empty anchors?!

[pink_eeyore]

I just used a link validation site (W3C) to search for broken links (it's a good site, shows you which link and where it is located so you can easily find it) and it told me:

"Found 109 anchors.
List of duplicate and empty anchors"


What does having empty anchors and duplicates mean in regards to SEO?

[Vasili]

Re: empty anchors?!

You should always read the explanations given on the site, and follow the recommendations, but because you are using BV, a specific explanation is advised:

"Duplicate Anchors" is something you will want to reduce, as the SE's may interpret this as duplicate Content, or "Stacking" ( a form of KW Bombing). Make the effort to not use repetitive words when titling images or objects, especially if already used prominently as either KW or in Content.

"Empty Anchors" is not too great a concern for HTML created sites, (i.e. Dreamweaver), that do not "insert" ALT fields as part of the code as BV does for 'shapes', as it usually refers to elements rather than Textual Content and merely indicates an empty ALT TEXT field or a term in ALT TEXT that has been read as a potential KW but not anchord on the page itself: this is a more serious risk, as KW and KP should never be stacked as ALT TEXT.

>> You are seeing a number of "Empty Anchors" on the report strictly because BV automatically writes in a field within the coding for "shapes" to hold ALT Tags and other builders do not: BV uses this coding, and using BV you normally have a number of "shapes" on your site without ALT Tags (filling in the auto-written field; leaving it empty). Not that big of a deal when talking about a BV site ....

[Collectors-info]

Re: empty anchors?!

The logo maker is another one that creates an image & wont let you fill in a alt tag that is built into the code.

[Vasili]

Re: empty anchors?!

The logo maker is another one that creates an image & wont let you fill in a alt tag that is built into the code.

The LogoMaker in BV actually converts a coded rendering into an image, and because of the way the dialog was written to interface with the (conversion) script, there is no way to provide a field to enter a 'value' because it is in between functions: it is not possible to retain attributes through the process.
It is possible to manually enter attributes directly upon the HTML source code ... if you know how to do it, and as long as you follow the guidelines above, doing so will not create undue SE valuations .... but overall, it is not a practice worth mentioning/discussing when using Blue Voda, due to the potential for devastating errors to be made, low SE value contribution, and penalties to be levied that may or may not be recoverable. Trust me!

[pink_eeyore]

Re: empty anchors?!

Thanks for the info, but how do I remove these anchors? I am about to start giving all my images ALT text so while I have all 50+ pages open I might as well tackle this job.

The duplicate images in question are not in my FTP public folder. Here is an attached screen shot of what the link checker is finding. It also does not tell me what to do. There are no instructions so I come looking for help from the only place I know I will get some, BV. I usually first search myself for answers or knowledge before I come to BV forums.

Could the reason for these duplicate images be that they are the BV shapes I use for the page? The only time I ever saw these anchors by the name the checker provides is when I create an event and it lists the objects in the combo box.

I do not know how to go about fixing this and I don't want SE thinking I'm dropping KW or KP on them because I am not. I am trying to do everything by the book to the best of my knowledge. It's driving me mad!

[Vasili]

Re: empty anchors?!

1)Thanks for the info, but how do I remove these anchors? I am about to start giving all my images ALT text so while I have all 50+ pages open I might as well tackle this job.

The duplicate images in question are not in my FTP public folder. Here is an attached screen shot of what the link checker is finding. It also does not tell me what to do.
2)Could the reason for these duplicate images be that they are the BV shapes I use for the page?
3) The only time I ever saw these anchors by the name the checker provides is when I create an event and it lists the objects in the combo box.

I do not know how to go about fixing this and I don't want SE thinking I'm dropping KW or KP on them because I am not. I am trying to do everything by the book to the best of my knowledge. It's driving me mad!

You need to remember the points made in the other thread about the "weight" of perfoming the tasks in contrast to how the SE's value them in the grand scheme of things ... and the concepts described in this thread as well, and how it applies to how anchors are specifically creatred by BV singularly.

1) I would advise against ALT Tagging all your images ... it is enough that each image is specifically Titled to be relevant to each page individually. You need to realize that this 'tool' is merely reporting cold facts as it can read them, as a scientific processing if you will: it is reporting each "instance" and is not stating a pro or con as to each instance --- it is information only!

2) If you study the results, you will realize that the majority of the BV shapes on pages have been copied (either from page to page - instead of using a 'page template' you created yourself, which would retain the same info transparently on all pages; or mutiply on each page), and only a very few images have been copied without page-specific titles or ALT.

3) A "Combo box" is read similar to how a "set" is read in math: you have individual elements within the set, each with different values and characteristics, but once they are included within a set they can only be described and only within the parameters of that set: i.e. (2+3+5+10) is a "set" that computers and the human mind read differently ... the computer reads linear, whereas the mind sees not only the symbol that designates a set, but also recognizes individual values within the set --- which is the same way our minds understand how to 'add' values to compile a "set value." Now ... if you take away the parentheses, our minds read the equation linear, and a series of sums, or an aggregate value, yes? Now try to understand the Combo box has parenthses also ... symbols that instruct the computer to evaluate and act according to a distinct set of parameters ... this Combo box must tell the computer that not only is pure code included within the set parameters of the Combo box but there is text and images also! The problem of BV shapes within a combo box is that it is put on equal footing as a hard image and straight code ... all of which generally has no empty field written in the code reserved for ALT Tags --- for images and other objects, ALT Tags are added as a 'Property' and then only if an entry was made to "associate" with the element itself: there is no automatic field that will remain empty until filled as is for a BV shape that makes ALT Tags part of the actual code itself. Get it? The difference between shapes and images? Imagine both being a shirt, and how shapes have a built in 'pocket' info can be stuffed into or not (the pocket will always be there), and for images it is like deciding to use a sticky note to attach the info onto the shirt.

