Javascript Navigation Buttons.

[adbart]

Hello all.

The use of javascript frequently comes up in conversation. Everyone says "no, don't touch it" when it comes to SEO. Just wondered if anyone has a technical opinion on the following code and whether or not Googlebot + others can follow these links:

In the header tag:

<script language="javascript">

//detect browser:
browserName = navigator.appName;
browserVer = parseInt(navigator.appVersion);
if (browserName == "Netscape" && browserVer >= 3) browserVer = "1";
else if (browserName == "Microsoft Internet Explorer" && browserVer == 4) browserVer = "1";
else browserVer = "2";

//preload images:
if (browserVer == 1) {

home0 = new Image;
home0.src = "http://www.example.com/image0.PNG";
home1 = new Image;
home1.src = "http://www.example.com/image1.PNG";

}

//image swapping function:
function hiLite(imgDocID, imgObjName, comment) {
if (browserVer == 1) {
document.images[imgDocID].src = eval(imgObjName + ".src");
window.status = comment; return true;
}}


</script>

And then where the image is in the body:

[stymiee]

That's fine because you are only using javascript for the rollovers. You have a regular hyperlink otherwise which is what is required for search engines to follow the links.

[adbart]

Yes, that was my thinking too.

Anyone else got an opinion on this?

[adbart]

Actually, to add to this topic:

Are there any drawbacks to using image-based links like these:

(1) Will Google/others give preference to crawling text-based links to images?

(2) ... even when 'img alt=' tags are used?

(3) Should you provide text-only links in addition on any page where image links are used (perhaps in the footer)?

[incrediblehelp]

Their has been much arguments when proposing text based links versus image/alt based links. Both seem to work well, but my experience shows that text links seem to do work the best. No evidence why.

In the end I say why not use both?

[adbart]

Do you not think that duplicating your navigation bar (e.g. showing it once at the top of the page as images, and showing it again at the bottom of the page as text links) might have some knock-on negative value?

[incrediblehelp]

I guess I would have to see it in person to know for sure, but on the surface I don't see much of an issue. It is just like thumbnails that link to a page and those same thumbnails have text links linking to the same page underneath them. I don't see that as a negative.

[adverlicious]

Originally Posted by adbart

Do you not think that duplicating your navigation bar (e.g. showing it once at the top of the page as images, and showing it again at the bottom of the page as text links) might have some knock-on negative value?

I think you can actually make the case that supplementary navigation links at the bottom of a page *improve* usability.

Consider the case of a long page: a user may be 2-4 "scrolls" from the top navigation ... a great opportunity to offer them high-value navigational links in the footer of the page.

My net on this topic: there's no identified downside to supplementary links and there's a likely SEO *and* usability upside.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by adverlicious

My net on this topic: there's no identified downside to supplementary links and there's a likely SEO *and* usability upside.

That is right!

[Webnauts]

Have anyone mentioned here the <noscript> tag?