T.J. wrote:

> "Els" <els.aNOSPAM@tiscali.nl> wrote in message
> news:1up89fabrx60s.1hcd9qcq4jhk3.dlg@40tude.net...
>> ** reposted in new thread on CanadaFred's request **

>> Since I think it was T.J.'s idea that more of us would show something
>> to critique - I'll submit this one:
>> http://locusoptimus.com/css-trickery...s-on-hover.php
>>
>> It's a set of 3 interlinked pages (see pagination at the top), and my
>> goal was not to get the best SERPS for one keyword, but to be found on
>> several different descriptions for the same problem.
>>
>> Some people say 'hover', others use 'mouseover', etc. I didn't want
>> people who search for either to be left in the dark. ATM no one finds
>> me, but that should be a matter of time, and perhaps slight changes to
>> the content, although I'd rather leave it as is.
>>
>> Varying results so far:
>> http://www.google.com/search?q=image...s+on+mouseover
>> http://www.google.com/search?q=image...tyles+on+hover
>> http://www.google.com/search?q=image+styles+on+hover
>> http://www.google.com/search?q=image...s+on+mouseover
>>
>> But no results yet when swapping the order of the words around.
>
> Thanks,
> This is more like it, and reminds me of how this group used to be.
> Assuming these 3 pages are targeting
> "image border styles on hover" and similar derivatives.

Correct, but including the term IE and Internet Explorer.

> First thing I would say is,
> Instead of just using the "skip to content" why not use
> "skip to information about image border styles on hover"
> would that be considered to spammy?

It would possibly confuse the visitor. Since it is meant for visitors
who are not scanning the page visually, it might lead them to believe
it would skip to only part of the content, skipping another part.
I would use such a sentence if I'd have more than one subject on the
page I think.

> Next, why have
> "Locus Optimus accessible web design" in the <h1> tag?
> Would it not be better to have
> "How to get IE6 to apply image border styles on hover (mouseover)?"
> as the main header?

Yes. That is, it has crossed my mind. Often enough when designing
sites, I put the title of the site in <div id="logo">, and the first
header of the page in the <h1>. I don't remember exactly why I didn't
do that on this site, probably because I want the words 'accessible
web design' to be picked up by Google more than any of the page
titles.

> In the phrase
> "Every now and then, someone pops up in a newsgroup, asking why
> the borders on linked images won't change colour on hover in
> Internet Explorer 6, despite setting explicit styles for them."
>
> It would be optimised better if you worked the target phrase in to
> the question asked and put it in <strong> tags
>
> "Every now and then, someone pops up in a newsgroup asking,
> <strong>How do I set image border styles to change colour
> when hovered over in IE6?</strong>
> Even though they have explicitly set styles for them."
> (or words to that effect)

Makes sense, although I'd prefer to only put in the <strong> tags,
without changing the form of the sentence.

> I think you would be justified to put your line
> "So why don't they get applied, and what can be done about it?"
> in a header tag
> and also it should be a little more descriptive
> instead of saying "why don't they"
> I would replace it with "why don't image border styles"

Noted.

> I would break up the next line
> "Here's the <a href>solution: get IE6 to apply image border styles on
> hover.</a>"
> and replace it with
> "Here's the solution: <a href>How to get IE6 to apply image border styles on
> hover.</a>"

That would mean the three pages end up with much the same title in the
links to them, while I wanted three different ones. Hence, the word
solution into the link that points to the solution. Also because
people may Google for the solution rather than the problem.

> Back to the code.
> Title is too long and you should try to work hover in to it somewhere

:-)
Sounds like "make it shorter, put more words in" <g>

I chose to put mouseover in there instead of hover, because although
it really is a hover effect, many people use the JavaScript word
'mouseover' for the same thing. I take it that the part you find too
long, is the @ Locus Optimus (c)2005 ?

> Description is missing, might not be applicable for google
> positions yet, but always be prepared.
> Plus it is sometimes used.
>
> Keywords are missing, same as above, you never know when
> the algo might change, be prepared.

Yes, description and keywords simply were forgotten :\

> You don't use geourl in your metatags, this can be very useful

geourl? Wazzat?

> Alt attributes are "", we know your views on this, but it would
> be better for SEO if you tried to work the keywords in a little bit.

As in <img src="images/poppy.jpg" alt="image to show the (non)effect
of styles on hover in IE"> ?

Thanks, somehow that didn't come up in my mind when writing the page.
(was just thinking: irrelevant that it is a poppy, so no need for alt)

> I see you just link using,
> <a href="ie-image-border-styles-on-hover-solution.php
> rather than using the full url.
> This is something I would like to see tested more, not sure if
> we have ever discussed whether linking this way or with the
> complete URL in is best, or whether it makes no difference.

Even if it would be better to have the full url (which I don't think),
I wouldn't change it, simply because it would cause problems between
my local and online versions during testing. I keep everything
relative, so I can move stuff around without hassle.

> That's enough to be going on with, thanks
> for posting it.

Thank you for the review, much appreciated :-)

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
accessible web design: http://locusoptimus.com/