Since in a Combo box all elements must be somehow put on a more even field in order to be similarly formatted by the Rules of the box (so they display properly), issues of images and shapes arise because they are being compared more intensely than ever before, and with the peculiar coding of shapes, more "instances" become noticable and reportable. It does not mean that you have to act, or over-react. You simply need to realize that BV has the coding that it does, and that it is not a big deal in the SE's eyes .... nowhere near as big a deal as if you put ALT Tags on all your images! That would flag them immediately to take a profound hard look into every aspect of your site to determine if you were unfairly elevating values by spoofing relevancy ..... relevancy must be precise and balanced, and it is not created well by adding morsels via Tags - thus the penalties!

Bottom Line
Don't sweat the report ... it is just an myopic, unbiased list of "items" that need not freak out your SEO radar screen! It is simply telling you that it "sees" the special BV code, and that the "fields" available for ALT TEXT for shapes is 'empty' at the time the report was generated when asked to treat all the elements in a Combo box as if they were the same.

That's it! I'm done ... pooped and empty. You're over-thinking and spinning yourself like a top: going nowhere really really fast! Keep it simple, and avoid the imperfect pursuit of perfection! G'Night!

[Vasili]

Re: empty anchors?!

Couldn't help it - I thought better of the example I gave above.

Think of it this way:
On a beach you have untold billion individual pieces of sand, right? That's how a SE thinks of each site.....as a beach. It walks on the beach looking for a diamond: properly created relevancies (anchors/values; properly created=balanced, compliant format). The SE knows it has to turn over 100 shovelfuls of sand to find one diamond on average, so if it finds 3 diamonds in each shovelful 5 shovelfuls in a row, it is more likely to think someone seeded them, right? That is the same thing as ALT Tagging each and every image and/or shape .... unnecessarily adding to elements with artifical relevancy out of balance with normal, generic, true relevancy.

Now the SE also knows it does not want to find a lump of coal on the beach ... they are glaringly obvous, and are not only of no value, but can be regarded as "pollution" to the beach: these are the "Duplicate Anchors," which is like total overkill and indication of the beach being stuffed with similar (coal is carbon like a diamond and also similar to sand=silica) but non-conforming material, which the SE reads as "Duplicate Content," a serious infraction.

The way in which BV writes code for "Shapes" with a "field" ready to inclue ALT Tags is simply the sand itself ... it is the foundation, the environment the SE walks upon in the search for diamonds .... it does not notice or care if the sand is coral sand, lava sand, or rock sand: it is just sand!

This is the same basic perspective the SE's use when encountering "empty anchors": if once in a while a piece of sand is felt underfoot as being bigger or seen as different color (with an ALT Tag), it may add to the sandscape with its uniqueness, but it is not all that important, and certainly not as important to evaluate every single speck of sand on the beach! The SE wants to regularly find diamonds, and detests finding coal.

OK! NOW I have to get some sleep. Hope that helped!

[pink_eeyore]

Re: empty anchors?!

I understand know! Finally someone understand the error of my ignorant ways. I did not use a template. During the past 10 months that i started this site (first one hence all the "learning" I am doing) I went through so many different site templates that I gave up using templates (I did not understand the difference of a template and just copying a page) and did as you said, I copied or duplicated pages or content to save time not realizing the affects. My site does not need to be SEO perfect as it is not a web product only type of business but I do want it to be good now for the future may be fruitful.

My site is mainly for information and for local browsers searching for my type of service. I come up in the local business results search for all my important key words in both google and yahoo. It would be nice to get ranked number one but way too unlikely for my type of business this late in the game. Luckily word of mouth, targeted emails, and door hangers is best way to reach my potential clients. Once my name gets out there, searching something similar to *big paw services* with *CO* or a city in my service area yields my website to the top of the page.

But, like you said, I have a perfection issue... I believe it is better to get all the kinks out of the way now because I do want clients to find me through the web over all the time and money I spend on marketing materials in the nearer future by searching generic terms related to my field. pay-per-click google sponsored links scares the hell out of me even with the cash limits you can set. Not financial sound just yet.

can I bother you for one more question regarding my perfection issue... should I go about creating a template for my site? If I take this route, do I need to recreate each new text or image/shape per page? meaning, if i have a template, i duplicate it for each page but if I copy over each element like the shapes, logos, or text boxes, will I be in the same position I am now with the duplicate anchors? I If copy just the text from within the text boxes and paste it into a new text box I will be avoid the issue correct? That will be so time consuming but i don't have anything better to do with my life between trainings and while pet sitting there is not much to do but work on my site.

p.s.

Good night and thanks again for all the detail! since they don't pay you... I'm a certified ski and snowboard instructor at a local ski resort 4 miles from home teaching both disciplines for the fun if it (we get to ski for free at 14 resorts - that's the intensive, not the $40 a day teaching adults)

If you ever happen to be wanting to ski or snowboard (or learn) in CO, I will be happy to show you the nice powder-filled secret lines most people do not know about or teach you free of charge for your previous and continual help! Room and Board is your problem;)

[Vasili]

Re: empty anchors?!

I do the Lodge at Breck and a condo at Vail often enough to have a favorite place to pick up my morning coffee and freshly baked scone!

Now that the thread has been actually "answered" it is supposed to be Closed, so it would be best if you simply use a "Choice" link in my Signature below to email me so I can reply in detail to your other inquiries: not supposed to belabor threads and can only reply personally outside the Community.