Alt Vs. Title - Battle of the Attributes

[mjtaylor]

On another thread I asked whether title attributes on hyperlinks have value SEO wise ... probably should have started a new thread then ... but in any case:

Originally Posted by Orion

Hey MJ,

alt and title attributes are definitely read by the search engines. I'm not sure what weight they give them in their various algorithms but I'm sure it's something.

the big thing is that they are accessibility traits (which SE's also are starting to weigh in their rankings), and it's important NOT to use them to spam keywords into your site.

also not using alt will result in poor conversions on the % of the population that uses speech or text only browsers.

using title gives you another voice to the site visitor (alt only gives you the tool tips in IE, and title will override alt in IE) to provide direction or additional information about an item or image. title can also be used informs in the <input> tag to give direction to the site visitor.

hope that helps...

Yes, thanks ... I am not into keyword *stuffing* of alt (or title tags), but I know alt tags are SEO-effective and I have even seen alt text used as the description in Google, so I tend to write them with care.

It's the title attribute that interests me.


Could you tell me what you mean when you write:

title can also be used informs in the <input> tag to give direction to the site visitor.

I am still unclear on what the purported use of the title attribute is. Alt tags were around a long time ago, put in place to describe images for those who had images turned off in their browsers ... and I know they can be heard for sight impaired people ... but I am not sure why we need a title attribute for the same 'accessibility' though I think you are close to making it clear to me ...

I appreciate the clarification - and would also appreciate hearing from others on whether or not they think title attributes have SEO impact.

Thanks!!

Cheers, MJ

[kgun]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

I appreciate the clarification - and would also appreciate hearing from others on whether or not they think title attributes have SEO impact.

Yes, but a minor one. The alt attribute and attributes generally may be more important in the Web 2.0 linking model or call it whatever you will.

Note they have written a book with nearly the same title.

XPath, XLink, XPointer, and XML: A Practical Guide to Web Hyperlinking and Transclusion

"The combination of Extensible Markup Language (XML) and its related interlinking standards bring a range of exciting possibilities to the realm of Internet content management. This practical reference book documents these critical standards, shifting theory into practice for today's developers who are creating tomorrow's useful, efficient, and information-rich applications and Web sites.
Blending advanced reference material with practical guidelines, this authoritative guide presents a historical overview, current developments, and future perspectives in three detailed sections. Part I provides a conceptual framework highlighting current and emerging linking technologies, hypermedia concepts, and the rationale behind the "open" Web of tomorrow. Part II covers the specifics behind the emerging core standards, and then Part III examines how these technologies can be applied and how the concepts can be put to efficient use within the world of Web site management and Web publishing".

May be better to use time on that emerging trend where attributes have a very central role.

Example chapter: XML Pointer language.

[Webnauts]

Using "title" attributes for images is an usability issue. For example, it solves the problem that Firefox does not display "alt" attributes. Also the "title" attribute can be used also in hyperlinks for providing the user a short description about the linked page.

"Title" attributes are read by search enginens. but have no ranking weight so far, but they sure make sense for search engines in semantical terms. In other words, improves pages search engine friendliness.

The "title" attributes are useless for blind people, because screenreaders do not support them, if I am still up-to-date.

Proper length of the "title" attribute is between 60-70 characters including spaces.

[Webnauts]

In addition I would suggest you to read my stticky post about the use of "Alt" attributes:
Use Alt Attributes with Care

And "Alt" tags do not exist. They are attributes.

[mjtaylor]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Using "title" attributes for images is an usability issue. For example, it solves the problem that Firefox does not display "alt" attributes. Also the "title" attribute can be used also in hyperlinks for providing the user a short description about the linked page.

"Title" attributes are read by search enginens. but have no ranking weight so far, but they sure make sense for search engines in semantical terms. In other words, improves pages search engine friendliness.

The "title" attributes are useless for blind people, because screenreaders do not support them, if I am still up-to-date.

Proper length of the "title" attribute is between 60-70 characters including spaces.

Very helpful, thanks, John. I want to know more about what you meant by:

"Title" attributes are read by search enginens. but have no ranking weight so far, but they sure make sense for search engines in semantical terms. In other words, improves pages search engine friendliness.

