H1 versus Font Size +3

[Drew-z]

I was curious if you all have any experience on the priority Google gives a H1 heading versus a font size of +3 or +4?

I prefer the control of H1's with CSS as font size + or - can distort alignment and cause unwanted wrapping depending on user browser settings and cell space limitations.

My sense would be that Google would treat them the same and maybe even give H1 a slight advantage.

Emprically, however, it seems G loves font size +3 with a bold thrown in there on the focused keyword from many of the high ranking sites I analyzed.

I realize it's a minor distinction either way, but I use them so often it would be nice to hear the habits of others on this.

Thanks

[Webmaster T]

Originally posted by Drew-z
I was curious if you all have any experience on the priority Google gives a H1 heading versus a font size of +3 or +4?Fontsize is just HTML markup or text formatting. Heading tags have not just formatting uses but are part of the document structure so have more weight. For instance if you look at the HTML specification it has recommended uses and for H1 it says it should be like a sub title. 2 and up are for blocks of text following it.

Emprically, however, it seems G loves font size +3 with a bold thrown in there on the focused keyword from many of the high ranking sites I analyzed.Google says in the old white paper that markup is used moreso when it is in the vicinity of or in the link text. <B> and <font> are obvious ways to determine what a page is about. However, overuse may hinder this.

[g1smd]

Just like you can separate text into separate paragraphs using either:

<br><br><br><br>text text text text text
<br><br><br><br>text text text text text
<br><br><br><br>text text text text text

or

<p>text text text text</p>
<p>text text text text</p>
<p>text text text text</p>


and can put headings on a page using either

<font size="+3"><b>A Big Heading</b></font>

or

<h1>A Heading</h1>

only the latter one of each example actually uses the HTML to convey meaning to robots.

You should use the latter type of code in each case.

[danielp]

In another thread, I highlighted the use of H Tags beyond SEO - in particular, accessibility. Many screen readers rely on H Tags to interpret the structure of web pages. Even if web pages have a structure, without proper header tags, screen readers can't find it. So it is important to use H Tags - for your visitors.


To quote the W3C:

"A heading element briefly describes the topic of the section it introduces. Heading information may be used by user agents, for example, to construct a table of contents for a document automatically."
If screen readers like H Tags, it might be fair to say that search engines may also consider H Tags of importance - particularly if they are used correctly.

It makes 'logical' sense for H Tags to have a weighting in SEO. I wouldn't be surprised if the correctly structured use of H Tags was a factor in Google's algo. I'm also sure that any mis-use of H Tags will be frowned upon by Google.

Of course, I would be interested to see any evidence of the effect of using H Tags for specific pages in terms of search-engine ranking.

Cheers,

Daniel

[qwerty]

I believe our own DanO was doing some research on Google's treatment of H1, H2, and bolded text. Hopefully he'll have something to say about it here.

[Dan0]

Instant summary:

H1 vs. H2 vs. H3: Tried all 3, no discernable difference between them in terms of their effect on rankings.

Headings vs. Bold Text: Headings good, bold text better than plain text but not as good as headings.

This makes sense. Headings are supposed to convey information about the structure of a document. Headings are an important part of understanding what a document is about.

In spite of all the noise we all add to the equation, I'd bet that the vast majority of results returned by Google on a given day are *not* for deliberately optimized content.

[chmcwebmaster]

Following along with this discussion about <H> tags, can anyone confirm whether the <p> tag (paragraph tag) is required after an <H> tag (when the <H> tag is a subhead in the body text), and does this matter to search engines? Also, does this have usability implications?

Example 1, using a <br> to indicate a new paragraph:

<h2>subhead</h2>
<br>New paragrah 1 text

<p>New paragraph 2 text</p>

Example 2, using a <p> tag to indicate a new paragraph:

<h2>subhead</h2>
<p>New paragraph 1 text</p>

<p>New paragraph 2 text</p>

For subheads, we're actually only using <strong> instead of <H> tags, but we'll be making this change soon.

[Webmaster T]

Well if you expect a line of text directly under a heading because you used <BR> you'll be sadly disappointed. White space around a heading is done automatically by the browser. You can control whitespace using CSS however it seems like a lot of work and actually degrades the <H> tag as a valuable way to get people scanning pages to take notice. JMO I'm sure many disagree! As to research on <H> I looked at it a looooong time ago, probably one of the first to write about doc structure and SE rankings. It was written long before G was around.

