2011/8/4 0:20:41
|
---|
|
Is the 'keywords' metatag so long dead that we can just ignore it?Title says it all, really. Do you still bother filling in the 'keywords' box on your articles? Can we just dispense with it, or is there still some arcane use for it of which I am unaware?
|
2011/8/4 1:43:07
|
---|
|
Re: Is the 'keywords' metatag so long dead that we can just ignore it?I don't fill in the keyword box with articles (Impression) or links (imLinks) anymore. Guess it's better to use one good relevant set of keywords throughout the whole website.
|
_________________
McDonalds Store |
2011/8/4 2:21:21
|
---|
|
Re: Is the 'keywords' metatag so long dead that we can just ignore it?I don't fill the keywords box most of the time. I think tags have taken that role now.
The summary is still used by sites like digg and facebook (and google+ maybe) to put next to a posted link. |
_________________
|
2011/8/4 20:18:01
|
---|
|
Re: Is the 'keywords' metatag so long dead that we can just ignore it?I'd leave in the option - I prefer to specify the keywords rather than accept what gets auto-generated. It may not be a positive SEO factor, but it's definitely not a negative factor, if done well.
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/googles-negative-ranking-factors-whiteboard-friday |
2011/11/15 4:37:09
|
---|
|
Re: Is the 'keywords' metatag so long dead that we can just ignore it?Google Webmaster Central Blog:
Google does not use the keywords meta tag in web ranking |
_________________
McDonalds Store |
2012/2/24 9:21:53
|
---|
|
Re: Is the 'keywords' metatag so long dead that we can just ignore it?The (meta) keywords are used or can be used in PDF documents as created by the TCPDF library.
Unfortunately TCPDF outputs the keywords twice... |
_________________
McDonalds Store |