First of all, I presume you mean that one can use semantic variations of keywords - perhaps even stems?

And secondly, what's the difference between "ranking weight" and "search engine friendliness"?

I am presuming (not much different than assuming, is it?) that semantic relevance is weighted ... if ever so lightly ...

Originally Posted by Webnauts

In addition I would suggest you to read my stticky post about the use of "Alt" attributes:
Use Alt Attributes with Care

And "Alt" tags do not exist. They are attributes.

Awesome post on alts... (I do know that they are attributes of image tags, but typing or even saying attribute is tiresome, so for now, I will type alts.)

I read the post once before while wandering around the forum and it is something I will read again. I can't absorb and retain it in one pass ... it is well deserving of the sticky ...

I agree with the woman who replied that your post changed her vision of alts. Me, too. I was particularly impressed with the suggestion that one consider the flow of language with the surrounding text. I would never have thought about that. Your attention to accessability is admirable, John. It is not something I have the patience for.

You provide a very clear, intelligent voice for some important technical aspects of design and SEO and I thank you for it. You references are almost always illuminating. Thanks for being there.

MJ

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

Very helpful, thanks, John. I want to know more about what you meant by:

"Title" attributes are read by search enginens. but have no ranking weight so far, but they sure make sense for search engines in semantical terms. In other words, improves pages search engine friendliness.

First of all, I presume you mean that one can use semantic variations of keywords - perhaps even stems?

Exactly. More detailed keyword rich description that of the text link itself.

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

And secondly, what's the difference between "ranking weight" and "search engine friendliness"?

For example if you implement on your site pages an If-Modified header, all search engines will consider your site friendly, because the will save bandwidth when they visit you site and therefore money. And the same time your reward is that you also save bandwidth, and you are considered by the search engine more friendly.

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

I am presuming (not much different than assuming, is it?) that semantic relevance is weighted ... if ever so lightly ...

Exactly. Contextual meaning of the link. Therefore, because google is nothing else than a software, it is obvious that semantics is the language google can understand, write, speak and/or execute.

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

Awesome post on alts... (I do know that they are attributes of image tags, but typing or even saying attribute is tiresome, so for now, I will type alts.)

This is an improvement. Cool.

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

I read the post once before while wandering around the forum and it is something I will read again. I can't absorb and retain it in one pass ... it is well deserving of the sticky ...

I am glad that you also found my post useful.

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

I agree with the woman who replied that your post changed her vision of alts. Me, too. I was particularly impressed with the suggestion that one consider the flow of language with the surrounding text. I would never have thought about that. Your attention to accessability is admirable, John. It is not something I have the patience for.

If you do not have the patience for accessibility, you do not have patience for semantics. Well if you want to be in SEO business in long-term, I would suggest you to try to get over this barrier.

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

You provide a very clear, intelligent voice for some important technical aspects of design and SEO and I thank you for it. You references are almost always illuminating. Thanks for being there.

Thank you for the kind words MJ. It is true that I am very seriously into accessibility and accessible design, in usability and usable design and upon those both in organic SEO.
I am a Web Architect and that is nothing else than a professional who meets a principal level in accessibility, usability and SEO. In other words I would define my profession as an expert on on-site/on-page optimization. From prototyping of a redesign or new design with 100% valid code, excellent semantical structure and site navigation, editing server configuration rules, script development for certain needs, up to search engine indexing and achieving maximum rank possible and then pass it over to a SEM company to do the rest like Content, PPC, IBLs building.

I prefer being the best, that is why I do not ant to be the best for everything. I am front of my PC in average 16-17 hours a day, and some time I reached up to 44 hours without sleep.

But I am not working so much for money, because if that would be the case, as I charge $ 1,500.00 for two hours consultation, I would have been very rich since a while now. I have setup a test platform where I do research with the support of my excellent team!

