SEO methods

[delta_blues]

Greetings, Fellow Forum members.

 

My understanding of the very first importance for achieving an acceptable rank in say for instance “Google” search.

 

Is certified error free HTML coding on all pages and for all CSS, both internal and external. All other considerations follow behind in importance.

 

The kind of certification I refer to is by W3C . Below find links to the CSS validation.

http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/#validate_by_input
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/#validate_by_upload
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/#validate_by_uri

Find below the links for Markup language.

http://validator.w3.org/#validate-by-upload
http://validator.w3.org/#validate_by_uri
http://validator.w3.org/#validate_by_input

 

If there are HTML and CSS errors on your website, acceptable ranking will be difficult to achieve.

 

I sell Glass Bottleneck guitar slides. My store is on the first page of Google using the key words below.

"bottleneck guitar slides"

www.deltaslides.com

 

Results 1 - 10 of about 49,700 for bottleneck guitar slides.

 

I have made no other effort for SEO but to be absolutely certain that all of my code is error free.

Don’t make the mistake thinking that since the CSS and HTML were supplied by a source that it is automatically error free.

 

Concerning keywords:

Search the Internet for your competitors. Right click on their index page and read the source code meta tags for keywords.

Use them, but don’t steal their exclusive keywords, only use keywords that are obviously public domain.

Many will say that keywords are of little value. Don’t be fooled keywords are picked up by many spiders, webots and webcrawlers.

Use as many as 50 keywords, but don’t over use by repeating words more than twice.

 

Considering the meta tags:

Here is an example of a through and complex set of tags that I use on my websites.

You may use any and all of these tags. Just replace my info with yours and copy and past.

<meta content="english" />
<meta content="no" />
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<meta name="imagetoolbar" content="no" />
<meta name="robots" content="indexfollow" />
<meta name="rating" content="general" />
<meta name="object-type" content="document" />
<meta name="classification" content="advertising" />
<meta name="search-engines" content="AltaVista, AOL, Yahoo, WebCrawler, Infoseek, Excite, Hotbot, Lycos, Magellan, LookSmart, CNET, MSN" />
<meta name="revisit-after" content="30 days" />
<meta name="description" content="SANDALEER LEATHER CO., We hand craft Renaissance leather goods and Celtic Silver Jewelry. Member Clan Morrison North America." />
<meta name="keywords" content="handmade leather sandals, clan Morrison, custom leather sandals, leather sandals, sandals, handmade footwear, sterling silver clan bracelets, sterling silver Celtic knot bracelets, handmade leather, handmade leather goods, leather goods, leather forearm guards, leather wrist guards, leather gauntlet, Leather Gifts, sterling bracelet, shoulder bag, handcrafted messenger bag, belt, gift, purse, cow skin, cow hide, cowhide, full grain leather, handmade leather bags, leather tobacco pouch, handmade leather, leather pouch bag, leather messenger bag, leather shoulder bag, leather bags, personalized, leather purses, custom made leather bag, hand made, pouch, tobacco, custom-made, handmade pouch bags, hand-crafted, custom made, hand-made, stitching, across body bag, hand-made bag, Celtic, Celtic knots, Morrison clan, tribal wear, sterling silver, bracelets, handmade leather goods, leather goods, custom leather sandals, leather sandals, sandals, handmade footwear," />
<meta name="author" content="Domain Promotions" />
<meta name="copyright" content="domain promotions" />
<meta name="country" content="united states" />
<meta name="classification" content="internet website design" />
<meta name="resource-type" content="Document" />
<meta name="language" content="english-US" />
<meta name="URL" content="http://www.sandaleer.com" />
<meta name="last-update" content="Aug-17-2009" />
<meta name="continent" content="North America" />
<meta name="distribution" content="global" />
<meta name="format" content="10957 bytes" />
<meta name="DC.type" content="Design" />
<meta name="DC.format" content="text/html" />
<meta name="DC.language" content="English" />
<meta name="DC.publisher" content="Domain Promotions Design Group USA" />
<meta name="DC.creator" content="Domain Promotions Design Group USA http://www.dompros.com/" />

Best Regards, Robert

[delta_blues]

Here are the meta tags converted for .php.

