Has there ever been a diagram of the "perfect meta tag?" Something that includes each of the different tags one should have, as well as the rules and suggestions regarding each tag?
Subscribe to HRA Now!
Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
Share and download Custom Google Analytics Reports, dashboards and advanced segments--for FREE!
www.CustomReportSharing.com
From the folks who brought you High Rankings!
More SEO Content
International SEM | Social Media | Search Friendly Design | SEO | Paid Search / PPC | Seminars | Forum Threads | Q&A | Copywriting | Keyword Research | Web Analytics / Conversions | Blogging | Dynamic Sites | Linking | SEO Services | Site Architecture | Search Engine Spam | Wrap-ups | Business Issues | HRA Questions | Online Courses
Sponsored Content
The Perfect Meta Tag?
Started by
aquatix
, Jan 03 2004 02:31 AM
15 replies to this topic
#2
awall19
-
- Active Members
-
- 502 posts
Peanut Butter Lover
Posted 03 January 2004 - 02:45 AM
Generally search engines ignore most meta tags.
though its not a meta tag page title is highly important.
the only meta tags that are used by any search engines to improve rankings are the keywords and description tags.
<head>
<title>Perfect Title</title>
<META name="description" content="A sentence to paragraph of readable text
<META name="keywords" content="keyword, blue keyword, green keywords">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
</head>
Inktomi is the only major crawler which officially supports the keywords tag. also think Teoma was supporting it unofficially if memory serves. meta tags are not very important though since they are so easy to spam. many top SEOs do not even use the keywords tag
Google for example completely ignores the keywords tag...
though its not a meta tag page title is highly important.
the only meta tags that are used by any search engines to improve rankings are the keywords and description tags.
<head>
<title>Perfect Title</title>
<META name="description" content="A sentence to paragraph of readable text
<META name="keywords" content="keyword, blue keyword, green keywords">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
</head>
Inktomi is the only major crawler which officially supports the keywords tag. also think Teoma was supporting it unofficially if memory serves. meta tags are not very important though since they are so easy to spam. many top SEOs do not even use the keywords tag
Google for example completely ignores the keywords tag...
#3
awall19
-
- Active Members
-
- 502 posts
Peanut Butter Lover
Posted 03 January 2004 - 02:48 AM
also its important to note that there is no such thing as the "perfect" anything with search engines. search engines keep their algorithms a secret. anyone who tells you they know the secrets or have the perfect solution is blatently lying or works for the search engine and is trying to destroy that which feeds him...
#4
Grumpus
-
- Active Members
-
- 786 posts
HR 6
Posted 03 January 2004 - 09:54 AM
The truth of the matter is - Meta Tags aren't designed for search engines. (Except for the Robots tag - and even then, not exclusively for search engines). They are designed for user agents in general. The keywords/content/and description tags evolved over the years to be geared toward search engines, but they weren't designed for search engines.
Your meta tags are there to send all kinds of information to the user agent. There are parental control functions (though I don't know any browsers that are designed to take advantage of them), functions to tell your browser what language its in (and even possibly give you the location of the same file written in your language), and all sorts of spiffy cool things - all designed long before the day of the search engine.
Awall's right though - the three he gave you are the most useful ones when it comes to SEO - and even then, the SEO value is questionable. Even INK which uses Meta Tags for the description will go into the page and pull out a snippet if you've chosen not to provide it with a tag. For me, I prefer this as the snippet it picks is like Google's where the keyword is visible and is from a relevant portion of the page tailored to that specific search. (I should say, that that is how INK DID do it - I haven't checked in some months, so that may no longer be the case, but I think it is...)
As far as I'm concerned, if you're going to use meta tags - use 'em - and use 'em all (well, the appropriate ones, anyway). Use the language tag. Use the content rating tag (as required - it's not only "sex" stuff that gets rated for content, same as with movies and TV). Certain markets and industries have other meta tags that are used for specific purposes.
I know. I know. This is nitpicky. I guess I'm just in one of those moods today. (My New England Patriots aren't on TV this week because they're too good at the game - I hate it when that happens.)
G.
Your meta tags are there to send all kinds of information to the user agent. There are parental control functions (though I don't know any browsers that are designed to take advantage of them), functions to tell your browser what language its in (and even possibly give you the location of the same file written in your language), and all sorts of spiffy cool things - all designed long before the day of the search engine.
