Tag Info

The rel attribute is only for a and link elements. The nofollow value is to keep a web crawler from following that link (which might have affected the linked page's ranking based on your own). It keeps spammers commenting on blog posts from gaining any page ranking from linking from the blog (or discussion forum, etc.). It doesn't make sense for img elements ...

It's just "commentary." In this case, whoever created that link apparently thinks the person on the other end is a douche. The rel attribute defines the relationship between the current document and the target(href) document. Consider this a more…aggressive version of the Vote Links microformat. (Just as non-standard, but was an attempt at establishing a ...

The only time that it is mandatory to use rel="nofollow" on a link is if the link is sponsored. If somebody paid you for the link, or if the link is part of an exchange, Google might penalize your site for NOT including a rel="nofollow" on it. You should also apply nofollow to links that are created by your users without review. Otherwise, they have ...

rel=translation has been proposed but not adopted by the W3C (it's not in the HTML5 working document). If the words on the pages are different then Google won't penalize you for duplicate content (several people say this in the Webmaster forums). There's lots of advice on multi-language sites in this blog post.

It has no meaning assigned to it in any published specification. It may have been agreed on in some community, or it may have special meaning to some software, or it may be just someone’s idea of a joke. There are various rel values around, but anything that is not listed in the Microformats Microformats Wiki existing rel values page probably isn’t worth ...

The official link types as defined by the W3C specify the following for HTML 4.01: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/types.html#type-links In HTML 5 the W3C appear to have handed off registration and management of these link types to the microformats folks. See section 4.12.4.14` Other link types: Extensions to the predefined set of link types may be ...

The answer is you should allow links that are trusted to not have the rel no follow tag. There are a couple of reasons: Your link juice is always divided between all the links on your page including, the links with the rel no follow tag. The link juice just isn't sent to through the links to the external sites with the no follow tags. The point of rel no ...

According to Matt Cutts links to quality external sites is part of Google's algorithm. Not to mention, if every site did this imagine what the state of search engines would be like? Quality of search results would suffer tremendously. Be a good webmaster and help the search engines do a better job.

Pull up the two Google profiles in consecutive tabs. Switch to the "About" tab in both. See how yours has that "Other profiles" section at right, with a link back to scirra.com? Ashley's doesn't. The verification process looks at the Google profile page for a backlink to the claiming site. See here, second bullet under "Associate your content with your ...

To inform search engines of alternate language versions of a page, you should use the <link> element with the hreflang attribute, as described in the HTML spec. <LINK title="The manual in Dutch" rel="alternate" hreflang="nl" href="http://someplace.com/manual/dutch.html"> These links go in the head so are not visible to normal users. For users ...

Is my juice leaking? From your last question I think that maybe your ideas might be confused regarding link juice leaking. According to my understanding of this Matt Cutts' article (that I suggest you to read): Your link juice leaks out because of any link you place on your page, even if the link uses the rel="nofollow". The only difference using ...

As far as SEO goes there are not a lot of values officially recognized for the rel attribute when used in the <a> tag. As far as I know they are: nofollow Google authorship markup There are other values you can add the rel attribute that do have semantic meaning but they have not been given specific meaning by the search engines. That doesn't mean ...