Edit these tags to suit your store. Then copy and paste them into your >includes/languages/English.php file(or whatever your language is)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

define('keywords', ' enter, your, keywords, here, between, the, single, quotes, use a comma, between, keywords');

define('description', 'A concise Description of your website);

define('copyright', 'Your_personal_or_company_name_here');

define('author', 'Your_personal_or_company_name_here');

define('language', 'en-us'); //or your language

define('search-engines', 'all');

define('revisit', '30_days'); //or as often as you want

define('robots', 'index_follow'); //or no follow

define('resource-type', 'document');

define('object-type', 'document');

define('rating', 'general-html');

define('continent', 'North America');

define('basefont', 'verdana'); //or font of your choice

define('content', 'no');

define('image_toolbar', 'no');

define('meta_content', 'no');

 

//Below match the same info as above. Delete all of the comments.

 

//If you don’t want to use a certain meta tag, be sure to delete both instances of the tag.

 

"<meta name=\"keywords\" content=\"".KEYWORDS."\">";

"<meta name=\"description\" content=\"".DESCRIPTION."\">";

"<meta name=\"copyright\" content=\"".Your_personal_or_company_name_here."\">";

"<meta name=\"author\" content=\"".Your_personal_or_company_name_here."\">";

"<meta name=\"language\" content=\"".en-us."\">";

"<meta name=\"search-engines\" content=\"".all."\">";

"<meta name=\"revisit\" content=\"".thirty_days."\">";

"<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"".index_follow."\">";

"<meta name=\"resource-type\" content=\"".document."\">";

"<meta name=\"object-type\" content=\"".document."\">";

"<meta name=\"rating\" content=\"".general.html."\">";

"<meta name=\"continent\"content=\"".North_America."\">";

"<meta name=\"basefont\" content=\"".verdana."\">";

"<meta name=\"content\" content=\"".no."\">";

"<meta name=\"image_toolbar\" content=\"".no."\">";

"<meta name=\"meta_content\" content=\"".no."\">";

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The key for success is test, test, test, Check every link in your store both for correctness and that it works.

Don’t build your store just to suit “Google” but for every major search engine.

Check your store in 3 or 4 different browsers. You should have these browsers installed in your PC, Netscape, MSIE, Avant, Firefox.

[Jack_mcs]

I'm assuming you meant well with this I applaud your willingness to share what you've found, if that is the case. However, your statements are incorrect and that should be pointed out to those that don't know it to save them the time they might spend on making them.

 

Is certified error free HTML coding on all pages and for all CSS, both internal and external. All other considerations follow behind in importance.

This has no affect whatsoever on how well a page ranks unless there are serious coding issues that prevent a page from loading. At best, it is the least important thing to do when optimizing a page.

 

If there are HTML and CSS errors on your website, acceptable ranking will be difficult to achieve.

Simply not true.

 

Use as many as 50 keywords, but don’t over use by repeating words more than twice.

Oh my, no. A page should have three, maybe four, keywords unless they can be supported by the text on the page. To support up to fifty would require a huge amount of text.

 

Use them, but don’t steal their exclusive keywords, only use keywords that are obviously public domain.

There isn't such a thing as exclusive keywords. By definition, a keyword is something someone would type into a search engine to find a site. If such keywords were exclusive, it would mean each site would have their own listing.

[delta_blues]

Greetings, Jack...

 

Thank you very much for taking the time to enter into this deliberation.

 

Your input allows the expansion of views on this subject, and is very welcome.

Although the condescending style leads to skepticism.

 

In the center of your first statement is a key wording “coding issues”, the subject of our discussion.

 

Admittedly there are those among us that dismiss the importance of error free HTML, CSS and so on.

They often write code as they please rather than following guidelines.

Throughout the Internet there are offerings of snippets, scripts, add-ons etc., which are written with no thought of correctness.

Web authors unwittingly and trustingly paste these into their web pages, without realizing the problems that are caused.

