w3 Validation?

[codeman1234]

Hello,

I was just wondering if really matters at all on SEO that website validates on w3 validation for CSS and XHTML, can someone please let me know if I should spend my time fixing this errors at all? Just keep in mind I am in a very competitive market and for me any plus point from Google it is more than welcome.

I been reading about it and there is a video from Matt Cuts that he basically says not to care at all since google.com does not validate at all, there is no extra effort points for doing it >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPBACTS-tyg

Can someone let me know if this true or what they really think about it?


Thanks

 

[Wilson Grant Fisk]

If you can validate then great but these days even some of the top sites can't validate.
Some of the errors you see are just there because they are not part of the official spec yet.
I try to fix as much as I can then leave it otherwise you spend too much time trying to fix code and this can cost you money.
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/w3c-validation-for-seo-myth-and-reality/18566/

 

[Techxan]

I m big fan of validating code as much as possible. People will argue with me, and have, but if your page does not parse correctly, the content may be misunderstood. This is never good for SEO. In addition, validated code is easier for the bots to understand, everything is where it is supposed to be and in the right formatting.

I have read that the Google algorithm takes into account over 200 things in ranking. I personally believe that a site with very little coding errors contributes to the trust Google has in a website. More Google trust increases your domain authority.

How you interpret that as an assist to SEO depends on the person.

If you are looking at gaining all the SEO points you can, I would validate them as much as possible tha doesn't degrade the user experience. Some browsers will display things incorrectly even when the code is validated, and if cross browser compatibility is an issue, I would leave the errors.

I look for every advantage, so I validate as much as possible.

It also makes your work a look a lot more professional.

 

[codeman1234]

Hello W130SN and Techxan,

I agree with both of you I think it is important and what Techxan says about growing domain authority can be true, I think it is important for SEO but, it seems for Matt Cuts trying to let know people that is not as important, I don't get why, is he trying to miss guide ?

 

[steelballs]

it seems for Matt Cuts trying to let know people that is not as important, I don't get why, is he trying to miss guide ?

That is clear to understand his corporate directive is to mislead - confuse and if it costs his company money penalize others...

 

[codeman1234]

That is clear to understand his corporate directive is to mislead - confuse and if it costs his company money penalize others...

Agreed, so, conclusion that Validation it is a SEO factor to keep in mind. If anyone is against this conclusion? Please let me know, I would like to know why.

Thanks

 

[Techxan]

The real question is how important is it? Is it worth the time you put in to validate? There are other SEO tasks that have far higher priority than validating the code. Other things will also increase your site authority, such as registering your site for 5 years or more, and linking out to authority websites in your niche.

Things like this give only a few SEO points, so dont obsess over validating the code until all you other ducks are in a row, unless you are building the site and validating as you go.

IF you get a new customer with a site and many pages, validating should be pretty low on the onpage optimization checklist.

 

[Techxan]

That is clear to understand his corporate directive is to mislead - confuse and if it costs his company money penalize others...

I don't agree with this statement at all. Many times I hear on the forum "matt cutts says this", but when you read the actual statement, it says something else.

Recently he said in a Google support forum:

"Note: I wouldn't expect links from press release web sites to benefit your rankings, however."

Everyone on the web decided that this statement means that MC said that press releases are not good for SEO.

If you look at the statement, he does not even mention press releases, he specifically said "links from press release web sites". A Press release website is a glorified old style link farm. They have no standards and will post anything. Google has devalued these links like they did article directories.

A press release that goes out to news dispatches and results backlinks from sites that think your information is newsworthy is an entirely different matter. These links are not "press release web site links". They are links from assorted news aggregators all over the web, and are solid gold SEO wise.

Even if you take his statement to include all press releases, he still says "I wouldn't expect", not "these do not count". Taking the statement down to what he said, obviously in some cases these links are helpful, but he expects that most of them are useless. This is still not the same thing as saying press release links are useless, or even that all press release web site links are useless.

