>> Conventional mark-up and layout results in the typical HTML page 
>> format of Header / Columns / Footer format for "natural" page flow.
>> 
>> My question is this: is it more search engine friendly to use a 
>> mark-up format of Columns / Header / Footer and use CSS 
>> position:absolute to place Header above Columns and Footer? If so, 
>> what are the pitfalls, if any?

I'll ignore the SE part as not relevant on css-d, but rearranging /
designing sequence with CSS is definitely on topic here.

Plenty of pitfalls, but most depends on how you define "header".
I rearrange / design "headers" in sequence all the time, but I use
"composite headers".

A header might be:

1: "package of eye-catching stuff you'd like to present on top, but
which doesn't change the informational value of the page if it is
somewhere else in the document-sequence".
That's what I call a "one piece designer header".

IMO: you can move it around anyway you like.

Pitfalls:
- repositioned headers may not scale well when subjected to font-resizing.
- may be created more "for the look of it" than for the semantics of
source-code and content. In short: it may not make sense - with or
without CSS.
---

2: "introduction to the content, which must stay on top in order to make
sense".
That's what I call a "real header".

IMO: don't move it around for SE or any other UA. Just style it up where
it is.

Pitfalls:
- none, AFAIK.
---

3: "headline" + "bits and pieces from the document" + "site-design parts".
That's what I call a "composite header".

IMO: those "bits and pieces" are created/suitable for repositioning, and
should improve the experience in both CSS-able and non-CSS-able UAs when
arranged correctly. "Site design parts" may be all-CSS, or repositioned
from somewhere else in the flow - or both.

Pitfalls:
- repositioned "bits and pieces" may not scale well when subjected to
font-resizing.
---

Simple example with "composite header":
<http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_1_02_02.html>

> With css you can display things one-way for the viewer and another 
> way for SE's -- no problem.

I see plenty of potential problems for a number of Users if this isn't
done right on _all_ levels.

As mentioned: not all User Agents are CSS-able, which may leave some
viewers with a "SE-experience". It better be a good one :-)

regards
        Georg
-- 
http://www.gunlaug.no
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
IE7b2 testing hub -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Reply via email to