"Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> __/ [ T.J. ] on Monday 01 May 2006 11:20 \__
>> "Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> __/ [ T.J. ] on Sunday 30 April 2006 23:34 \__
>>>> Looking like using <pre>
>>>> could be beneficial for SEO in certain circumstances.
>>>> Check the entries made on 24/04/06
>>>> (not on all DC's yet)
>>> Is the text which was added on 24/04/06 ranked higher? Did it enter the
>>> more quickly than the text that you added a week earlier? I sure hope
>>> lot of my site's content is <pre>'d. What is the impact of <br> or <br
>>> Any conclusions yet?
>> It's not really a test to see which ranks higher
>> as I am using made up words which don't appear
>> in the serps.
>> The text added on 24/04/06 was a bit slow to be
>> picked up, but it is a new page, and only has about 3
>> links pointing to it.
>> It seems to have been cached on 26/04/06 but I didn't
>> notice it come in to the index until yesterday.
>> It is more of a test for positioning, especially if working
>> in a narrow space, when you want a line break in a
>> particular place, but still want it SEO friendly.
>> Have a look here as an example
> ,----[ Markup Snippet ]
> | <td align="center">
> | <img src="booster-1.jpg">
> | <br>
> | <a
> | href="http://www.booster-seats.co.uk/mothercare-booster-seats.html"
> | >Mothercare <br>booster seat</a>
> | <br>
> | £9.99
> | </td>
> Why not let the table "do its thing"? Sometimes, by including line breaks,
> you essentially make matters worse, e.g. when the screen size shrinks or
> expands. It can lead to multiple lines where one could fit gracefully or
> even, under particular settings, break a two-liner into three. Anyway,
> that's the user's point-of-view. How search engines will treat it is
> matter altogether.
> Nice experiments.
The table was just an example of 4 ways of doing things.
The experiment is mainly about forcing a line break in
a particular place, but without using a <br> and making
it stay SEO friendly.