I always take what he says with a grain of salt, because he is a company spokesman and will always spout the party line. But he often says things that point us in the right direction if we take time to analyze what his intentions are and read between the lines.

For instance, he always harps on user experience, and quality. I think everyone can agree on these two things being a huge plus for ranking nowadays. Quality is really starting to matter and he has really been pushing it for three years now.

 

[aranrond]

I tried out of curiosity to validate Google in W3 validator - 23 Errors, 4 warning(s), Facebook - 34 Errors, 4 warning(s)

 

[codeman1234]

The real question is how important is it? Is it worth the time you put in to validate? There are other SEO tasks that have far higher priority than validating the code. Other things will also increase your site authority, such as registering your site for 5 years or more, and linking out to authority websites in your niche.

Things like this give only a few SEO points, so dont obsess over validating the code until all you other ducks are in a row, unless you are building the site and validating as you go.

IF you get a new customer with a site and many pages, validating should be pretty low on the onpage optimization checklist.

Well, personally I just finish validating code and I really want to try a test to see if really matters or not. I think you are completely spot on but, I am just really curious if I will see any ranking and PA/DA to, see if works.

I will leave this thread open and I will let you know how it goes.

I don't agree with this statement at all. Many times I hear on the forum "matt cutts says this", but when you read the actual statement, it says something else.

Recently he said in a Google support forum:

"Note: I wouldn't expect links from press release web sites to benefit your rankings, however."

Everyone on the web decided that this statement means that MC said that press releases are not good for SEO.

If you look at the statement, he does not even mention press releases, he specifically said "links from press release web sites". A Press release website is a glorified old style link farm. They have no standards and will post anything. Google has devalued these links like they did article directories.

A press release that goes out to news dispatches and results backlinks from sites that think your information is newsworthy is an entirely different matter. These links are not "press release web site links". They are links from assorted news aggregators all over the web, and are solid gold SEO wise.

Even if you take his statement to include all press releases, he still says "I wouldn't expect", not "these do not count". Taking the statement down to what he said, obviously in some cases these links are helpful, but he expects that most of them are useless. This is still not the same thing as saying press release links are useless, or even that all press release web site links are useless.

I always take what he says with a grain of salt, because he is a company spokesman and will always spout the party line. But he often says things that point us in the right direction if we take time to analyze what his intentions are and read between the lines.

For instance, he always harps on user experience, and quality. I think everyone can agree on these two things being a huge plus for ranking nowadays. Quality is really starting to matter and he has really been pushing it for three years now.

I agree with this statement too, people usually miss understand information, but, in this world you have to think that Matt Cuts is also protecting Google's secrets and he is obviously not going to say all the truth and he will mislead people if he has too.

I tried out of curiosity to validate Google in W3 validator - 23 Errors, 4 warning(s), Facebook - 34 Errors, 4 warning(s)

Well I have to see that I am not impress since Google has to adapt to many devices to run its search engine and might have validation issues for that and facebook too. Even twitter has 14 Errors, 3 warning(s) and must be for same issue and most big sites like newspapers or social networks but for them SEO is not a problem since so many people share their links daily that I really don't think it affects them. But, for us that we compete with others validation should be something important on my opinion. However as I said before I will leave this thread open and I will let you know how my test goes if validation gives me something beneficial in my website's SEO. But, thanks for the info!

 

[roaldd]

it could never harm

 

[Raffy]

The real question is how important is it? Is it worth the time you put in to validate? There are other SEO tasks that have far higher priority than validating the code. Other things will also increase your site authority, such as registering your site for 5 years or more, and linking out to authority websites in your niche. Things like this give only a few SEO points, so dont obsess over validating the code until all you other ducks are in a row, unless you are building the site and validating as you go. IF you get a new customer with a site and many pages, validating should be pretty low on the onpage optimization checklist.

I agree that there are many other tasks that have a greater impact but if you're building a money site you care about I don't think w3 validation is something you should skip. I see it as another piece of the puzzle in making a site with a good UX that google and users trust. And while it seems to have little or no direct SEO impact now, Google may start valuing it more highly in the future.