readability is alot different from donimations of content. So, lets even looked at it from this angle the company logo is part of the content :) True, to a point, but we're discussing searchability. How can you search for a company when you don't know it exists? You search for the goods or services that you want - don't you? Once you've found a company's site, then you know they exist, sure - but you wouldn't find them if the structure of their markup favoured searches on 'Billy Bob's Fab Shop'. You'd be searching on whatever it is that Billy Bob sells. That's why the page content is more important than the 'brand' - as far as SEs are concerned. Remember, too, that if you feel the need, you can style the company name and/or tagline as big, bold and bright as you like - and still put it in a p, or even a div. Your h1 could be 6px high and #ccc on #fff, but it still carries more semantic weight in the markup... N ___ omnivision. websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
ya, quit agree with you! It now depend on how you do SEO. Or maybe I should ask; Does a content based site respond to search engine than a well meta-tag, keyword e.t.c site? On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 14:21:31 +0100, Nick Gleitzman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 28 Jun 2007, at 11:03 PM, Sunday John wrote: The company logo is the image image and the representative of the company on the internet. Without the existience of the company the logo won't exist and without the branding the website wouldn't have come anyway! The content should just be readable and not to dominate the site. I think readability is alot different from donimations of content. So, lets even looked at it from this angle the company logo is part of the content :) True, to a point, but we're discussing searchability. How can you search for a company when you don't know it exists? You search for the goods or services that you want - don't you? Once you've found a company's site, then you know they exist, sure - but you wouldn't find them if the structure of their markup favoured searches on 'Billy Bob's Fab Shop'. You'd be searching on whatever it is that Billy Bob sells. That's why the page content is more important than the 'brand' - as far as SEs are concerned. Remember, too, that if you feel the need, you can style the company name and/or tagline as big, bold and bright as you like - and still put it in a p, or even a div. Your h1 could be 6px high and #ccc on #fff, but it still carries more semantic weight in the markup... N ___ omnivision. websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
On 28 Jun 2007, at 11:41 PM, Sunday John wrote: Does a content based site respond to search engine than a well meta-tag, keyword e.t.c site? It's pretty much accepted now that meta name=keywords don't carry nearly as much weight as keywords (= search terms) in the actual content of a page. And Google - if you look at the results - returns your search term/s in the context of the page content, not the page title or meta name=description, although of course they're important too. The best advice I've ever found about optimising pages for SE results is: don't try and out-think a SE; it's too complex. Just concentrate on good, meaningful content, marked up in a semantically logical way. 'How to code for SE rankings' is just too big a subject to cover in a few words. Have a look at Danny Sullivan's site [1] or Google's own tips for webmasters [2] for good info. [1] http://searchenginewatch.com/ [2] http://www.google.com/webmasters/ N ___ omnivision. websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Google still uses the meta=description tag. Search for 'multipak', the description given for the top link is taken from the meta tag. Im not sure about other search engines. I dont work on the SEO side of things, because usually well formed mark-up is sufficient, unless your one of these people that like to squeeze blood from a stone, they will go the extra mile. I will continue to use H1 for web page title/company name/slogan/tagline until the time comes that using H1 for content really does make a difference, at the moment it seems to be speculation. If you also take a look around some of the big sites, you will see that they also place their branding within H1 tags, i will list a few: www.yahoo.com www.webstandardsgroup.org www.w3.org www.bbc.com www.alistapart.com If it was so wrong to place either logos, sitenames ect. in h1 elements people wouldn't do it, and yahoo, alistapart and wsg are all standards based. So i think the best conclusion is, if you really do want to try and boost your ranking then go ahead and try new things, but as it stands i stick to my guns in saying that search engines with search through all your headings. :) On 6/28/07, Nick Gleitzman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 28 Jun 2007, at 11:41 PM, Sunday John wrote: Does a content based site respond to search engine than a well meta-tag, keyword e.t.c site? It's pretty much accepted now that meta name=keywords don't carry nearly as much weight as keywords (= search terms) in the actual content of a page. And Google - if you look at the results - returns your search term/s in the context of the page content, not the page title or meta name=description, although of course they're important too. The best advice I've ever found about optimising pages for SE results is: don't try and out-think a SE; it's too complex. Just concentrate on good, meaningful content, marked up in a semantically logical way. 'How to code for SE rankings' is just too big a subject to cover in a few words. Have a look at Danny Sullivan's site [1] or Google's own tips for webmasters [2] for good info. [1] http://searchenginewatch.com/ [2] http://www.google.com/webmasters/ N ___ omnivision. websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Page Structure
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Crockford Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 1:48 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Page Structure [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of course the branding shouldn't be an h1. Totally disagree. Why? Well this wouldn't be a discussion if I accepted everything that was said at face value! Seriously. Why is the company logo and strap line the most important thing on every page of a web site. It isn't always. isn't the page content more important than the branding? isn't the headline for the page content the most important? Again, not always. The exact markup used affects what makes sense, and the exact nature of the site affects how important the appearance is. To answer another email, I didn't introduce the paper analogy (this time) just pointing out that the inference was incorrect. Actually, not so much incorrect as just variable - some times branding is essential, sometimes it is irrelevant. In either case, stick to the standards, and remember that we are discussing 'Headers' not some SEO 'relevance' tag. Finally, can I just point out that SEO is ever changing, and if you think that you can get one up on all the other sites out there by mangling your markup then in the long term you are wrong. Regards, Mike *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Nick Gleitzman schreef: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...with a paper doc the user always gets to see the front cover. Unless they're blind. Well, they wont be seeing anything else then either, so semantics and hierarchy of headings doesn't really matter in that case. Unless they have it in braille maybe, but then they will probably start with the front cover as well. cheers, Sander *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Sunday John schreef: Does a content based site respond to search engine than a well meta-tag, keyword e.t.c site? If I'm correct search engines like Google give extra weight to keywords in meta-tags, but