 

Then there are those that strongly support, that error free code is of primary importance. Included among us would be the “World Wide Consortium”, The W3C and me.

The truth concerning error free coding is, “It is never a bad thing or wrong, It is always a good thing and right”.

The spiders crawling over our web pages are machines. Machines reading and recording errors is never good…

 

To believe that a website left unchecked and full or coding errors has no effect on search engine rankings is incredulous.

 

Concerning the number of key-words…

 

Say we are selling tires. The single word tires on the index page will support, white wall tires, snow tires, all weather tires, rain tires, RV tires, off road tires, and so and so forth.

 

Some years ago is was demanded that every keyword be supported by volumes of text, so web-authors wrote the text in very fine fonts, hex coded to match the color of the page, so the meaningless babble written to support the keywords was invisible to the reader. Methods such as that have gone by the way.

Unless the key-words have little to do with the subject of the website, it’s easy to support them with the proper wording on the page, without using a huge amount of text.

 

Concerning exclusive keywords, they are commonly found on websites throughout the Internet.

Registered trademarks, Registered businessmarks, patented processes, registered business names, and so on.

To steal a business’s exclusive registrations to direct traffic away from and to, an alternate website may be, if not illegal, at the very least unscrupulous.

So it follows, of course that there are exclusive keywords, and should be easily recognized without much thought.

Why involve oneself with distasteful situations, that may result in an inquiry.

 

Your round about, but apparent dismissal and admonishment of the importance of following the guidelines of the W3C consortium would appear to some to be a disservice to the forum members.

 

 

Although, I follow the guidance of higher authority, from my point of view, I would advise my fellow forum members to visit the W3C site and review what they have to offer, I don’t believe that there is a single web author that would not benefit in some way.

After all the founders of the W3C invented “Mark-up Language”.

 

Best Regards, Robert

[Guest]

Robert, guess you should take an advice and read Google webmaster guidelines along with hints from mattcutts blog. I did some tweaking on the site ( lazarevac.biz ) but there are still some errors found via W3C validations, and we were revently "granted" PR3 for the page. If you suggest that W3C validation errors lead to poor ranking, than you should know that any YouTube embedding will not pass W3C validation if using original YouTube scripts, but will generate several errors. Still there are many great ranking pages out there with this kind of validation error.

[Jack_mcs]

Then there are those that strongly support, that error free code is of primary importance. Included among us would be the “World Wide Consortium”, The W3C and me.

The truth concerning error free coding is, “It is never a bad thing or wrong, It is always a good thing and right”.

The spiders crawling over our web pages are machines. Machines reading and recording errors is never good…

 

To believe that a website left unchecked and full or coding errors has no effect on search engine rankings is incredulous.

 

You're mixing words and coming to a wrong conclusion. If you code your page and forget to close a <tr>, your site will not pass W3C but the search engines will happily go through the page and not have a problem at all. That is what I am talking about. Those kinds of fixes have no meaning to SEO. If you can provide an instance where they do, please supply it. On the other hand, if a site won't finish a vaidate because of some error in the code that prevents the scanner from reading the page, then that should be fixed since search engines wouldn't be able to make it through either. But that's a big difference from passing a W3C inspection. But you are the one making the claim so please substantiate it with an example of wrong html code causing a problem with the search engines.

 

Concerning the number of key-words…

 

Say we are selling tires. The single word tires on the index page will support, white wall tires, snow tires, all weather tires, rain tires, RV tires, off road tires, and so and so forth.

 

Not true. The page may index for sites containing tires but there is no way it will index well for one of the other keywords. That's not how indexing works. If that was the case, then all anyone would have to do is put a list of keywords on the page and be in the top ten. But if there are more than ten sites, what happens to the others? Obviously, your statement fails under that test.

 

Some years ago is was demanded that every keyword be supported by volumes of text, so web-authors wrote the text in very fine fonts, hex coded to match the color of the page, so the meaningless babble written to support the keywords was invisible to the reader. Methods such as that have gone by the way.

 

Not true. There are still plenty of people out there using such techniques.

 

Unless the key-words have little to do with the subject of the website, it’s easy to support them with the proper wording on the page, without using a huge amount of text.

