>> >> : For all other things, title wins, as there is no alt. And the
>> >> advantage
>> >> : of the title is that for all web-browsers, when someone
>> >> scrolls
>> >> their
>> >> : mouse over the item, a pop up tooltip window appears with the
>> >> "title"
>> >> : in it.
>>
>> >> I haven't tested ALL web-browsers, but many browsers display
>> >> what's in the title="my title stuff" inside a tooltip window.
>>
>> >Hi Jim,
>>
>> >In an earlier post I mentioned that my use of the word Table was
>> >an
>> >error. I really meant Title. So it is a question of Title= vs.
>> >Alt=.
>>
>> >But, I was wondering if there was an SEO advantage to converting
>> >all
>> >the titles to alts. This would not help visitors so much as
>> >SERPs - if
>> >it is a good thing to do.
>>
>> >Thanks Jim,
>>
>> >Bob
>>
>> I think there would be.
>>
>
> There's no "think" about this question bill, it's clear cut!
>
> Google ignores the title attribute, but fully indexes the alt
> attribute, so images lacking alt text will not help your SERPs and
> anything added as a title attribute is ignored.
>
> That said this does not mean start stuffing your spacer images with
> keyword rich alt text, that's SEO SPAM and could potentially cause
> problems if your site is ever manually reviewed. Also don't use alt
> text for text links, so don't replace title attributes with alt
> attributes (alt = images not text links).
>
> See http://www.seo-gold.com/seo-tutorial/anchor-text-optimization/
> for
> further details (alt stuff near the bottom).
>
Hi David,
Thanks for the link. Good read.
I already have a lot of alt attributes for all my images with the
Title used for non-image links. Also, I am in the top 10 for almost
all my keywords. My efforts are simply to stay there rather than get
there.
So, I think I should leave things as they are. If I changed all my
Titles to Alts, I think it would be seen as spamming by Google because
they would all be non-image alts.
Thanks Again,
Bob
|
|