only if they appear in the content of the site as well. That way they know that these words are not just attractive dummies. cheers, Sander *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Nick Gleitzman schreef: How can you search for a company when you don't know it exists? How do you find out what goods a certain company sells if don't know what they are? You search for the goods or services that you want - don't you? Not always. If I want to know what campagnes Amnesty International is currently running, I don't want to search for every undemocratic country in the world. You just can't tell how people are searching for information. You only know know on which keywords you defenitly want to be found. And I think that the name of the organisation is an important one (you don't want to disapoint people who already know your name). cheers, Sander *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Sander Aarts wrote: How can you search for a company when you don't know it exists? How do you find out what goods a certain company sells if don't know what they are? Sorry, Sander, but that logic escapes me. Of course I don't know what goods a certain company sells if I don't know they exist. But I know what goods I'm looking for, so that's what I'll search on. You search for the goods or services that you want - don't you? Not always. If I want to know what campagnes Amnesty International is currently running, I don't want to search for every undemocratic country in the world. Not if you know how to use a search engine, no. And you're presuming that I know that Amnesty International exists - which is the whole point. What if I don't? I'd search on human rights abuses. You just can't tell how people are searching for information. You only know know on which keywords you defenitly want to be found. And I think that the name of the organisation is an important one (you don't want to disapoint people who already know your name). Exactly. But I still contend that my company name, being most likely more unique than any name of goods or services that I provide, doesn't require as much semantic weight in my markup and it will *still* be easily found by those who already know I exist - but that the strongest weight is given to the name/s and description/s of what I'm offering, because *I* think that's what the majority of searchers will be looking for. N ___ omnivision. websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
On 29 Jun 2007, at 5:44 AM, Sander Aarts wrote: Nick Gleitzman schreef: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...with a paper doc the user always gets to see the front cover. Unless they're blind. Well, they wont be seeing anything else then either, so semantics and hierarchy of headings doesn't really matter in that case. Unless they have it in braille maybe, but then they will probably start with the front cover as well. Exactly - which is why I said, later in the same post, that comparisons between web and print are pointless. But if you insist, supplying your nice glossy brochure or whatever with braille for unsighted people is *exactly* what we're talking about - Michael was referring to the 'visual weight' of the branding on a site or a document. Semantic XHTML gives us a way of providing that weight to blind visitors - by choosing the appropriate h* we can get their assistive technology device (whatever that may be) to tell them thata certain piece of info is more important. N ___ omnivision. websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Nick Gleitzman wrote: Exactly. But I still contend that my company name, being most likely more unique than any name of goods or services that I provide, doesn't require as much semantic weight in my markup and it will *still* be easily found by those who already know I exist - but that the strongest weight is given to the name/s and description/s of what I'm offering, because *I* think that's what the majority of searchers will be looking for. +1 and more eloquently put than my feeble attempts! ;) *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Nick Gleitzman schreef: Sander Aarts wrote: How can you search for a company when you don't know it exists? How do you find out what goods a certain company sells if don't know what they are? Sorry, Sander, but that logic escapes me. Of course I don't know what goods a certain company sells if I don't know they exist. But I know what goods I'm looking for, so that's what I'll search on. Sometime you're not looking for goods, but just for the company/organisation. Not always. If I want to know what campagnes Amnesty International is currently running, I don't want to search for every undemocratic country in the world. You search for the goods or services that you want - don't you? Not if you know how to use a search engine, no. And you're presuming that I know that Amnesty International exists - which is the whole point. What if I don't? I'd search on human rights abuses. Again, sometimes you want to find info about the organisation itself. And yes, that means that you already know it exists. But not all organisations have very distinctive/unique names. Some have these horrible innitials that can mean anything on the web. You just can't tell how people are searching for information. You only know know on which keywords you defenitly want to be found. And I think that the name of the organisation is an important one (you don't want to disapoint people who already know your name). Exactly. But I still contend that my company name, being most likely more unique than any name of goods or services that I provide, doesn't require as much semantic weight in my markup and it will *still* be easily found by those who already know I exist - but that the strongest weight is given to the name/s and description/s of what I'm offering, because *I* think that's what the majority of searchers will be looking for. I do agree that the actual content is probably more important on a page than the company logo (I just responded to your implication that people only search for products/services). It's not the uniqueness of the company name though that makes the content more important. It's the fact that within the website it's the content that makes a page unique and not the company name. cheers, Sander *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Nick Gleitzman schreef: On 29 Jun 2007, at 5:44 AM, Sander Aarts wrote: Nick Gleitzman schreef: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...with a paper doc the user always gets to see the front cover. Unless they're blind. Well, they wont be seeing anything else then either, so semantics and hierarchy of headings doesn't really matter in that case. Unless they have it in braille maybe, but then they will probably start with the front cover as well. Exactly - which is why I said, later in the same post, that comparisons between web and print are pointless. But if you insist, supplying your nice glossy brochure or whatever with braille for unsighted people is *exactly* what we're talking about - Michael was referring to the 'visual weight' of the branding on a site or a document. Semantic XHTML gives us a way of providing that weight to blind visitors - by choosing the appropriate h* we can get their assistive technology device (whatever that may be) to tell them thata certain piece of info is more important. I'm not sure anymore whether we're agreeing or disagreeing. Perhaps that's because English is not my native language. I had the impression that the comparison being made by Joseph Taylor was that just like with a company letter the name/logo is part of the template. It's always there. Does this mean it's not content (it's even there when the page is 'empty') or is the page not really empty? Are the header/footer on company paper part of the content, do they have importance? If not, why are they on every page then? Same questions for website templates. cheers, Sander *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
