Frames and SEO

RoadKillTs

Hi, what are peoples thoughts on the above?
I think frames aren't the best when it comes to SEO but would like to hear peoples thought.
Thanks.

cormee

Off the top of my head I can't see how frames would affect SEO. As long as each page of the frameset is optimised properly, and if the frameset is set up correctly, the fact that it's a frameset shouldn't have an effect on how Google spiders each component page.

From a usability and accessibility point of view it's a completely different situation - frames should be avoided like the plague.

RoadKillTs

Off the top of my head I can't see how frames would affect SEO.

I always thought they were a huge no no because Google sees a frames website as one page and doesn't index the content correctly.

Anyways thanks for the reply. I was asked to look at a site which is built on frames and wasn't sure to advise them on getting it changed or not.

cormee

RoadKillTs wrote: »

I always thought they were a huge no no because Google sees a frames website as one page and doesn't index the content correctly.

Anyways thanks for the reply. I was asked to look at a site which is built on frames and wasn't sure to advise them on getting it changed or not.

It's about 10 years since I did a site that uses frames so I could be wrong, but if the index page of the frameset contains links to each of the component pages, which I'm assuming Google would treat the exact same as any other page with links on it (assuming there is no javascript or the likes in the links that would cause spidering to fail). Results would depend on how you have each of those pages optimised. Also you should pay close attention to your <noframes> content.

You could advise them to lose the fames for accessibility and usability reasons. From a usability point of view visitors landing on spidered component pages outside the frameset can be very easily lost if they can't figure out how to view the page proper, but there is a snippet of javascript that will detect if the user has landed outside the frameset and bounce them back into it. From an accessibility point of view you should never use them, they can be navigated using some screen readers but it's very difficult.

tricky D

It's been possible to do this with css for a while now. Just Google css frames.

Pixelcraft

Frames shouldn't be seen nowadays. I think one of the main factors it would be bad for SEO is that your index page will just contain the frameset, and have no actual content to index.

RoadKillTs

Thanks for the replies. Will advise them to get it changed.

tomED

Pixelcraft wrote: »

Frames shouldn't be seen nowadays. I think one of the main factors it would be bad for SEO is that your index page will just contain the frameset, and have no actual content to index.

Pixelcraft is spot on.

Think of it like this - your typical frameset (in the late 90s) was :

Left, Top and Bottom

The left column tended to hold the navigation, the top was company logo and the bottom was the main content area.

When search engines indexed your homepage for example, it would index 4 individual pages.

1. Main frameset
2. Left frame
3. Top frame
4. Bottom Frame

Regardless of the fact that your main frameset would have little content to optimise it with, if someone searched for you, they could click on the result for the left frame for example and be presented with just a list of links. Then, when they choose a link, they'd be linked to a page with content and no way of moving to another page.

Hindsight is a great thing, but if we could go back, I'm sure that would be the top of most web designers lists to be removed from history!

waynewex

You should stay away from frames completely. They are well known for being an SEO no-no. Why would you use frames when there are far more modern and usable ways of doing what you're trying to do?

cormee

waynewex wrote: »

They are well known for being an SEO no-no.

How exactly? If your frameset is set up correctly each page will get spidered so you'll still have the same amount of content indexed - allbeit on different pages. It's not an ideal situation but the major issues with such a scenario relate to usability and accessibility, not SEO.

I'm not by any means advocating the use of frames as they should clearly be avoided and have no place on the www today, I'm just addressing OP's question.

tomED

cormee wrote: »

How exactly? If your frameset is set up correctly each page will get spidered so you'll still have the same amount of content indexed - allbeit on different pages. It's not an ideal situation but the major issues with such a scenario relate to usability and accessibility, not SEO.

Even if your frameset is set up correctly, you will still have the issues that I've mentioned above.

So I would concur that frames are an SEO no-no

cormee

tomED wrote: »

Even if your frameset is set up correctly, you will still have the issues that I've mentioned above.

So I would concur that frames are an SEO no-no

The issues you mention above are all usability and accessibility problems - OP is asking about SEO.

Eoin

Would the <noframes> tag in the main frameset page not be able to contain SEO friendly content?

cormee

eoin wrote: »

Would the <noframes> tag in the main frameset page not be able to contain SEO friendly content?

Yes. Here's how to do it: http://searchenginewatch.com/2167901

tomED

cormee wrote: »

The issues you mention above are all usability and accessibility problems - OP is asking about SEO.

Nope, if you read and you will see that they're all 3....

@Eoin - No frames tag isn't enough to properly optimise a site. It's better than having none but not worth much in reality for many reasons.

It's like this - if you want to give your website the best chance of getting decent rankings in the search engines, steer well clear of frames, full stop.

Pixelcraft

cormee wrote: »

The issues you mention above are all usability and accessibility problems - OP is asking about SEO.

No, the issue we mentioned about content is primarily SEO related.

cormee

tomED wrote: »

Nope, if you read and undertand, you will see that they're all 3....

Can you explain please.

tomED

cormee wrote: »

Can you explain please.

Tell me what you don't understand and I'll explain it