To properly support them, they have to be used in the text on the page. Google, especially, will scan that text and will even use human readers occassionaly. So a one sentence per keyword just isn't going to be of much use. It usually takes several spread throughout the text, resulting in a paragraph or two. Now multiply that by 50 keywords - it just isn't someting any normal site would do.

 

Concerning exclusive keywords, they are commonly found on websites throughout the Internet.

Registered trademarks, Registered businessmarks, patented processes, registered business names, and so on.

To steal a business’s exclusive registrations to direct traffic away from and to, an alternate website may be, if not illegal, at the very least unscrupulous.

So it follows, of course that there are exclusive keywords, and should be easily recognized without much thought.

Why involve oneself with distasteful situations, that may result in an inquiry.

That's a different and unique situation. You are talking about words owned by a company. It's very uncommon, in my experience, where a site would need to use such keywords and would be making a mistake, just for the SEO on the page, to do it in the first place.

 

Your round about, but apparent dismissal and admonishment of the importance of following the guidelines of the W3C consortium would appear to some to be a disservice to the forum members.

Yes, that's true, when taken from an SEO point of view, which is what this is about.

 

Although, I follow the guidance of higher authority, from my point of view, I would advise my fellow forum members to visit the W3C site and review what they have to offer, I don’t believe that there is a single web author that would not benefit in some way.

After all the founders of the W3C invented “Mark-up Language”.

But the question is whether that benefit has anything to do with SEO. So, again, please state how it does.

[delta_blues]

Greetings and thank you for your input...

 

I may add, that akin to these posts, there are those that promote that, the written language requires neither the structure of grammar nor the correctness of spelling. Just as long as others can understand you, it's OK!

 

OsCommerce is a do it your self application, even so, there those that have set-up entrepreneur websites aimed at earning income by soliciting payment for their help, while attempting to diminish those that do offer free input.

 

If the reader does agree that correct error free coding is unnecessary and without merit, and agree with the discredit's posted against the W3C, then don't bother to follow the W3C guidelines.

 

The World Wide Web Consortium is both the father and mother of the internet.

 

I would advise all OsCommerce users to go to the - http://www.w3schools.com/ - free training courses.

Thereby, You can receive impressive free of cost training and perhaps avoid the need to engage the services of those that prowl among us...

 

Best Regards, Robert

[delta_blues]

Greetings, As I first stated...

 

Do not design your store as a "Google" only website...

 

This is a big world.

 

Regards, Robert

[WedgeCoop]

delta_blues, the information you are providing is incorrect.

 

http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/thread?tid=46fe0487dc9697f7&hl=en

 

Also see #9 under "On-Page (Non-Keyword) Ranking Factors" at the following link:

 

http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors#ranking-factors

[delta_blues]

Greetings, Joe (wedgecoop)…

 

Thank you for your input, which I consider to be very important for Forum members and store owners to join in with mutual support of one another.

 

I do not understand clearly your statement.

 

It appears that you are saying that everything in my post’s are wrong?

 

I reviewed the web addresses that you referred to although I had read them before.

 

I found the following: See the excerpts first followed by the copied statement...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If the reader were to read the post completely and to understand it’s meaning the following would be found.

 

1. ”Cleaning up your HTML makes your site render better in a variety of browsers”.

2. “More accessible to people with disabilities or folks accessing your pages on portable or other devices”.

3. “It can improve the popularity of your site”.

4. “Increasing traffic”.

5. “Natural links to your site.”

6. “(which can help with your Google ranking), and so on”.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

W3C validator

http://sites.google.com/site/webmasterhelpforum/en/faq--crawling--indexing---ranking/#valid-code

 

Q: Does validating my site's code (with a tool such as the W3C validator) help my site's ranking in Google?

A: No, at least not directly. However, to the extent that cleaning up your HTML makes your site render better in a variety of browsers (http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py? answer=100782), more accessible to people with disabilities or folks accessing your pages on portable or other devices, and so on, it can improve the popularity of your site... increasing traffic, natural links to your site (which can help with your Google ranking), and so on.