On 29/06/07, Sander Aarts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry, Sander, but that logic escapes me. Of course I don't know what goods a certain company sells if I don't know they exist. But I know what goods I'm looking for, so that's what I'll search on. Sometime you're not looking for goods, but just for the company/organisation. That's true, but since your company name is likely to be far more unique than whatever product/service you're providing, the chances are you'll rank well for it anyway. But I guess it comes down to what you feel (preferably backed up by a bit of research) your target audience is likely to be looking for you by. Are you launching a huge, multi-million dollar branding campaign aimed at making your company name a household word? Then maybe emphasising your branding on the site by putting it in h1 tags is the way to go since you are hoping to get people familiar enough with your name that it's what they'll throw at a search engine when they want to find you. Otherwise, the chances are that your products/services are what you're hoping to use to draw people in. In which case the fact that you sell Product Y is of far more importance to searchers than the fact that you're called Company X. Not always. If I want to know what campagnes Amnesty International is currently running, I don't want to search for every undemocratic country in the world. You search for the goods or services that you want - don't you? Not if you know how to use a search engine, no. And you're presuming that I know that Amnesty International exists - which is the whole point. What if I don't? I'd search on human rights abuses. Again, sometimes you want to find info about the organisation itself. And yes, that means that you already know it exists. But not all organisations have very distinctive/unique names. Some have these horrible innitials that can mean anything on the web. I have no hard data to back this up, but I would guess that most web surfers these days understand enough about searching to know that if you have a generic-type word you are looking for (or if the results simply don't give you what you want) then you add some extra terms to narrow the field. And if you already know the name of the organisation, the chances are you at least know a little bit about what they do and so know the sort of things to add to your search. But once again it comes back to my first point, and the acknowledgement of the fact that you can't please 100% of the people 100% of the time. Work out what is most important for a given organisation / site and go with that option. Just some random thoughts from me, anyway. :) Cheers, Seona. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
H1 should be your company name, or logo. h1img src= alt=/h1 Some people like to use IR (Image Replacement) for logos, but a logo is your brand, just as your name is your brand, so i wouldnt use IR on a logo. Tagline should be H2. Im not sure on what you mean by page content, i wouldnt wrap the whole content in a H*, thats abusing the H* element. h1logo or company name/h1 h2tagline/h2 . PAGE CONTENT .. Your page content might consist of a number of elements, Divs, Lists, Paragraphs ect. But the important thing to remember is use the H* element where a heading is needed. On 6/27/07, Web Man Walking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello I am about to start a new website and was given some advice by a SEO expert who says the h1 on the page should be the most relevant thing to the page. For example for a Sports Packages company I design the website for they have: Company Name Tagline Page Content Which in my instance is: Glory Days tickets, accommodation travel packages for major events throughout the uk, europe and worldwide Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages How should this be marked up: h1Glory Days/h1 h2tickets, accommodation travel packages for major events throughout the uk, europe and worldwide/h2 h3Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages/h3 However the Rugby World Cup 2007 is the actual page content, they say that should be the h1 does anyone have a better suggestion as to how to deal with this common problem? Regards Ed Henderson Web Man Walking - web design usability experts t: 0131 669 8800 m: 0781 253 6964 f: 0797 062 1532 e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] w: web-man-walking.com a: 48 Eastfield, Edinburgh, EH15 2PN skype: webmanwalking msn: [EMAIL PROTECTED] New technology, old fashioned service *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
James Jeffery wrote: H1 should be your company name, or logo. Why? shouldn't stuff that appears on every page, maybe in a div id=branding, be of less importance than the subject of the page? I'd be doing: head titleRugby World Cup 2007 Packages - Glory Days/title /head body div id=branding pGlory Daysspantickets, accommodation travel packages for major events throughout the uk,europe and worldwide/span/p div id=content h1Rugby World Cup 2007 Packagesh1 content... /div /body and applying appropriate visual styling to the branding elements. (and I guess we now have both sides of the argument, so debate on...) *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
You can use more than one h1 Darren. On 27/06/07, Web Man Walking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello I am about to start a new website and was given some advice by a SEO expert who says the h1 on the page should be the most relevant thing to the page. For example for a Sports Packages company I design the website for they have: Company Name Tagline Page Content Which in my instance is: Glory Days tickets, accommodation travel packages for major events throughout the uk, europe and worldwide Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages How should this be marked up: h1Glory Days/h1 h2tickets, accommodation travel packages for major events throughout the uk, europe and worldwide/h2 h3Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages/h3 However the Rugby World Cup 2007 is the actual page content, they say that should be the h1 does anyone have a better suggestion as to how to deal with this common problem? Regards Ed Henderson Web Man Walking - web design usability experts t: 0131 669 8800 m: 0781 253 6964 f: 0797 062 1532 e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] w: web-man-walking.com a: 48 Eastfield, Edinburgh, EH15 2PN skype: webmanwalking msn: [EMAIL PROTECTED] New technology, old fashioned service *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Page Structure
I'd agree with the SEO expert, H1 should be saved for the most important heading on a page - which is not generally the company name. So in your example I'd say that Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages should be in a H1. However that means it's probably not going to be the first heading element on the page, which is frowned upon by some. Can anyone else expand on the reasons for that? Chris -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Web Man Walking Sent: 27 June 2007 09:25 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Page Structure Hello I am about to start a new website and was given some advice by a SEO expert who says the h1 on the page should be the most relevant thing to the page. For example for a Sports Packages company I design the website for they have: Company Name Tagline Page Content Which in my instance is: Glory Days tickets, accommodation travel packages for major events throughout the uk, europe and worldwide Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages How should this be marked up: h1Glory Days/h1 h2tickets, accommodation travel packages for major events throughout the uk, europe and worldwide/h2 h3Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages/h3 However the Rugby World Cup 2007 is the actual page content, they say that should be the h1 does anyone have a better suggestion as to how to deal with this common problem? Regards Ed Henderson Web Man Walking - web design usability experts t: 0131 669 8800 m: 0781 253 6964 f: 0797 062 1532 e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] w: web-man-walking.com a: 48 Eastfield, Edinburgh, EH15 2PN skype: webmanwalking msn: [EMAIL PROTECTED] New technology, old fashioned service *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Chris Taylor wrote: However that means it's probably not going to be the first heading element on the page, which is frowned upon by some. Can anyone else expand on the reasons for that? I think we need to be careful how we visualise page structure. I prefer the pragmatic headed paper approach, which says that there's a header (branding) on every page, the content, and then a footer (often on every page) using that concept, the heading structure begins with the content, not the branding. can anyone explain why branding should be included in the page heading hierarchy? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
