jo24 Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Hi, I was checking my shop and I notice that I have piles of errors on each page through checking with the W3C validator. The question is what is the best way to fix each error in each page? I don't know were to start. Please help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♥toyicebear Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 This or this or this might help you along Basics for osC 2.2 Design - Basics for Design V2.3+ - Seo & Sef Url's - Meta Tags for Your osC Shop - Steps to prevent Fraud... - MS3 and Team News... - SEO, Meta Tags, SEF Urls and osCommerce - Commercial Support Inquiries - OSC 2.3+ How To To see what more i can do for you check out my profile [click here] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jo24 Posted March 5, 2010 Author Share Posted March 5, 2010 Thanks for getting back to me. I'm just confused how I would go through each page and which would be the best way to tackle the errors. I don't want to over ride any of my pages. I have all the content on them. Will I do this by using one of these adds on? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jo24 Posted March 5, 2010 Author Share Posted March 5, 2010 I mean to do each page manually would take forever as there is no many pages to fix. Is there an Add on which can help me fix these errors quicker? As I want to set up SEO after mixing the errors. thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrPhil Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Remember that osC 3.0 is still in "alpha" release and is likely to change a great deal. It should not be used for a production store. That said, I would not worry about W3C validation on 3.0 -- hopefully the code base will be cleaned up over time. It's just not worth your time to clean it up manually when so much of the code is likely to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jo24 Posted March 5, 2010 Author Share Posted March 5, 2010 Remember that osC 3.0 is still in "alpha" release and is likely to change a great deal. It should not be used for a production store. That said, I would not worry about W3C validation on 3.0 -- hopefully the code base will be cleaned up over time. It's just not worth your time to clean it up manually when so much of the code is likely to change. Hi, I am using version 2 not 3. Sorry I must put it in the wrong forum. The reason why I wanted the site to validate is because I thought you had to have the site fully validated for Google to pick it up? I haven't done any SEO yet and I am not sure where to start with that either. Many thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrPhil Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 No, any search engine will still pick up your site, even if it badly flunks validation. It's true that you might get better search results (higher ranking) with a clean site, but the usual "better key words and phrases" will do more good for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Adding an seo like ultimate seo will clean up more of those errors than you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jo24 Posted March 8, 2010 Author Share Posted March 8, 2010 No, any search engine will still pick up your site, even if it badly flunks validation. It's true that you might get better search results (higher ranking) with a clean site, but the usual "better key words and phrases" will do more good for you. Thanks. What is the best adds on for SEO? Is there a way that I can use something to help the validation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jo24 Posted March 8, 2010 Author Share Posted March 8, 2010 Adding an seo like ultimate seo will clean up more of those errors than you know. Thanks for replying. Do you have the link to the add on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New 
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.