 

Web Authors should understand that the assembly of a website is a matter of a combination of parts resulting in the unification of page elements and further to the unification of web-pages to form a complete website.

A successful website is more or less the combination of elements forming the whole such as a chain or a brick wall.

 

Any weakness in the construction of the links or bricks will have a weakening affect on the whole project.

 

Concerning the item #9. That you referred to, I don’t understand the connection.

9. Keyword Use in the Subdomain Name (e.g. keyword.seomoz.org) 42% low importance.

 

It appears that the links that you refer to clearly verify the importance of error free web-design.

 

Best Regards, Robert

[K3D]

Ranking well for a 3 word keyphrase is not that difficult, especially when there are only 49,700 competing web pages.

 

You would rank better if you had unique page titles instead of DeltaSlides.com. You also have an incorrect DOCTYPE and you have numerous w3.org validation errors in HTML and CSS. Why are you not following your own advice?

[delta_blues]

Greetings, K3D, Thank you for your input

 

Even though you have chosen to criticize and scold, your comments are very welcome.

I will do a search to find the errors mentioned. Over time, I am sure that the code will be clean.

 

The more negative comments that are posted, the more exposure and transparency concerning the subject at hand.

Although it's clear that members who are experienced would benefit thousands of our members by posting positive input, such as ways and methods to improve their osCommerce store.

 

A discussion will be started as to just who are the forum members that advise other members that correctness is not necessary when authoring a website.

 

All of your observations which are mentioned are correct, but for one "Why are you not following your own advice"?

 

The store is being worked on daily as time permits. I am quite sure that when the store is complete the errors will be corrected.

 

As of yet I do not even have all of the products listed.

No doubt, that if you are running an osCommerce store you have spent many hours working on it yourself, but don't seen to regard that option for others.

 

I also must spend time on other websites. However, not to worry all in it's own time...

 

Anyway thank you for checking and reviewing my website. It would have been helpful to post the location of the errors as many of our members, do for each other. Rather than your open hostility.

 

Best Regards, Robert

[delta_blues]

OK, K3D...

I've taken the time to remove the "scroll bar color code" from the stylesheet.css of which you were so critical of.

 

I will now check the "DOC Types", for errors...

 

Thank you for pointing these out for my review.

 

Best Regards, Robert

[K3D]

No hostility here on my part, just to the point facts. You admit that you are ranking well for "bottleneck guitar slides", however your site has many validation errors. How did you achieve this if validating is such a great factor?

 

The stock oscommerce codebase is not w3.org HTML/CSS valid, however the errors are minor and they would not affect a text crawler like google, yahoo or bing. To say that using something like valign incorrectly would cause you to rank poorly is plainly misguided (most of the errors reported by w3.org are of this nature). Will a search engine crawler really choke if you incorrectly use <br> instead of <br />?

 

It is however good practice to create sites which validate, and is often useful in ironing out rendering bugs. My site was ranking very well long before being fully w3.org valid.

 

Finally, Jack_mcs has made some outstanding contributions / add-ons to the community with regards to SEO. Everyone would be well advised to listen to his advice and use some of his fantastic modules to create unique page titles, category text and meta descriptions.

[delta_blues]

Greetings, K3D, and thank you for taking the time to reply...

 

This is the short-term evaluation for this one osCommerce store. I'll give it 2 years, to make a valid analysis.

I am working on others and there will be more after that.

Inevitably, all of the errors I must correct are errors of which I created in the first place. Either by overlooking them or by my ignorance.

 

From a personal point of view,

I have received a lot of help from members which don't solicit money for their help. For which I am very grateful.

 

As far as correct "Coding", there those which choose to "do it right" and those who don't care... To each their own... The readers of this thread can make their own choice.

 

The best thing for this thread is for members to build solid and correct guide-lines rather small minded criticism which does little to benefit the whole.

 

Thank you for your observations. I have now stopped my work on other projects, to make corrections of which you have so gracefully pointed out.

 

I would be grateful, if when I believe I am finished, to review your points and indicate the further errors. As, I am sure there will be more.