I didnt say you can only use a single H1 element and yes H1 is to be used for the most important headings on the page. When im developing for corp. customers i tend to place the companys identity (The Logo/Name) in the the H1 element because this is, the most important heading on the page and its the first that a Search Engine will see. If you have article headings on the same page, why is it not possible to place them within H2 elements? Something else i do is place a H2 above all sections, such as Navigation, Main Content, Advertisments, Login ect, then use CSS to push them off screen so that when a non-css user views the site, each section has a heading so they dont get lost, this is also good for accessibility. On 6/27/07, Chris Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd agree with the SEO expert, H1 should be saved for the most important heading on a page - which is not generally the company name. So in your example I'd say that Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages should be in a H1. However that means it's probably not going to be the first heading element on the page, which is frowned upon by some. Can anyone else expand on the reasons for that? Chris -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Web Man Walking Sent: 27 June 2007 09:25 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Page Structure Hello I am about to start a new website and was given some advice by a SEO expert who says the h1 on the page should be the most relevant thing to the page. For example for a Sports Packages company I design the website for they have: Company Name Tagline Page Content Which in my instance is: Glory Days tickets, accommodation travel packages for major events throughout the uk, europe and worldwide Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages How should this be marked up: h1Glory Days/h1 h2tickets, accommodation travel packages for major events throughout the uk, europe and worldwide/h2 h3Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages/h3 However the Rugby World Cup 2007 is the actual page content, they say that should be the h1 does anyone have a better suggestion as to how to deal with this common problem? Regards Ed Henderson Web Man Walking - web design usability experts t: 0131 669 8800 m: 0781 253 6964 f: 0797 062 1532 e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] w: web-man-walking.com a: 48 Eastfield, Edinburgh, EH15 2PN skype: webmanwalking msn: [EMAIL PROTECTED] New technology, old fashioned service *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
On 27 Jun 2007, at 6:43 PM, James Jeffery wrote: H1 should be your company name, or logo. h1img src= alt=/h1 Some people like to use IR (Image Replacement) for logos, but a logo is your brand, just as your name is your brand, so i wouldnt use IR on a logo. Tagline should be H2. Im not sure on what you mean by page content, i wouldnt wrap the whole content in a H*, thats abusing the H* element. h1logo or company name/h1 h2tagline/h2 . PAGE CONTENT .. Your page content might consist of a number of elements, Divs, Lists, Paragraphs ect. But the important thing to remember is use the H* element where a heading is needed. Hmm. Not sure I agree with this. I think the advice Ed's been given is good - if SE results are essential to the success of the page, then I would put 'Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages' in the h1. I know the convention is to use h1 for the 'brand', but then every page on a site has the same h1... What about the title tag? It's important for SE rankings, too - I put the 'brand' info (Co. name, tagline) in it and then the same info in the body doesn't need to take up the all-important h1. Are Ed's clients' customers more likely to search on 'Glory Days' or 'Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages'? HTH N ___ omnivision. websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Page Structure
Good point Tony. Your example with the branding in a p looks like the best one for this situation. I'm certainly going to stick to that for future projects. Chris -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Crockford Sent: 27 June 2007 10:09 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Page Structure Chris Taylor wrote: However that means it's probably not going to be the first heading element on the page, which is frowned upon by some. Can anyone else expand on the reasons for that? I think we need to be careful how we visualise page structure. I prefer the pragmatic headed paper approach, which says that there's a header (branding) on every page, the content, and then a footer (often on every page) using that concept, the heading structure begins with the content, not the branding. can anyone explain why branding should be included in the page heading hierarchy? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
So basically what your trying to say is that branding is the least important
part
of the page, so place it in a p ?
That is incorrect. Lets say you have:
Earth Consultants
Free Housing and Enviroment Advice
Between your title tags your likley to place something like:
titleEarth Consultants - Free Housing and Enviroment Advice/title
So using H1 you are saying that your page title is the most important
heading
on that page. In some cases this might not be the case but most the time it
is the case. So lets get back to the first example:
Company: Earth Consultants
Logo: Yes
Tagline/Slogan: Free Housing and Enviroment Advice
You could mark it up in a couple of ways, one way is:
h1Earth HousingspanFree Housing and Enviroment Advice/span/h1
h1 {font-size: 1.4em; background: url(image/path) no-repeat; padding-left:
50px;}
h1 span {display: block; font-size: 1em}
What would be more important then that in a web document? You have the
company
name and the tagline/slogan. Other headings can use h 2,3,4 ect.
On 6/27/07, Chris Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good point Tony. Your example with the branding in a p looks like the
best
one for this situation. I'm certainly going to stick to that for future
projects.
Chris
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tony Crockford
Sent: 27 June 2007 10:09
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Chris Taylor wrote:
However that means it's probably not going to be the first heading
element
on the page, which is frowned upon by some. Can anyone else expand on
the
reasons for that?
I think we need to be careful how we visualise page structure.
I prefer the pragmatic headed paper approach, which says that there's a
header (branding) on every page, the content, and then a footer (often
on every page)
using that concept, the heading structure begins with the content, not
the branding.
can anyone explain why branding should be included in the page heading
hierarchy?