For example, if you are included in the ODP directory and Google is using as a snippet the description of you site given to ODP, what do you do if want to disallow google?
I am sure you will say: the meta tag NOODP. We do not do that any more. We add that rule in our .htaccess file. Check our site's Search Engine Optimization Company - SEO Workers HTTP header with this tool and look at the results carefully HTTP / HTTPS Header Check

Or we do not want that search engines crawl and index our site's PDFs files. How would you do that? I am sure with the robots.txt. We do that in our .htaccess file.

We also add our ICRA label in our .htaccess file and we do not use the Lable meta tag. Or we add a P3P policy in our rules in our .htaccess file and not using meta tags.

Why do I do all that? Well look how big site my documents <head> areas are.....

We also use the If-Modified header, and much more.

We recently have setup pages for testing to see if Google is already so far developed that they understand XML SCHEMA rules, like Robots.Exclusion, XMDP, and some other stuff.

We are planning to leave the SE sitemaps, hopefully beginning of next year, and we want to do that with OAI.

To resume: I am striving to reach highest possible competency for the future, before the future becomes more competitive than myself. Why not for the present?

THE PRESENT IS ALREADY PAST FOR ME!

After all, thank you once again for the so kind and warm words.

I honestly feel very honored.

[mjtaylor]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

If you do not have the patience for accessibility, you do not have patience for semantics. Well if you want to be in SEO business in long-term, I would suggest you to try to get over this barrier.

I appreciate the advice, however, I am closing on 10 years in this business without the patience for accessibility. On the other hand, semantics come naturally to me - and I think that's why my SEO style is successful ... sure, I know the weighted factors, but I seem to able to write keyword rich copy that both people and search engines find natural.

For other SEOs, their strength may lie elsewhere ...

Originally Posted by Webnauts

For example, if you are included in the ODP directory and Google is using as a snippet the description of you site given to ODP, what do you do if want to disallow google?
I am sure you will say: the meta tag NOODP.

Naw, I would have waited for your answer ...

I am really not a designer; I oversee design for my clients; I consult with other designers and tell them how to optimize for SEs; I write and edit copy; and I build links.

You, on the other hand, know far more than I ever will about technical issues and how they relate to SEO. And I can count on you - as well as other knowlegeable members here - to keep me up to date and fill me in when I don't know something. I am so grateful to be part of this community.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

<snip> (And the rest of the snipped quote was very informative, thanks.)

To resume: I am striving to reach highest possible competency for the future, before the future becomes more competitive than myself.

Very funny and very cool.

MJ

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

I appreciate the advice, however, I am closing on 10 years in this business without the patience for accessibility. On the other hand, semantics come naturally to me - and I think that's why my SEO style is successful ... sure, I know the weighted factors, but I seem to able to write keyword rich copy that both people and search engines find natural.

For other SEOs, their strength may lie elsewhere ...

So you are an Expert Copywriter?

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

Naw, I would have waited for your answer ...

I am really not a designer; I oversee design for my clients; I consult with other designers and tell them how to optimize for SEs; I write and edit copy; and I build links.

Just curiosity: How can you advice designers if you cannot design yourself? Or do you sell theoretical knowledge there?

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

You, on the other hand, know far more than I ever will about technical issues and how they relate to SEO.

But all that technical stuff is on-site or on-page optimization.

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

And I can count on you - as well as other knowlegeable members here - to keep me up to date and fill me in when I don't know something. I am so grateful to be part of this community.

Thanks for the kind words again.

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

Very funny and very cool.

Not funny but sure very cool.

[Orion]

the purpose of the alt="" attribute is to describe an image to someone who can't see it.. Internet Explorer adds the feature of putting this info into tool tip it's not supposed to do that and the title attribute will ALWAYS override alt. ALT is for speech browsers and when you turn off images in your browser (or text only browsers).

the purpose of the title="" attribute is to provide a tool tip and additional information it is mostly used in links <a href="" title="">link text</a> but can also be used in the image tag (ONLY where it makes sense)

eg. <img scr="company_logo.png" alt="company logo" title="name of company" />)

you can also use the title in form
eg. <label for="dob>Date of Birth</label><input type="text" id="dob" tabindex="1" size="30" title="Please enter your date of birth in the format: mm/dd/yyyy" />
when someone mouses over the field it will show a tool tip with the title info in it providing additional instructions (usability and accessibility) to the site user.

hope that helps! I was out all day sorry it took me a while to reply =o)

[brandrocker]

Thanks for this very resourceful discussion. Bookmarked it. Usability and accessibility is of great concern in modern websites. Hope this discussion will help many others like me who are eager to improve in this regard and appreciate that lot more to learn actually.