 

Best Regards, Robert

[delta_blues]

Greetings, K3D...

 

"To say that using something like valign incorrectly would cause you to rank poorly is plainly misguided (most of the errors reported by w3.org are of this nature). Will a search engine crawler really choke if you incorrectly use <br> instead of <br />?"

 

The above are your statements, not mine. These are simplistic examples are of minimal consequence.

 

The statement above which is "plainly misguided" is repeated attempts to diminish another forum member.

 

Do you know what a nesting error is or any other errors that actually matter? Do you know what code bloat is?

 

Although as you say, without hostility. What are the motives for your conduct?

 

The assemblage of those who have logged-in to "Google" webmasters school and are in opposition to error free web authoring, may cause some to wonder...

Just who is it that chooses to oppose the W3C, acknowledged world wide as the premier authority?

 

de·ny verb. de·nied, de·ny·ing, de·nies. 1. To declare untrue; contradict. 2. To refuse to believe; reject. 3. To refuse to recognize or acknowledge; disavow.

 

The written statements in this thread say that they don't use error free coding in their own websites...

Are they doing the same in client’s web-pages?

Who are they trying to convince by doing it as they choose, rather than as universally accepted.

Are they trying to convince clients that doing it wrong is OK?

Are they just to lazy to do the required work?

 

It may make one wonder, might it not?

 

Regards, Robert

[delta_blues]

OK, Returning to the subject.

 

It’s easy to make mistakes when editing HTML, CSS, Scripts and so on.

 

That’s why we validate.

 

It’s not possible to make decisions without knowing what the possibilities are.

Building a website is a construction. Do you want to a clean correct construction as you go, or try to fix it later?

 

If it doesn’t matter to you, then no need to read further.

 

The way to keep it clean is by using inspection and validation.

Inspection and validation before you begin the “Search Engine Optimization” (SEO) process.

 

Many of us find that using “World Wide Web Consortium” (W3C) validation tools is both time consuming and tedious.

 

Many of the warnings and error messages seen to be cryptic.

 

The W3C is operating under the assumption that if a web author has reached the point of validating their coding, they must have reached a competency which enables them to understand the error messages.

The W3C doesn’t seem to take into account that many of us are using HTML, Scripts, .PHP and CSS that was supplied either with our store or from a website such as www.dynamicdrive.com, www.hotscripts.com, www.scripts.com, for menu’s, CGI scripts and so on, and we have no idea what the errors messages mean.

 

Here are some things that may help you.

 

CSE HTML Validator Lite, a Free Download of an excellent tool, with a short learning curve.

Install this software on your hard drive validate and save before you validate with W3C, You should have no errors.

 

1. http://download.cnet.com/CSE-HTML-Validator-Lite/3000-10247_4-10035333.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

English v5.4.5, Color Cop a free multi-featured color-picking tool. Has an eyedropper, magnifier, 3x3/5x5 average sampling, complementary color generation and variable magnification. Easy to use, can generate any hex code seen on a monitor screen.

2. http://colorcop.net/download,

 

Now you may say to yourself, “Why do I need a color picker”?

I will explain… It is to correct CSS warnings, “Color is the same as”,

Which I will get to later.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A fabulous free style-sheet editor! Easy to learn.

3. http://topstyle.en.softonic.com/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A fabulous free multi editor. A super "NotePad". Easy to learn.

4. http://www.pspad.com/en/download.php PSPad - freeware HTML editor, PHP editor, XHTML, JavaScript...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

These tools will enable you to create a professional web-store that you can be proud of.

 

More later…

 

Fell free to email me for more info.

 

Best Regards, Robert

[delta_blues]

Feeding the Crawlers… An SEO technique.

Use one or two keywords but avoid keyword stuffing.

 

1. Image alt tag, <img border="0" src="images/xoxo.gif, alt=”keywords in short concise description”.

2. Image title tag, <img border="0" src="images/xoxo.gif, title=”keywords in short concise but catchy description”>.

Example:

<img border="0" src="images/xoxo.gif alt=”keywords in short concise description” title=”keywords in short concise but catchy description” />.