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Web Man Walking wrote: h1 id=companyGlory Days/h1 h2 id=taglinetickets, accommodation travel packages for major events throughout the uk, europe and worldwide/h2 div id=content h1Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages/h1 /div Would I penalised for something like this? My understanding would be that the first h1 is the ones the search spiders use to determine what the page is about. Hence I don't use headings for branding. why do you want to put strapline and company names in hx's? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Web Man: It is one of lifes great mysteries (i.e. that is secret to Google), at what point the value of H1 is diminished through (over) use. You are doing the right thing by placing emphasis on the rugby world cup aspect. The only time I expect to maybe see a clients name in an H1, is if is somebody who is taking on the traditionally expensive job of building a brand and expecting most searches on that. Of course there is Viral marketing and your not doing too bad a job on that front at the moment :0) -- Regards - Rob Raising web standards : http://ele.vation.co.uk Linking in with others: http://linkedin.com/in/robkirton On 27/06/07, Web Man Walking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Some great stuff, thanks to all. Are Ed's clients' customers more likely to search on 'Glory Days' or 'Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages'? Definitely the latter. They want clients who want to go to the Rugby World Cup 2007. I presume they are not too bothered who their supplier is ;-) Of course keeping the branding on each page is also important. I know multiple h1's are frowned upon but what about something like: h1 id=companyGlory Days/h1 h2 id=taglinetickets, accommodation travel packages for major events throughout the uk, europe and worldwide/h2 div id=content h1Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages/h1 /div Would I penalised for something like this? E. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
James Jeffery wrote: So basically what your trying to say is that branding is the least important part of the page, so place it in a p ? no, I'm saying what the page is about is the most important, so put that in the h1 take a multiple page site with branding on every page - after the first page you're more interested in what the page is about than which company it is. if you're looking for widgets for your foobar then you want to find foobar widget pages, not a specific company... for a while I put all the branding and footer information at the end of the source and then visually displayed it at the head. SEO and semantics are tricky areas, I doubt we'd ever reach consensus, but my view of the web is as a collection of connected pages, rather than web sites as books with pages as chapters. (and it's how the search engines see the web too, in the most part) on that basis the page content is the most important and therefore the semantic structure should follow content, not the book cover. my 2p. ;) *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Page Structure
FWIW, my take would be: // div id=masthead p id=headerimg id=logo alt=Glory Days src=images/GloryDays.gif / tickets, accommodation travel packages for major events throughout the uk, europe and worldwide /p h1 id=topicRugby World Cup 2007 Packages/h1 /div // Float the logo id to the right. This will position the h1 topic beneath the header tagline. Everything is captured within the masthead div. Kind regards, Frank -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Crockford Sent: Wednesday, 27 June, 2007 13:01 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Page Structure Web Man Walking wrote: h1 id=companyGlory Days/h1 h2 id=taglinetickets, accommodation travel packages for major events throughout the uk, europe and worldwide/h2 div id=content h1Rugby World Cup 2007 Packages/h1 /div Would I penalised for something like this? My understanding would be that the first h1 is the ones the search spiders use to determine what the page is about. Hence I don't use headings for branding. why do you want to put strapline and company names in hx's? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Tony, while i can see your point, i dont agree. Nothing against your views but its the way you put a few things. A search engine will not just search the by the H1, actually no-one actually knows how a search engine works, its a secret to the creator, but what we do know is that they make use of all H* elements not just H1. The part that struck me is where you said: 'for a while I put all the branding and footer information at the end of the source and then visually displayed it at the head.' What about people with devices and browser with css either not supported or off? Source Order is very important. Views are views, and a great debate consists of a difference of views. : ) On 6/27/07, Tony Crockford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: James Jeffery wrote: So basically what your trying to say is that branding is the least important part of the page, so place it in a p ? no, I'm saying what the page is about is the most important, so put that in the h1 take a multiple page site with branding on every page - after the first page you're more interested in what the page is about than which company it is. if you're looking for widgets for your foobar then you want to find foobar widget pages, not a specific company... for a while I put all the branding and footer information at the end of the source and then visually displayed it at the head. SEO and semantics are tricky areas, I doubt we'd ever reach consensus, but my view of the web is as a collection of connected pages, rather than web sites as books with pages as chapters. (and it's how the search engines see the web too, in the most part) on that basis the page content is the most important and therefore the semantic structure should follow content, not the book cover. my 2p. ;) *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>James Jeffery wrote:A search engine will not just search the by the H1, actually no-one actually knowshow a search engine works, its a secret to the creator, but what we do know is that they make use of all H* elements not just H1.I tend to agree with James Jeffery on this one. I just checked one of my sites front page and found not a single h1, h2 or h3. Yet many of my key words like 'group health insurance' or 'freedom blue ppo' show that site on Google first page. Oh how I wish I knew how some magic code like h1 would place me on the first page for everything I create. Til then, I'll just go about trying to code as best I can ever improving with the help and debates of you fine folks. Thanks & best, Jim Barricks * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Barricks Insurance Services 13900 NW Passage #302, Marina Del Rey, CA 90292 Phone: (310) 827-7286 | Fax: (310) 827-0256 Toll-Free 1-877-Look4Life (1-877-566-5454) http://www.barricksinsurance.com | CA License 0383850 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming "WOW -- What a Ride!" * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ***List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmUnsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfmHelp: [EMAIL PROTECTED]***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I tend to agree with James Jeffery on this one. I just checked one of my sites front page and found not a single h1, h2 or h3. Yet many of my key words like 'group health insurance' or 'freedom blue ppo' show that site on Google first page. Oh how I wish I knew how some magic code like h1 would place me on the first page for everything I create. using headings that contain your key phrases are a clear indication to the search engine algorithm that this page is about that keyphrase. if your page is all about Steam engines and steam engine is contained in the page title and a couple of headings, then the page will be ranked higher than a similar page that just contains the words steam engine a similar number of times. page content and structure is