[g1smd]

<h2>subhead</h2>

<p>New paragraph 1 text</p>

<p>New paragraph 2 text</p>


That is the "correct" way to do it.

[qwerty]

Yup. And if you don't like the way it looks, use your css to reformat your headings and paragraphs. There's no excuse for throwing in breaks and spaces when you can apply consistent formatting without breaking up the structure of the document.

[Sharon & Roy]

Originally posted by Dan0

H1 vs. H2 vs. H3: Tried all 3, no discernable difference between them in terms of their effect on rankings.

Headings vs. Bold Text: Headings good, bold text better than plain text but not as good as headings.


Our research bears witness to Dan's.

This has been the case for years and we foresee it to remain this way for years to come.

The thing is, that in the grand scheme of SEO, the weight given by these HTML Tags have a threshold and this threshold is soon OUT TRUMPED by "Off The Page" ranking criteria (which has no threshold) when your keyword phrase is or becomes competitive.

While we advise that every Web Page contain these specific HTML Tags, please don't end up what we refer to as "Majoring in the Minors."

These HTML Tags fall into the "Minor SEO Techniques" category, so don't be surprised if your Web Page doesn't jump from #29 to #2 for a competitive keyword phrase after you have added these HTML Tags to your keyword phrase(s).

Your Friends,

Sharon & Roy

[Webmaster T]

Originally posted by Sharon & Roy
These HTML Tags fall into the "Minor SEO Techniques" category, so don't be surprised if your Web Page doesn't jump from #29 to #2 for a competitive keyword phrase after you have added these HTML Tags to your keyword phrase(s).
"Minor SEO Techniques" that cumulatively (<H> is one of many small gains) are more powerful than off page criteria. As witnessed by the several PR7 sites I beat with a PR3 on a regular basis! Off page criteria are no more important than a fully optimized site ie: all the minor stuff is in place. If not you may as well subscribe to the "linking campaign is optimization" hypothesis!

[Sharon & Roy]

Originally posted by Webmaster T

"Minor SEO Techniques" that cumulatively (<H> is one of many small gains) are more powerful than off page criteria.


Hi Webmaster T,

We respectfully disagree with your comment.



As witnessed by the several PR7 sites I beat with a PR3 on a regular basis!


Beating (as you put it) a PR7 site (again, as you put it ... and there are no PR7 sites, only PR7 pages) with a PR3 on a regular basis WILL MORE TIMES THAN NOT have very little to do with "On The Page" ranking criteria. The majority of the time it will have EVERYTHING to do with "Off The Page" ranking criteria. That is if you are actually comparing apples with apples, meaning that BOTH pages have been optimized for the SAME Keyword Phrase.

BTW, Webmaster T, would you point us (and others) to these examples of yours, please, so that we can see what you are talking about, because we don't believe this to be true in the least, and we mean you absolutely no disrespect at all, as you are probably well aware of that, thanks!



Off page criteria are no more important than a fully optimized site ie: all the minor stuff is in place.


Once again, we disagree with your comment.

"Off The Page" ranking criteria is INFINITELY more important the "On The Page" ranking criteria.



If not you may as well subscribe to the "linking campaign is optimization" hypothesis!


While, we "believe" that you may be saying this in a sarcastic way, you are not far from the truth.

For your competitive keyword phrases, the LIMITED SCORE of your "On The Page" ranking criteria will easily be Out Trumped by the UNLIMITED SCORE of your "Off The Page" ranking criteria.

Will look forward to viewing your examples, Webmaster T.

Your Friends,

Sharon & Roy

[Drew-z]

Originally posted by Sharon & Roy
"Off The Page" ranking criteria

Can you give some examples of this beyond incoming links and link text.

Thanks

[Dan0]

I love the phrase "majoring in the minors."

You can optimize a page in very little time, in terms of what's on the page. A little more work goes into optimizing your internal links to make a site user friendly, crawlable, and to give search engines clues about the topic of the pages you link to.

Once that's done, "off the page" really means "off the site." Who is linking to you, in what context. Eventually, who is linking to them and in what context, will also matter a lot.

This is where the significant research is going on - you don't see new patents on analyzing the text of a page, you see new patents on analyzing the relationships between pages.

