Semantic HTML makes it easier for Google to crawl and ‘understand’ a website but what about microformats? Are microformats any more semantic/crawlable then standard HTML markup?
Share
Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Semantic HTML makes it easier for Google to crawl and ‘understand’ a website but what about microformats? Are microformats any more semantic/crawlable then standard HTML markup?
Google announced a little bit of RDFa and Microformats support in the last few days.
Links and commentary here:
http://rdfa.info/2009/05/12/google-announces-support-for-rdfa/
Yahoo has been using RDFa and Microformats to drive Search Monkey for some time:
http://developer.yahoo.com/searchmonkey/
Both will probably aid click-through rates, but not necessarily ranking. Expect more search engines to use more different RDFa vocabularies as time goes on. BOSS is also relevant here:
http://developer.yahoo.com/search/boss/
The intent is to help create more search engines and they will have access to the data in the pages.