[kgun]

Read about

1. Multiended-links.
2. Link base.
3. Generic links.
4. Location sets

in my post above and you should have an idea of what is coming if / when the SE's are picking up. It is not difficult for the SE's to do that since it is mostly XML tagging and as such easy code to parse. Think sets, mapping of lesser sets (of KW's onto larger).

If you understand LSI, that may also help you.

If you know OOP, "in a sense", you can think of attributes as methods of objects.

[mjtaylor]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

So you are an Expert Copywriter?

Well, I would love to think I am an expert. I am a successful SEO copywriter/editor. I do know a lot about SEO and I am a good writer, and I seem to be able to combine writing and SEO in a way that helps the sites I work on rank highly.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Just curiosity: How can you advice designers if you cannot design yourself? Or do you sell theoretical knowledge there?

I can design, I have designed, but I stopped doing that a few years ago, and started to outsource most of my design work. I didn't love design and I do love SEO. I also do a lot of consulting, where I simply tell a webmaster how to optimize a site but never touch it. I have also been hired by site owners to tell them which SEO to hire. I do still maintain a lot of sites, but it's very rare that I sit down and design the basic graphics and layout for a new site.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Not funny but sure very cool.

No, really, I thought this was witty and it made me laugh but maybe you didn't mean it as I took it :

Originally Posted by Webnauts

I am striving to reach highest possible competency for the future, before the future becomes more competitive than myself.

It's all fun, MJ

[kgun]

Great discussion with you and clever John.

I had to search long before I found this thread about LSI

that I think is important. There I try to explain the matematical concept visually with words.

Heading: Is it possible to explain the mathematics?

Continued three posts below.

[mjtaylor]

I had a look at that thread ... it is hard for a someone who doesn't like math to absorb ... but it was worth a read through, thanks ...

[crankydave]

I've not seen or heard of anything definitive that indicates that the title and alt attributes "help" you from a SE's perspective.

Like so many other things, they're easily misused and abused. SE's don't neccessarily "weight" what they "see". I suppose it is possible for their misuse to "harm" you but not help you when it comes to a SE's perspective.

Dave

[mjtaylor]

Originally Posted by crankydave

I've not seen or heard of anything definitive that indicates that the title and alt attributes "help" you from a SE's perspective.

Like so many other things, they're easily misused and abused. SE's don't neccessarily "weight" what they "see". I suppose it is possible for their misuse to "harm" you but not help you when it comes to a SE's perspective.

Dave

Thanks for chiming in. I am confident that alts *are* weighted at least moderately, but there is not consensus among SEOs for that supposition ... (I am not so sure about title attributes.)

This is what some others had to say about alt tags*, which were considered moderately important in this poll of SEOS on Google Search Engine Ranking Factors:

Andy Hagans - This is very important for Image search, but not as important for Web search.

Scottie Claiborne - When an image is used in place of anchor text, the alt acts as anchor text. Alt attributes for linked images do have some importance when it comes to SEO. Alt attributes on regular images are important for usability (think mobile devices and screen readers) but not for SEO.

Natasha Robinson - In Google Local listings, I've actually found some sites ranking for words that only appear in ALT tags and Image titles of that site.

So, there is not consensus. However, in my own experience, I have seen an alt tag on a logo used as the description in Google, and that led me to believe it's fairly important if not a heavily weighted factor.

* Matt Cutts calls them alt tags, so forgive me, John; I do know they are technically attributes not tags.

FWIW, MJ

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

So, there is not consensus. However, in my own experience, I have seen an alt tag on a logo used as the description in Google, and that led me to believe it's fairly important if not a heavily weighted factor.
FWIW, MJ

I too have seen the alt attribute used as the description. I've also seen the meta description used in Google and every test I'm aware of to date has indicated that the meta description is not used as a positive ranking factor.