This is also where it gets increasingly hard to "fake it." Either your site/page is relevant and authoritative or it's not. If it's not, enjoy this time while you can, because it will never come again.

[Sharon & Roy]

Originally posted by Drew-z

Can you give some examples of this beyond incoming links and link text.

Thanks


Hi Drew-z,

There is nothing beyond incoming links (AKA PageRank/Link Popularity) and link text (AKA Link Reputation).

Your Friends,

Sharon & Roy

[Sharon & Roy]

Originally posted by Dan0

I love the phrase "majoring in the minors."


Hi Dan,

Would you agree that there are those people who just "don't get it" and spend hours and hours on end, "tweaking" their "On The Page" ranking criteria, like adding an HTML Tag here and adding an HTML Tag there, then removing these same HTML Tags next month and using a different HTML Tag, and then changing their copy to add a few more occurrences of their keywords to get the keyword density from 4.7345 to 6.8771, and on and on they go, month after month.



You can optimize a page in very little time, in terms of what's on the page.


Totally agreed.

Once that is done, it's done!

The ONLY way your Web Page is going to increase in the rankings from here on in is through "Off The Page" ranking criteria, because you have already optimized the "On The Page" ranking criteria and reached its threshold, so there is NOTHING left to optimize "On The Page."

Your Friends,

Sharon & Roy

[qwerty]

Originally posted by Sharon & Roy
There is nothing beyond incoming links (AKA PageRank/Link Popularity) and link text (AKA Link Reputation). I generally agree with what you're saying here, but I would add one other factor to "off-the-page" criteria: other pages. Your site can move up and down based on changes made to other people's pages, and while that's out of your control, it's still significant.

[Sharon & Roy]

Originally posted by qwerty

I generally agree with what you're saying here, but I would add one other factor to "off-the-page" criteria: other pages. Your site can move up and down based on changes made to other people's pages, and while that's out of your control, it's still significant.


Hi Bob,

We appreciate your comment about ... other pages ... being a factor in "Off The Page" ranking consideration (which they are) but we didn't include them because it is obvious and a given.

Would you not agree that ... other pages ... are a factor in "On The Page" ranking consideration as well?

Of course you would, and so would we, but here again, it is obvious and a given, so we would not include ... other pages ... in our list for all of the "On The Page" ranking criteria either, nor would the majority of SEOs (in our humble opinion, of course).

Your Friends,

Sharon & Roy

[qwerty]

I do agree. I only mentioned it because your statement There is nothing... was sufficiently all-encompassing that it could be misconstrued to mean that even the obvious didn't matter. Just a question of semantics, really ;)

[Dan0]

Originally posted by Sharon & Roy
Would you agree that there are those people who just "don't get it" and spend hours and hours on end, "tweaking" their "On The Page" ranking criteria, like adding an HTML Tag here and adding an HTML Tag there, then removing these same HTML Tags next month and using a different HTML Tag, and then changing their copy to add a few more occurrences of their keywords to get the keyword density from 4.7345 to 6.8771, and on and on they go, month after month.[/B]
Yeah, that's exactly the problem out there, and that's why I wrote my book. That's also why I've been giving it away for free, for almost two months. I couldn't tell you the keyword density of any page on any of my sites. You can only get so far with what's on the page. No dirty tricks are necessary.

[Webmaster T]

I stand corrected, I didn't mean to say "Minor SEO Techniques" are more powerful and I did mention they were as important later. I don't subscribe to the "linking is optimization" hypothesis. I am perhaps adamant when what I believe is important to a well rounded campaign is trivialized.

I may be an idiot but IMO what they were saying is SEO, isn't optimization it is site promotion. SEO falls into that larger category but I don't link the two. I have never solicited links enmasse because I believe they come as a result of having good content. I may encourage linking on the site but I definitely don't send UCE and link requests IMO, are often in this category. I seldom even contact those I link to.

Linking isn't within my sphere of influence and it shouldn't be! That is up to others to decide all I can really do is make the site as good as it can be. That is only the "Minor SEO Techniques" and optimizing link and information architecture.

So to that end I optimize fully and get some exposure as the site matures and the content does it's job. I don't obsess about keyword density(don't even check it) and I don't subscribe to the density must be X BS. The density must be what it needs to be to be effective. That may be 4% in one SERP and 6% in another. I do belive the content/copy and title are more important then the "Minor SEO Techniques" and linking. The others are co-dependents.