Awall's right though - the three he gave you are the most useful ones when it comes to SEO - and even then, the SEO value is questionable. Even INK which uses Meta Tags for the description will go into the page and pull out a snippet if you've chosen not to provide it with a tag. For me, I prefer this as the snippet it picks is like Google's where the keyword is visible and is from a relevant portion of the page tailored to that specific search. (I should say, that that is how INK DID do it - I haven't checked in some months, so that may no longer be the case, but I think it is...)
As far as I'm concerned, if you're going to use meta tags - use 'em - and use 'em all (well, the appropriate ones, anyway). Use the language tag. Use the content rating tag (as required - it's not only "sex" stuff that gets rated for content, same as with movies and TV). Certain markets and industries have other meta tags that are used for specific purposes.
I know. I know. This is nitpicky. I guess I'm just in one of those moods today. (My New England Patriots aren't on TV this week because they're too good at the game - I hate it when that happens.)
G.
#5
Jill
-
- Admin
-
- 32,325 posts
High Rankings Advisor
Posted 03 January 2004 - 11:24 AM
Welcome, Aquatix! 
Don't even worry about Meta tags. If you're just getting into SEO, that's the least important part of it. (You may have read old info that made you think it was important.)
Worry about which keyword phrases are actually the best ones to target, your visible page copy and your Title tag.
My husband is going through the same withdrawal!
Jill
Don't even worry about Meta tags. If you're just getting into SEO, that's the least important part of it. (You may have read old info that made you think it was important.)
Worry about which keyword phrases are actually the best ones to target, your visible page copy and your Title tag.
(My New England Patriots aren't on TV this week because they're too good at the game - I hate it when that happens.)
My husband is going through the same withdrawal!
Jill
#6
Paul J
-
- Active Members
-
- 141 posts
HR 4
- Location:Minneapolis, MN
Posted 03 January 2004 - 01:38 PM
Jill and G, be thankful you're not a Vikings fan right now. 
Aquatix, I'm actually somewhat of a meta "description" tag fan. I don't really worry about the SEO value, but it can be present nice to the user.
Example, since Inktomi feeds MSN, you can go to MSN, type "proper meta description tag" in their search. Inc.com comes up at #1 (currently). Their meta description tag is what's read under the title. It reads "Use killer meta description tags for high search engine rankings."
Presumably, inc.com felt that is what they wanted their user to read under their title when someone searches for "proper meta description tag". If the user likes the tag enough to click to their site, it's a good meta tag.
Paul
Aquatix, I'm actually somewhat of a meta "description" tag fan. I don't really worry about the SEO value, but it can be present nice to the user.
Example, since Inktomi feeds MSN, you can go to MSN, type "proper meta description tag" in their search. Inc.com comes up at #1 (currently). Their meta description tag is what's read under the title. It reads "Use killer meta description tags for high search engine rankings."
Presumably, inc.com felt that is what they wanted their user to read under their title when someone searches for "proper meta description tag". If the user likes the tag enough to click to their site, it's a good meta tag.
Paul
#7
Grumpus
-
- Active Members
-
- 786 posts
HR 6
Posted 03 January 2004 - 01:49 PM
Yup. It's a tradeoff, there, though. If that page ranks well for some other term, that desciption may not fit as well. A blurb from the page near those terms may work better.
The meta tag (in the case of INK/MSN, right now) is great for controlling exactly what the user sees on MSN - and if your page is very focused and targeted, this can be considered nothing but a good thing.
If the page is more broadly focused, it could might be detrimental because the description you put there may not match up very well and convert to a click.
This is something where there is no right answer. It's where style can still play a part in SEO - and the decision you make on how to do it can be made on a page-by-page basis.
I love exploring the areas of SEO where style and creativity are still strong.
G.
The meta tag (in the case of INK/MSN, right now) is great for controlling exactly what the user sees on MSN - and if your page is very focused and targeted, this can be considered nothing but a good thing.
If the page is more broadly focused, it could might be detrimental because the description you put there may not match up very well and convert to a click.
This is something where there is no right answer. It's where style can still play a part in SEO - and the decision you make on how to do it can be made on a page-by-page basis.
I love exploring the areas of SEO where style and creativity are still strong.
G.
