Comments on: Are CSS-based layouts better than tables for SEO?

By: mawebgeek

mawebgeek — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 17:18:15 +0000

>being indexed by Google isn’t the only consideration

But asking Matt questions means there is a subtext of (as far as Google is concerned…)

And I think that’s all Matt is trying to speak to.

By: suonnoch

suonnoch — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 16:36:34 +0000

What price web standards now!

OK, so the message is that Google doesn’t care at all whether you layout your website with tables or CSS, wrt SEO.

But Cutts could have acknowledged that there is big movement out there amongst designers to streamline semantics, presentation and thereby improve accessibility.

By: suonnoch

suonnoch — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 16:36:19 +0000

What price web standards now!

OK, so the message is that Google doesn’t care at all whether you layout your website with tables or CSS, wrt SEO.

But Cutts could have acknowledged that there is big movement out there amongst designers to streamline semantics, presentation and thereby improve accessibility.

By: plabrow

plabrow — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 16:03:17 +0000

It’s not all about SEO. There is no harm in CSS-based layouts – so just use them: table-based layouts are harder to maintain, result in slower loading web pages, are less portable over different media… the list goes on. Just because ‘Google doesn’t mind, doesn’t make using tables sensible. Tables cost more to the client in the long term, deliver slower sites which can frustrate users and are less accessible (if at all). Anyone using table-based layouts isn’t doing the job right. End of.

By: larssonk22

larssonk22 — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 15:10:40 +0000

Thanks for giving us Google’s view. What people need to do is use some common sense, CSS might be a headache to begin with (I know it certainly was for me) but once you get the hang of it, it makes life so much easier (I only use tables when I feeling very lazy). Pros for css and the negs for tables have already been mentioned by the other posters here. CSS is where everyone is going and it should be a standard, look at dreamweaver CS4.

By: schank111222

schank111222 — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:55:15 +0000

Are you still recording the videos? Do you get the questions from your topic on Moderator?

By: ObiManMDQ

ObiManMDQ — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:15:50 +0000

I think Tables vs. CSS does not have a direct impact on your rankings, but it helps your site to be better for your users (faster response, better layout, better accesibility, more flexibility, etc)

And as *always* , what its better to users, its better to Google.

By: ShaneSelby

ShaneSelby — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:18:08 +0000

I thought Google didn’t read javascript or css? Correct me if I’m wrong. By using css you separate the html from the design so google can load the page quicker.

By: larssonk22

larssonk22 — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 12:59:16 +0000

Problem I’ve just ran into is that 3/4 of visitors to my site use IE, 1/4 of these IE users are still using IE6. IE6 doesn’t obey the CSS and the site looks like a complete mess, however my site that is built using tables looks the same in every browser.

By: wildcard2092

wildcard2092 — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 12:39:52 +0000

Well said.