 

3. Table summary, use on every table...<table summary=” use keywords in short concise but catchy and colorful description”, border=”x”, width=xx”>.

Example: <table summary=” use keywords in short concise but catchy and colorful description” border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5">

 

Best Regards, Robert

[delta_blues]

Use Keywords anywhere within the H1 Headline Tag.

Some say that only the H1 Tag is counted, but we may want to add keywords in all headline tags.

 

Here are various examples of how to write CSS h tags.

Find the ones that may suit your needs. Edit them as needed.

 

Copy and paste into a copy of stylesheet.css named stylesheet_new.css

 

When you upload the new stylesheet to the ftp server side, rename the working stylesheet, as stylesheet_1st.css and rename stylesheet_new.css as stylesheet.css

This saves your original stylesheet.

 

These will define your "Headlines" on your webpage.

Place your keywords on the webpage inside of these tags.

 

Example: <tr>

<td><h1>I love my Store</h1></td>

</tr>

The h1 tag must be contained within the <td>,<body>,<dd> or <th> tag.

Do not use with <td class="pageHeading"> As they will conflict.

Css in the head overrides external stylesheets.

HTML on the page overrides CSS in the head.

--------------------------------------------

 

//Examples all h tags...

 

h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6 {

margin : 5px;

font-weight : normal;

}

--------------------------------------------------

//h1, Links...

 

h1 a:link, h1 a:visited {

color : #000000;

}

 

h1 a:hover {

color : #000000;

}

 

//Descending sizes...

 

h1 {

font : 20pt "Trebuchet MS", "Arial", "Verdana", sans-serif;

letter-spacing : 0.5px;

height : 0.95em;

overflow : hidden;

}

 

h2 {

font : 18pt "Trebuchet MS", "Arial", "Verdana", sans-serif;

letter-spacing : 4px;

}

 

h3 {

font : 14pt "Trebuchet MS", "Arial", "Verdana", sans-serif;

letter-spacing : 3px;

}

 

h4 {

font : 12pt "Trebuchet MS", "Arial", "Verdana", sans-serif;

letter-spacing : 2px;

}

 

h5 {

font : 10pt "Trebuchet MS", "Arial", "Verdana", sans-serif;

letter-spacing : 1px;

}

 

//Another way...

 

h1 {

font-size: 20px;

color: #000000;

font-weight: bold;

margin-top: 0px;

margin-bottom: 3px;

}

h2 {

font-size: 18px;

color: #000000;

font-weight: bold;

margin-top: 0px;

margin-bottom: 3px;

}

h3 {

font-size: 16px;

color: #000000;

font-weight: bold;

margin-top: 0px;

margin-bottom: 3px;

}

h4 {

font-size: 14px;

color: #000000;

font-weight: bold;

margin-top: 0px;

margin-bottom: 3px;

}

h5 {

font-size: 12px;

color: #000000;

font-weight: bold;

margin-top: 0px;

margin-bottom: 3px;

}

h6 {

font-size: 10px;

color: #000000;

font-weight: bold;

margin-top: 0px;

margin-bottom: 3px;

}

 

Best Regards, Robert

[aligp]

Stop wasting server space now! w3c validation has little to do with seo or ranking. Google staff on their blog has given this question a resounding NO, which you have intentionally missed. W3C sets up web page coding standard but unfortunately not all browser makers follow these standard, eg, MS IE (tho some improvement recently as seen in IE8). A web page is a good page as long as it show up correctly on visitors pc screen, which does not necessarily comply with W3C standards, in fact, you have to bend the rules to make it render correctly on some versions of browers. So, until W3C starts making browsers and lobbying the united nations to pass resolution to ban all others but W3C to make browsers, you can't guarantee 100% a W3C validated web page will show up correctly on every brand and version of browsers. Further more, google or the like does not go out crawling website using W3C validator, they have their unique and clever way of "reading" web pages to extract the info or data they want.

Stop greetings and enjoying yourself pls and show some regards to the server space.

Ali

[delta_blues]

Greetings, Ali…

 

If you wish to harass, belittle and attempt to diminish other forum members, you should start your own thread.

