On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 15:03:42 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
>__/ [Paul Burke] on Friday 02 September 2005 14:46 \__
>> On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 14:23:18 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>__/ [Dustin] on Friday 02 September 2005 13:48 \__
>>>> Paul Burke wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 14:29:50 +0200, "RenÃ LÃweneck" <rene@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>How many pages are involved?
>> Well, the main site I want to try it on has 8-900
>That's pretty manageable even without automation, which is encouraging.
Theres no way I will be doing on my own site. Not with 4500 pages and
a tricky design to copy with css
>>>Many advantages to taking that approach...
>> Just SERPS ? or others as well ?
>The latter: others as well. I could go off writing an entire essay about it,
>yet I am sure that there are plenty of pages which summarise the advantages
>of using CSS. Do a Web search and you will find the most highly-regarded
>write-ups on the subject. I would recommend O'Shea, Holzschlag or Meyer.
>> ... <URL>
>> Sorry Roy, I cannot stand that site at all. Looks pretty and all that,
>> but naff if you want to copy and paste, which users do do at times.
>I am well aware of that. I suffer from that disability as well.
>> I have played around with CSS-P before but dropped out of SERPS two
>> days later and reverted back.
>CSS is an investment. When moving a few keywords and tags altogether or
>putting them in auxiliary CSS files, you may lose temporarily. However, you
>also encourage more crawling and allow for quicker extension of your site.
>You write content rather then worry about the layout.
I do use css quite a lot. But not 100% and not sucessfully with
floating or absolutes. I'll get there one day :)
>> It may not have been the change of style, but I don't want to take too
>> many risks.
>> I have just finished the site again a few days ago using XHTML instead
>> of HTML and already dropping in SERPS for main keywords.
>Maybe the sensitivity to change is quite high when it comes to search
>engines. Maybe your strong SERP's change without you realising it. You are
>very strongly fixed on these particular SERP's that served you best in the
I think it was too early for my chagnes to have affected the SERPS so
badly. There was a google update at the same time which didn' help.
>Your new site may or may not reach balance over time. The matter of fact is
>that some of the best sites are constructed in XHTML (including all my
>newer sections and pages). They are definitely favoured if anything at all.
>XML), which is realted to XHTML. We are soon going to see Web 2.0 so better
>keep up with the change while you can...
The site is a year old now (and at least 4 major visual changes in
that time) but converted to xhtml just a few days ago.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----