just one small part of your SERP factor though, as inbound links, Page freshness and other factors play a large part too. ;o) *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Chris Taylor wrote: can anyone explain why branding should be included in the page heading hierarchy? Its a matter of convention. When we write documents, we always put the big heading up top and go down from there. Its simple habit. Of course the branding shouldn't be an h1. The opposite is true when making a document on company letterhead. When we do that, we're not stopping to put the company name in big bold letters at the beginning of our document, we're letting the header and footer take care of that information. With that notion out in the open, it becomes clear what should truly be a heading. In the past, I've set the company name or logo in an h2, reserving the h1 for the actual page heading. Considering the thinking going on here, this conversation says that I should probably markup pages like: div id=header vcard content=for company name branding / other header info / /div div id=content h1My big page Heading/h1 content / /div Seems pretty straight forward. If the logo needs to be an image, we can make a vcard entry for that. CSS will handle how it looks size-wise etc Thoughts? -- Joseph R. B. Taylor Sites by Joe, LLC http://sitesbyjoe.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***begin:vcard fn:Joseph Taylor n:Taylor;Joseph org:Sites by Joe, LLC adr:;;408 Route 47 South;Cape May Court House;NJ;08210;USA email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Web Designer / Developer tel;work:609-335-3076 tel;cell:609-335-3076 x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:http://sitesbyjoe.com version:2.1 end:vcard
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Joseph Taylor wrote: this conversation says that I should probably markup pages like: div id=header vcard content=for company name branding / other header info / /div div id=content h1My big page Heading/h1 content / /div Seems pretty straight forward. If the logo needs to be an image, we can make a vcard entry for that. CSS will handle how it looks size-wise etc Thoughts? Add in some skip to links and I think you're onto a winner, as long as the content doesn't get too far down the source. -- Join me: http://wiki.workalone.co.uk/ Engage me: http://www.boldfish.co.uk/portfolio/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
-Original Message- From: Tony Crockford [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Jun 27, 2007 8:44 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Page Structure [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I tend to agree with James Jeffery on this one. I just checked one of my sites front page and found not a single h1, h2 or h3. Yet many of my key words like 'group health insurance' or 'freedom blue ppo' show that site on Google first page. Oh how I wish I knew how some magic code like h1 would place me on the first page for everything I create. using headings that contain your key phrases are a clear indication to the search engine algorithm that this page is about that keyphrase. if your page is all about Steam engines and steam engine is contained in the page title and a couple of headings, then the page will be ranked higher than a similar page that just contains the words steam engine a similar number of times. page content and structure is just one small part of your SERP factor though, as inbound links, Page freshness and other factors play a large part too. Hi Tony, I didn't even know there was such a thing as SERP factor. I get an average of 4000 visitors a day now on my main site. I have been told that if I make too many changes on my site I could loose my ranking with Google. I mentioned only 2 words that bring me front page on Google. I have tracked down dozens of other words that are from my site but NOT my front page such as: insurance jokes yes virginia how to bake a potato waldorf salad, etc. Just thinking I could loose my ranking has stopped me from changing a bunch (mainly recipes) pages over to Web Standards. See my quandry? It's scary! Thank you for visiting our site. If we can help unravel the quotes or applications with you, please call us Toll-Free 1-877-Look4Life (1-877-566-5454). For INSTANT ONLINE quotes for Groups, Familys and Individuals: http://www.barricksinsurance.com/ Thanks best, Jim Barricks * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Barricks Insurance Services 13900 NW Passage #302, Marina Del Rey, CA 90292 Phone: (310) 827-7286 | Fax: (310) 827-0256 Toll-Free 1-877-Look4Life (1-877-566-5454) http://www.barricksinsurance.com | CA License 0383850 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Representing Blue Cross, Blue Shield, Aetna, Allianz, Delta Dental, Golden West, John Hancock, Kaiser Permanente, Nationwide, HealthNet, Pacificare, PacAdvantage, Unicare. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
In the past, I've set the company name or logo in an h2, reserving the h1 for the actual page heading. That'll only work if the page heading actually comes before the company name, otherwise your heading hierarchy is broken. -- Tyssen Design www.tyssendesign.com.au Ph: (07) 3300 3303 Mb: 0405 678 590 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
On Wed, June 27, 2007 5:17 pm, Tony Crockford wrote: Add in some skip to links and I think you're onto a winner, as long as the content doesn't get too far down the source. But, if you have a skip to content link as the first link on the page (or thereabouts), search engine bots will follow it to the page content. This should mean you don't need to so concerned about the content doesn't get too far down the source bit. -- Stuart Foulstone. http://www.bigeasyweb.co.uk BigEasy Web Design 69 Flockton Court Rockingham Street Sheffield S1 4EB Tel. 07751 413451 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page Structure
Curious, what if you use this ? h3emRugby World Cup 2007 Packages/em/h3 and also putting all important keywords in the title I was asked recently by someone to tell her why with certain keywords search, her site shows up in first page in google and yahoo. This person has no html and web design knowledge whatsoever, let along the SEO and structural markup, however she managed to build her site in Dreamweaver with table layout and many divs styles, font face, br are inserted in the code. It's a site about greeting card and almost no way she, even me able to bring the site to the first page in google search with the word 'greeting card, notecard, etc'. But her site comes up in the first page with keywords 'humorous card', 'humorous greeting card', and 'humorous blank card'. I looked at her source code, she has 'humorous' this word in the title, h1 and a p tag with em. She didn't know what em for, and the reason she used it was because she wanted itallic. Obviously she was hitting on luck and I got to learn a new SEO trick. tee *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
Nothing's wrong with putting your nav at the bottom of your source. Actually I think its a rather good idea! People using screen readers dont want to bombarded with the same set of links each time they visit a new page. Thats why the whole skip to content thing came about...so users with screen readers could skip to the content - which is the most important thing about a site, surely? Moving your nav to the bottom of your structure removes the need for a skip to content... I don't know - thats just what I've picked up over time. Cheers Darren http://www.dontcom.com On 6/24/05, Ian Main [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good morning group, I have a question regarding page structure and hierarchal order. I have a client who insists making me place the site's navigation at the bottom of the page structure and than positioning it at the top via CSS. His reasons of doing this is for search engine optimisation? Quite frankly, this doesn't make sense to me as I thought indexing the site's pages is pretty important stuff. Also explaining the issue about screen readers and CSS off didn't persuade is discussion. Does anyone have any links to this subject or help me explain to him the right way of doing this? P.S. Hope this isn't off topic, I'm asking help on page structure not SEO. Thanks guys, Ian Main http://www.e-lusion.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