 

Who are you to decide the amount of anything, let alone server space is to be used by anyone.

If you and others wish to design, their websites to conform to “Google” Webmasters School so be it. Many of the rest of us will do it as we conceive to be correct.

There are those among us that don’t design to only one browser or even two browsers, but rather to cross platform.

 

Wannabe’s that can’t write code correctly, or can’t understand the W3C errors and warnings, continually denigrate that which they can’t deal with.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, Bill says to John. “I’m building a house. John replies,” Where?”

“On my lot replies, Bill”.

John questions, “On that foundation the day laborers poured”?

“Yes, say’s Bill”.

John, protests, “But the foundation hasn’t been inspected!”

“Hogwash, says, Bill… Those inspectors don’t know anything.”

The rules and regulations are stupid and after the house is built, the problems won’t show. No one will know the difference!”

“Besides, I will sell the house to some sucker and let them deal with it.”

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I may add. Who are you to decide what I am to write in my thread,

Who I am to greet or whether I am to enjoy myself or not.

 

I do not miss anything intentionally, such as you have.

 

In addition, I have not guaranteed anything.

 

Your lack of understanding for the use of salutations, Shows just how ignorant you are.

Considering your attempt to dictate to others concerning their conduct on their own threads is uncalled for.

 

Your rude arrogance is found to be repulsive.

 

Regards, Robert

[delta_blues]

Flaming is a hostile and insulting post or reply directed towards a forum member.

 

A hostile forum user typically generates a flame response to other posts or users posting on a site, in an attempt to dictate and force their point and/or their way of life on others.

 

Such a response is not constructive, does not clarify a discussion, and does not persuade others.

 

Generally, flamers intervene in an attempt to assert their authority, or establish a position of superiority over other users and actually influence only their cronies and click members.

 

What they reveal are their own shortcomings.

 

They call for support by email to their gang and email congratulations to one another.

 

They turn forum members away from themselves and their non-productive conduct.

 

 

 

Judge for yourselves...

 

Regards, Robert

[delta_blues]

Greetings, Crimble…

 

Thank you for your input. Of course, you are referring to any and all Search engines…

 

Common knowledge states that there “Pros and Cons” to every issue.

 

No doubt, the Nay Sayers will find comfort in your agreement and support, while thanking you for your vote.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

On the pro side. There are many, such as myself, who are well aware of their shortcomings.

Realizing we are not error free, but preferring to begin our site cleaned up as much as possible before we begin the task of SEO.

We use a validator.

 

The major complaint against using a validator is that they have “Bugs”.

Using that complaint, many of us would then find it necessary to shut down our computers while we search for a user interface to replace MSWindows.

 

There are those that say dirty, bloated, poorly written code has no bearing on anything. Just as long as the page looks OK and the links work.

Some of us (probably many) prefer not to take a chance and will take every measure to present error free code to the crawlers.

This is especially true of those among us that are unwilling to build our site solely on the criteria provided by “Google”.

 

It is clearly understood that “Google” dominates. Some may wonder if this is a good thing. Who is it that wants to be dominated?

 

Some may comment, ”Well ‘Facebook’, won’t validate”.

So, OK, then get your diploma from the University of Facebook.

 

I have been using the assets provided by the W3C for over 9 years and they have never caused me problems of which I am aware.

 

The quip, when the W3C makes browses is ludicrous. Akin to when orange trees grow apples I will make a pie!

 

The W3C formulates the languages that the browsers read.

 

Best Regards, Robert

[delta_blues]

Greetings, Fellow Forum Members

 

Personal attacks have successfully disrupted this thread. Causing difficulty in following and taking advantage of the original posting which offers those interested, Internet based assets offered by the “World Wide Web Consortium”, The W3C.

 

These attacks appear to be attempts to coerce readers to act or think in a certain way by using pressure by way of displaying intimidation of the author.

 

I will now re-post this thread in a revised and edited form.

Since the naysayers have already voted, there will be no reason for them to interrupt.

 

 

Regards, Robert

[lnkddin]

Nice post!!! Thanks for sharing...