#8
SearchRank
-
- Active Members
-
- 2,333 posts
HR 7
- Location:Phoenix, AZ
Posted 03 January 2004 - 02:58 PM
The only meta tag that one needs to worry about is the meta description tag and this is because Inktomi and Alta Vista still use it. Inktomi powers MSN and HotBot and everyone believe Yahoo will start using Inktomi instead of Google.
However, when optimizing the meta description tag, do not neglect the actual html text of each page which is where Google and others gather their info about the page.
However, when optimizing the meta description tag, do not neglect the actual html text of each page which is where Google and others gather their info about the page.
#9
Grumpus
-
- Active Members
-
- 786 posts
HR 6
Posted 03 January 2004 - 03:12 PM
everyone believe Yahoo will start using Inktomi instead of Google
Not everyone.
G.
#10
Ron Carnell
-
- Moderator
-
- 959 posts
HR 6
- Location:Michigan USA
Posted 04 January 2004 - 12:43 AM
And that's a good thing, too, Grumpus.If the page is more broadly focused, it could might be detrimental because the description you put there may not match up very well and convert to a click.
#11
rustybrick
-
- Active Members
-
- 151 posts
Seeking A+ Posts
- Location:New York
Posted 04 January 2004 - 01:51 AM
I am pretty sure Inktomi uses the meta keyword tag as well. It has in the past ranked sites based only on that tag but it does look at the content on the page.
I have begun working on the meta tags for my sites by making sure they are clean and page specific. I also am trying to make my meta description tag more appealing to the user, by trying to encourage the user to click on my link versus the one above mine.
This is mostly in anticipation for the new Yahoo!.
I have begun working on the meta tags for my sites by making sure they are clean and page specific. I also am trying to make my meta description tag more appealing to the user, by trying to encourage the user to click on my link versus the one above mine.
This is mostly in anticipation for the new Yahoo!.
#12
Grumpus
-
- Active Members
-
- 786 posts
HR 6
Posted 04 January 2004 - 11:15 AM
This is mostly in anticipation for the new Yahoo!
Be forewarned - absolutely nothing of consequence has been improved upon or changed in INK in well over a year. Conversely, AllTheWeb and AV have gone though many improvements and changes and have had gobs of new features added to them. It'd be rather silly if not completely absurd to assume that Yahoo would go with stale and outdated INK when the fresh and streamlined AllTheWeb and/or AltaVista are sitting there waiting.
G.
#13
qwerty
-
- Moderator
-
- 8,295 posts
HR 10
- Location:Somerville, MA
Posted 04 January 2004 - 11:52 AM
FWIW, INK has done a lot more crawling in the past year than it had in the past. But I agree with Grumpus. Yahoo owns too much technology and too big an index of documents (ATW) to just sit on it.
I believe they bought Overture more for PPC than to get ahold of AV and ATW (which Overture owned), but they've got them, and it makes sense for them to use them. Maybe not right away, but I think eventually we'll see ATW's index ranked by INK's algo (so hopefully a lot of the trash in there will go away), and maybe AV's image search, which I find much better than Google's.
I believe they bought Overture more for PPC than to get ahold of AV and ATW (which Overture owned), but they've got them, and it makes sense for them to use them. Maybe not right away, but I think eventually we'll see ATW's index ranked by INK's algo (so hopefully a lot of the trash in there will go away), and maybe AV's image search, which I find much better than Google's.
#14
Jill
-
- Admin
-
- 32,325 posts
High Rankings Advisor
Posted 04 January 2004 - 11:55 AM
So I think it's safe to say that Grumpus's 2004 prediction is that Yahoo will eventually begin to use ATW and/or AV technology in their search results.
Damn...wish I had thought of that when I was trying to come up with predictions. It's a good one!
Damn...wish I had thought of that when I was trying to come up with predictions. It's a good one!
#15
Grumpus
-
- Active Members
-
- 786 posts
HR 6
Posted 04 January 2004 - 12:34 PM
This is going to be a fun discussion of speculation. So rather than hijacking this thread and taking it off base, I've continued the speculation over here:
http://www.highranki...?showtopic=2826
And now back to your regularly schedule Meta Tag Discussion.
G.
http://www.highranki...?showtopic=2826
And now back to your regularly schedule Meta Tag Discussion.
G.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
