Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

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!



Photo
- - - - -

What Is Proper Way To End Meta Tags?


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Webseeker

Webseeker

    HR 3

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 89 posts
  • Location:Minnesota

Posted 16 April 2012 - 12:48 AM

While still trying to find a fix for my website or it's pages not coming up on G, I was looking through my meta tag info. I also looked at other meta tag info from various sites.

The below is what it's like on the page I'm trying to get ranked:

<meta name="description" content="My description information goes here in this spot... hopefully to do some good" />

And I have seen it like the below on other sites:

<meta name="description" content="My description information goes here in this spot... hopefully to do some good" >

The difference is the very end. I use /> and sometimes see elsewhere it's just >.

And what gets me is that on one page at a supposed credible site on the topic of meta tags, they were showing examples and they used just the > with no close like that --> />.

Is there a proper way? It "appears" to be a non-issue since I've seen both on several sites. I'm also amazed that one of them, the one I'm not using is wrong. LOL!

What's your opinion?

Thanks,

Webseeker

Edited by Webseeker, 16 April 2012 - 10:55 AM.


#2 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 32,983 posts

Posted 16 April 2012 - 08:49 AM

/> is the proper format, but either way will work fine with the search engines. (As you've seen.)

#3 Webseeker

Webseeker

    HR 3

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 89 posts
  • Location:Minnesota

Posted 16 April 2012 - 10:53 AM

Muchas gracias! Merci! Vielen Dank!

Webseeker

#4 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,145 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 16 April 2012 - 01:49 PM

Actually, I believe it depends on the doctype declaration. Older document styles don't use the slash before the closing ">".

#5 cfreek

cfreek

    AAAHHHH!!1one1!

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 166 posts
  • Location:Richmond, Virginia, Earth

Posted 16 April 2012 - 01:56 PM

As I recall, Michael is correct; it was XHTML that stated all tags must have a closing tag.
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/
Section 4.1 covers it.

Edited by cfreek, 16 April 2012 - 01:56 PM.


#6 chrishirst

chrishirst

    A not so moderate moderator.

  • Moderator
  • 7,028 posts
  • Location:Blackpool UK

Posted 16 April 2012 - 06:19 PM

The difference is the very end. I use /> and sometimes see elsewhere it's just >.

actually BOTH are correct.

'>' is for HTML including HTML5 and '/>' is for XHTML but is also valid in HTML5 (sometimes)

Edited by chrishirst, 16 April 2012 - 06:19 PM.


#7 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,145 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 16 April 2012 - 07:24 PM

I think I'm just going to use '/>' and be done with it. :)

All these doctype rules annoy me.

#8 Webseeker

Webseeker

    HR 3

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 89 posts
  • Location:Minnesota

Posted 16 April 2012 - 11:52 PM

actually BOTH are correct.

'>' is for HTML including HTML5 and '/>' is for XHTML but is also valid in HTML5 (sometimes)


Hello chrishirst! Long time no talk to back to the time where you quit replying to my pm's! (knew you were busy) Anyway, the site is XHTML, so it looks like my site with the '/>' is correct!

Thank you for your reply ol' buddy.

----------------------------------
----------------------------------

Thank you very much for the additional replies. Learning is a fun thing for me so I really appreciate the replies I've received thus far.

Webseeker

Edited by Webseeker, 16 April 2012 - 11:52 PM.


#9 chrishirst

chrishirst

    A not so moderate moderator.

  • Moderator
  • 7,028 posts
  • Location:Blackpool UK

Posted 17 April 2012 - 09:16 AM

Hello chrishirst! Long time no talk to back to the time where you quit replying to my pm's! (knew you were busy)


Hiya, probably not busy, but it will be about the time that various health problems took me off the "front line", so to speak.

#10 Webseeker

Webseeker

    HR 3

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 89 posts
  • Location:Minnesota

Posted 19 April 2012 - 11:31 PM

Hiya, probably not busy, but it will be about the time that various health problems took me off the "front line", so to speak.


Been there, done that. Glad times are different now!

Webseeker




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

SPAM FREE FORUM!
 
If you are just registering to spam,
don't bother. You will be wasting your
time as your spam will never see the
light of day!