Question regarding header tags

[nrg_alpha]

I am implementing header tags into my pages for SEO improvements. <h1> will be solely spoken for as the graphic header at the top of every page.

 

The question I have is: Is there an adverse effect on a series of <h2> tags (with regards to spiders / site indexing) that have id's assigned to them?

 

Example: <h2 id="mostRecent">Text goes here</h2>. I am using multiple h2 tags with different id's as graphic image sub-headers (in conjunction with CSS obviously) so that spiders see and take into account the hugey text-indented off screen h2 text while we only see the css background in it's place.

[dropfaith]

to the best of my understanding on spiders and css headers they still rank the text of the header and pretty much ignore its id

 

i assume the css for h2 will be display none  so its not a visable thing and only an seo usage

 

which wont have any adverse effects

[nrg_alpha]

to the best of my understanding on spiders and css headers they still rank the text of the header and pretty much ignore its id

 

Yeah, I know spiders don't take CSS into account. Just that every example of header tags I see, there is no attributes within the opening header tag in question.

This is why I need to know if attributes including id's or classes for those tags will be a problem for spiders or not. I'm assuming that with say regex, it won't be an issue.. just tying to confirm.

 

i assume the css for h2 will be display none  so its not a visable thing and only an seo usage

 

which wont have any adverse effects

Actually, this SEO technique loads an image as a background within the header tag via CSS and indent the text offscreen via the text-indent rule. So the text is taken into account by spiders (as it is in the (x)html document), yet we see the remaining <h2> as a background (using display: none would take the <h2> tag out completely.. while this would leave the h2 tag within the document code, the background image would not be visible.)

[sKunKbad]

I don't think image replacement of headers will actually penalize your site by itself. I've done it for sites that ranked well, even #1, so you obviously aren't going to be penalized enough to make a difference (or at all). I think Google is smart enough to realize what you are trying to do isn't bad.

 

While the text-indent isn't my first choice for image replacement, I think all of the popular image replacement techniques are similar. I personally prefer to absolutely position the text and image in seperate divs, stacked one on top of the other, and use z-index for displaying the image. The benefit to this is that when images are turned off, your page will still make sense. And yes, people do use the web with images turned off.

[nrg_alpha]

I don't think image replacement of headers will actually penalize your site by itself. I've done it for sites that ranked well, even #1, so you obviously aren't going to be penalized enough to make a difference (or at all). I think Google is smart enough to realize what you are trying to do isn't bad.

 

Oh, I know it isn't a 'black hat' technique or anything like that.. It's a way of using text for the spider to see and recongize (as images have no effect). I have implemented my header tags (with attributes) and there is no detrimental effect (in fact, it seems to be helping.. well, ok.. that and the fact that I submitted a sitemap.xml file to Google). So far, so good it seems.

 

While the text-indent isn't my first choice for image replacement, I think all of the popular image replacement techniques are similar. I personally prefer to absolutely position the text and image in seperate divs, stacked one on top of the other, and use z-index for displaying the image. The benefit to this is that when images are turned off, your page will still make sense. And yes, people do use the web with images turned off.

 

I think it's far easier to simply embed an image as a background to a header tag and offset the text, as I don't need mutiple divs stacked, nor do I need to use z-indexing... The overall markup is also lighter (not that an extra div or two is huge or anything...). As for disabling images within the browser, my site is an art-based one (meaning, it is built to view images).. without them, the site is pretty much rendered useless (even with text replacements)... so the target audience is for people who view images. If they have images disabled, they are on the wrong site.

[sKunKbad]

As for disabling images within the browser, my site is an art-based one (meaning, it is built to view images).. without them, the site is pretty much rendered useless (even with text replacements)... so the target audience is for people who view images. If they have images disabled, they are on the wrong site.

 

Yes, you are obviously right. Your olsenportfolio.com site looks pretty nice.

[nrg_alpha]

Thanks for the compliment

Still tweaking it (i.e. SEO). Getting there..

[atticus]

I am implementing header tags into my pages for SEO improvements. <h1> will be solely spoken for as the graphic header at the top of every page.

 

This is the wrong way to use the h1 tag. The technical definition of the h1 tag is "the most important header on the page". Google abides by this definition. Your h1 tag should match your title tag and should be unique on every page.

 

http://www.mywebtronics.com/atlanta-seo/seo-header-tags/

 

[nrg_alpha]

I am implementing header tags into my pages for SEO improvements. <h1> will be solely spoken for as the graphic header at the top of every page.

 

This is the wrong way to use the h1 tag. The technical definition of the h1 tag is "the most important header on the page". Google abides by this definition. Your h1 tag should match your title tag and should be unique on every page.

 

Thanks for the heads up. This won't be a hard fix. Some PHP song & dance will fix this right up.