Posted by m3avrck on December 1, 2006 at 10:26pm
| Project: | Zen |
| Version: | 6.x-1.x-dev |
| Component: | layout.css |
| Category: | bug report |
| Priority: | normal |
| Assigned: | JohnAlbin |
| Status: | closed (fixed) |
Issue Summary
The logo or main title for the page should be an H1, like it is.
The next title of the content should be an H2, shouldn't it?
Comments
#1
Well, a glance at Bluemarine suggests H1 is fine,
but it is noteable that Garland switches to H2, as does Bluebeach [Drupal.org]
+1 on changing to H2
It might require a slight edit of style.css too though.
Alan
#2
I agree on this too, but I'm going to put it off 'til I can adjust the css appropriately. However if anyone else has energy for this, feel free to roll a patch for it.
#3
m3avrck / jjeff,
Here is a patch file for
page.tpl.phpfor review.rport
#4
From a Search Engine Optimisation point of view, every page should have a UNIQUE H1 tag. I would suggest the logo/site name should in fact be an H2, or even not a title, and the title of the node or view be the 1st and only H1 on the page.
just my $0.02
#5
Do we need h1, h2 etc in site names and titles? My suggestion is to keep these for the content in main area only. For site names and titles we could stick to appropriately styled p's or a's. I find the SEO argument very compelling.
#6
For SEO purposes, the content's main heading should be an H1. And it should be the only h1 on the page.
I believe the current
<h1 id="site-name">should be changed to<div id="site-name"><strong>. The site name is already in the<title>tag, so it gets plenty of SEO lovin’ and shouldn’t be harmed much by its demotion from an h1.If there are no objections, I will commit this change soon.
#7
Committed.
#8
#9
This is extremely confusing for a CSS-jockey: the #site-name is a H1 on the front page, but a div on every other page. This means that you have to basically over-write every H1 style in the #site-name declaration for the div (ie. margins, line-height) for the front page to look the same as every other page.
Perhaps those overrides could be added to one of the common stylesheets?
Also, why use
<strong>instead of "font-weight: bold;" in CSS?#10
I don't understand the need for the strong tag. Indeed, it got in my way. I wanted my site name to be normal and couldn't understand why it was coming out bold despite my css changes. How exactly does this tag help with SEO?
#11
The
<strong>tag is structural markup, and is meant for accessibility. It helps SEO by having the site name not be an h1 on every page, while still adding emphasis for screen readers and other assistive technologies.Returning to fixed. An issue that was closed for 3 years should stay closed.