Hi Ian, I dont think its a massive issue to do that (put the navigation at the end of the source and position it at the top of the page visually). Theres probably some people that would say this is potentially better for screenreaders, in that they aren't confronted with a massive navigation listat the topofevery page load (if you have a massive navigation list and no 'skip to content' link). on a kinda related note - whenwe designed http://www.smh.com.au/we decided to put the left hand navigation last in the source order (although there is still some ad tag and site stat stuff after it) so that the center column would load first - hopefully speeding up the load time over dialup of the content you want to read. there were never any problems or concerns that came from that decision. the search engine optimisation argument probably does have some weight behind it - in that if your content is higher up the page (above a load of navigation code) then you may be index'd better than a very similar site that had its content lower in the source. thats starting to split hairs though - and to a large extent not worth worrying about too much - in my opinion anyway :) pete ottery On 6/24/05, Ian Main [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good morning group,I have a question regarding page structure and hierarchal order.I have a client who insists making me place the site's navigation at the bottom of the page structure and than positioning it at the top via CSS.His reasons of doing this is for search engine optimisation?Quite frankly, this doesn't make sense to me as I thought indexing the site's pages is pretty important stuff. Also explaining the issue aboutscreen readers and CSS off didn't persuade is discussion.Does anyone have any links to this subject or help me explain to him theright way of doing this? P.S. Hope this isn't off topic, I'm asking help on page structure not SEO.Thanks guys,Ian Mainhttp://www.e-lusion.com** The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
Of course, as far as the "skip to content" linkgoes - you might want to add a "Skip to main menu" link in the source for screen readers above the content as well.:) But I actually put my menus at the bottom of the source code on my sites too. So I don't nessicarily see anything wrong with it. I suppose it all comes down to user preference really. ---Original Message--- From: Peter Ottery Date: 06/23/05 19:34:50 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation Hi Ian, I dont think its a massive issue to do that (put the navigation at the end of the source and position it at the top of the page visually). Theres probably some people that would say this is potentially better for screenreaders, in that they aren't confronted with a massive navigation listat the topofevery page load (if you have a massive navigation list and no 'skip to content' link). on a kinda related note - whenwe designed http://www.smh.com.au/we decided to put the left hand navigation last in the source order (although there is still some ad tag and site stat stuff after it) so that the center column would load first - hopefully speeding up the load time over dialup of the content you want to read. there were never any problems or concerns that came from that decision. the search engine optimisation argument probably does have some weight behind it - in that if your content is higher up the page (above a load of navigation code) then you may be index'd better than a very similar site that had its content lower in the source. thats starting to split hairs though - and to a large extent not worth worrying about too much - in my opinion anyway :) pete ottery On 6/24/05, Ian Main [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good morning group,I have a question regarding page structure and hierarchal order.I have a client who insists making me place the site's navigation at the bottom of the page structure and than positioning it at the top via CSS.His reasons of doing this is for search engine optimisation?Quite frankly, this doesn't make sense to me as I thought indexing thesite's pages is pretty important stuff. Also explaining the issue aboutscreen readers and CSS off didn't persuade is discussion.Does anyone have any links to this subject or help me explain to him theright way of doing this? P.S. Hope this isn't off topic, I'm asking help on page structure not SEO.Thanks guys,Ian Mainhttp://www.e-lusion.com** The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
Ask your client ... What is more important to you, getting a high ranking on a search engine so potential customers (who may or may not become a real customer) are able to find the site, or keeping the customers you already have by offering site navigation that is easy to locate and use? Your question is not a web technical issue. It's a basic common sense business issue. Anyone who has passed Marketing 101 should know that keeping the customers you have, and keeping them happy is a Prime Directive. It's ten times harder to bring back a customer you had but lost, rather than find a new customer. Technically you can have both by absolute positioning. The actual navigation content sits at the bottom of the page, but CSS places it at the top of the rendered page. I have a client who insists making me place the site's navigation at the bottom of the page structure and than positioning it at the top via CSS. His reasons of doing this is for search engine optimisation? ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
Darren Wood wrote: Moving your nav to the bottom of your structure removes the need for a skip to content... But, conversely, can create the need for a skip to navigation link before the content. Both solutions have pros and cons. -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
indeed. if i used a screen reader I'd rather see: * Skip To Main Content * Skip To Navigation than * Skip To Main Content * Home * Tradeshows * Cutomer Service * Corporate Information * Contact Us * Request Catalog * Download Forms * Order Tracking But I guess it boils down to personal pref. D On 6/24/05, Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Darren Wood wrote: Moving your nav to the bottom of your structure removes the need for a skip to content... But, conversely, can create the need for a skip to navigation link before the content. Both solutions have pros and cons. -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
The technique is called reverse source order, and yes in theory it does improve your ranking in SERP's because content laden words appear at the top of the page. It also means the first screenful in a text only browser is content. I've been using this technique for over two years now, and if you position your navigation with CSS nobody can tell the difference. You don't need skip links, but you can code them in if you want, drop the skip to because it doesn't really make sense and add menu, as it is slightly more universally understood than navigation: * Main Content * Navigation Menu regards Terrence Wood. On 24 Jun 2005, at 11:56 AM, Darren Wood wrote: indeed. if i used a screen reader I'd rather see: * Skip To Main Content * Skip To Navigation ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
