Re: infoseek... metas vs. content

[ Reply To This Message ]

Re: infoseek... metas vs. content

From Jim on 29 January '98
adding to Re: infoseek... metas vs. content posted by Brian

I've been trying to drum into people (since what
seems like the stone age) the fact that, in the
scheme of things, META tags are pretty low
priority, but it's like whistling in the wind -
nobody ever listens to me.

You should have them, sure, but they rank below
page content and WAY below TITLE content as far as
relevency goes.

The mentality is "META tags look technical, so
they must be of overriding importance". Not true.

Replies from other people:

THANKS, WE OWE YOU A DINNER!..... Brian Geverd - 29/1/98

*Reply to this message:*
Who Are You?
Your name:
Email:
Home page title: (optional)
Home page URL: (optional)

Your Reply:
Subject:
Reply:	>I've been trying to drum into people (since what >seems like the stone age) the fact that, in the >scheme of things, META tags are pretty low >priority, but it's like whistling in the wind - >nobody ever listens to me. >You should have them, sure, but they rank below >page content and WAY below TITLE content as far as >relevency goes. >The mentality is "META tags look technical, so >they must be of overriding importance". Not true.