Dave

[kgun]

Originally Posted by crankydave

I too have seen the alt attribute used as the description. I've also seen the meta description used in Google and every test I'm aware of to date has indicated that the meta description is not used as a positive ranking factor.

Dave

Thought of this when I read the post:

1. There are other SE's than Google.
2. The tag (or attribute) may be important there.
3. People that uses these SE's find the page there and link to it.
4. Improbable scenario?

As long as it is not regarded as a negative ranking factor for GoogleBOT, why not use it? Too many lines of tagging?

Being marginally better than your competitor can be the difference between success and failure, especially when competition is fierce. There is a large difference between 9.79 amd 9.80 on the 100m in the olympics. One is gold the other is silver.

Who remember silver medals?

[crankydave]

I agree kgun.

There's no reason not to use them properly and there are more SE's than just Google.

I wasn't trying to imply that they shouldn't be used, just that the misuse or abuse *might/may/could* be considered a negative factor and neccessarily a positive one.

Dave

[mjtaylor]

Well, I am going to move forward as though they are important enough to use carefully and properly with keywords considered, as well as accessibility and flow ... if they are weighted, great, they will help; if they are not, they

Thank you all your input on that!

Interesting to hear that you have also seen the alt used as description, Dave; no one else has evern corroborated that for me. All the more reason to write those carefully ...

Cheers, MJ

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

Interesting to hear that you have also seen the alt used as description, Dave; no one else has evern corroborated that for me. All the more reason to write those carefully ...

Cheers, MJ

Yep. It was a header graphic on the home page that was of various products. The alt listed the various products shown by the image.

A search for the company name returned the home page as result that used the alt as the search description. A search for the text that was used as the alt, with quotes and without on Google, did return the page. Still does.

Dave

[mjtaylor]

Interesting. Mine was the first graphic on the page.

Thanks, MJ

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by brandrocker

Hope this discussion will help many others like me who are eager to improve in this regard and appreciate that lot more to learn actually.

I honestly hope so too.

I am preaching accessibility since year 2000, and I hope after all I will see some fruits.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

Interesting to hear that you have also seen the alt used as description, Dave; no one else has evern corroborated that for me. All the more reason to write those carefully ...

Mj to avoid any misunderstandings, the alt attribute is used as a short description of an image. Must not be longer than 60-70 characters including spaces. I recommend max. 64.

For images long descriptions the "longdesc" attribute is the appropriate one. But that does not replace the alt attribute. They can be both used for an image.

But I have to add here that in terms of accessibility, the "longdesc" attribute is considered to be a deprecated technique, but it is not a violation when you still want to use it.

How does that work?

Lets say you have an image of myself and you want to provide a longer description.

Then you should set up a page called i.e webnauts.html were you can add additional information you cannot in the short length of an alt attribute.

Then you you image markup should like i.e like this:

 <IMG SRC="webnauts.jpg" LONGDESC="webnauts.html" ALT="Webnauts Organic SEO Expert.">

I am sure that search engines pick up those long description pages, as we were using them until a year ago and they have been indexed.

Be aware that this attribute may be only followed by search engines and blind users, if you do not add next to the image the "D" link, which I would not do that, as that will spoil the beauty of your page.

ATTENTION: Not necessary unless you have an image that is a relevant part of the content that requires full explanation of contents.

More interesting info about alt and longdesc attributes: Building an appropriate alt tag: UW Oshkosh Web Accessibility

[mjtaylor]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Mj to avoid any misunderstandings, the alt attribute is used as a short description of an image. Must not be longer than 60-70 characters including spaces. I recommend max. 64.

Not sure why you felt you needed to explain all that as a response to what I had written. Perhaps you misunderstood what we were talking about?

I was saying and Dave was corroborating the occasional use of the alt contents as the description in G's free results.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

Not sure why you felt you needed to explain all that as a response to what I had written. Perhaps you misunderstood what we were talking about?

I was saying and Dave was corroborating the occasional use of the alt contents as the description in G's free results.

Sorry sis. I most probably misunderstood something. Sorry.