Actually, the site I read said the link should read "Skip tothe main content." Whole thing. Because otherwise (from what I understood) if it isnt' written out that way, the screen reader pronounces content wrong. It pronouncesit like the verb... the dog was content. And neither link would nessicarily have to show up on your finished page if you style them with display:none;. It would be there for the sole purpose of users with screen readers. I would use: Skip tothe main content. Skip to the navigation menu. ---Original Message--- From: Terrence Wood Date: 06/23/05 20:22:31 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Cc: Terrence Wood Subject: Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation The technique is called reverse source order, and yes in theory it does improve your ranking in SERP's because content laden words appear at the top of the page. It also means the first screenful in a text only browser is content. I've been using this technique for over two years now, and if you position your navigation with CSS nobody can tell the difference. You don't need skip links, but you can code them in if you want, drop the "skip to" because it doesn't really make sense and add menu, as it is slightly more universally understood than navigation: * Main Content * Navigation Menu regards Terrence Wood. On 24 Jun 2005, at 11:56 AM, Darren Wood wrote: indeed. if i used a screen reader I'd rather see: * Skip To Main Content * Skip To Navigation ** The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
On 6/24/05, Dennis Lapcewich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is more important to you, getting a high ranking on a search engine so potential customers (who may or may not become a real customer) are able to find the site, or keeping the customers you already have by offering site navigation that is easy to locate and use? The client is requesting that the navigation be placed at the bottom of the *source code* and then positioned at the visual top of the page using absolute positioning - so there is no usability issue. It's a technique I use a lot, for search engine optimisation and accessibility reasons, and there's absolutely no problem with it. -- Kay Smoljak http://kay.smoljak.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
Erica Jean wrote: And neither link would nessicarily have to show up on your finished page if you style them with display:none;. It would be there for the sole purpose of users with screen readers. Not necessarily. Keep in mind users with limited mobility who cannot use a mouse and therefore rely on keyboard input, who benefit just as much from those links (as it saves them the same tedious tabbing). They should ideally see that these links are present. -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
I tend to agree. Navigation should come first with a skip link to content, OR content before naviagation but with a skip link to navigation. The display:none technique is pretty much the norm now for this screen reader issue. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erica JeanSent: Friday, 24 June 2005 10:48 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation Actually, the site I read said the link should read "Skip tothe main content." Whole thing. Because otherwise (from what I understood) if it isnt' written out that way, the screen reader pronounces content wrong. It pronouncesit like the verb... the dog was content. And neither link would nessicarily have to show up on your finished page if you style them with display:none;. It would be there for the sole purpose of users with screen readers. I would use: Skip tothe main content. Skip to the navigation menu. ---Original Message--- From: Terrence Wood Date: 06/23/05 20:22:31 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Cc: Terrence Wood Subject: Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation The technique is called reverse source order, and yes in theory it does improve your ranking in SERP's because content laden words appear at the top of the page. It also means the first screenful in a text only browser is content. I've been using this technique for over two years now, and if you position your navigation with CSS nobody can tell the difference. You don't need skip links, but you can code them in if you want, drop the "skip to" because it doesn't really make sense and add menu, as it is slightly more universally understood than navigation: * Main Content * Navigation Menu regards Terrence Wood. On 24 Jun 2005, at 11:56 AM, Darren Wood wrote: indeed. if i used a screen reader I'd rather see: * Skip To Main Content * Skip To Navigation ** The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
correct, but simply including the word 'main' is enough... 'skip to' is optional. main content is pronounced correctly. Studies (sorry, can't find the url, but think it came via Joe Clark) have shown that a lot of screen reader users don't understand the concept of 'skip to' and consequently ignore those links. regards Terrence Wood. On 24 Jun 2005, at 12:47 PM, Erica Jean wrote: Actually, the site I read said the link should read Skip to the main content. Whole thing. Because otherwise (from what I understood) if it isnt' written out that way, the screen reader pronounces content wrong. It pronounces it like the verb.. the dog was content. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
display:none makes the link invisible in some screen readers, the
off-left method is better solution for hiding content in the visual
design intended for screen reader/keyboard users.
Example:
// remove from visual design
.hide {
position:absolute;
left: -px;
}
// show to keyboard users
.hide:focus {
left: 0;
}
kind regards
Terrence Wood.
On 24 Jun 2005, at 1:12 PM, Webmaster wrote:
The display:none technique is pretty much the norm now for this screen
reader issue.
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
On 6/23/05 6:32 PM Terrence Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent this out: Studies (sorry, can't find the url, but think it came via Joe Clark) have shown that a lot of screen reader users don't understand the concept of 'skip to' and consequently ignore those links. Is there something wrong with go to whatever section? Rick Faaberg ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
Oh well that's interesting. You learn something new everyday ;) And that just goes to show you can't always trust what someone says on a website.;) ---Original Message--- From: Terrence Wood Date: 06/23/05 21:35:27 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Cc: Terrence Wood Subject: Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation correct, but simply including the word 'main' is enough... 'skip to' is optional. "main content" is pronounced correctly. Studies (sorry, can't find the url, but think it came via Joe Clark) have shown that a lot of screen reader users don't understand the concept of 'skip to' and consequently ignore those links. regards Terrence Wood. On 24 Jun 2005, at 12:47 PM, Erica Jean wrote: Actually, the site I read said the link should read "Skip to the main content." Whole thing. Because otherwise (from what I understood) if it isnt' written out that way, the screen reader pronounces content wrong. It pronounces it like the verb.. the dog was content. ** The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
Rick Faaberg wrote: Is there something wrong with go to whatever section? One could argue that the go to is already implied by the fact that it's a link. But I'd agree that, if I had to choose between skip and go, I'd go with the latter because of its greater clarity. -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
Rick Faaberg wrote: Is there something wrong with go to whatever section? It's been said that go to could imply to someone using a screen reader that the link will take them to another page. You might prefer to say Go to ... on this page. Joe Clark had an entry in Axxlog a while back that discussed the terminology Skip to - that might be what Terrence was talking about. http://axxlog.wordpress.net/archives/2004/05/28/web-items/ Joe writes (of screen reader users in an accessibility presentation): ~~ Most did not know about the link - “skip navigation” is jargon - “skip to content” Jaws mispronounces - “skip to main content” seems best ~~ I think we have discussed this here before(?) and many decided Jump to was a good compromise while still implying the link moves the user to another place on the current page. Simply putting Main content might be confusing. Users might wonder if it meant the main content of the site as a whole and if the page they were viewing merely contained peripheral info. Vicki. :-) ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
