Several people that have reviewed my website have suggested I lose the frames. Why are they considered a negative? I don't have a tech background, so I would love this question answered. I have considered switching to Advanced Access, but I think they also use frames. I do know that their websites are frequestly at the top of searches. I really like my website provider, but I have to get leads or why bother having it, and I don't get leads. Thanks everyone. Have a wonderful day.

Frames can be a problem in that if provisions have not been made for search engines to access the rest of your site - search engines may think you have just a one page website. That seems to be what is happening in your case- which is why people are telling you to lose the frames.

Advanced Access uses frames but their main entry page is not framed which allows search engines to spider the site. That is not what causes some of their sites to rank well though.

Some Advanced Access sites do rank well - simply because they have traded a lot of links with other sites over the years and Advanced Access's system causes search engines to not count the reciprocal links back - so they effectively have just one-way links which fools search engines into thinking the sites are more valuable than they really are.

It is usually just AA sites that have been around for a long time that rank well since most knowledeable webmasters will not trade links with them anymore - making it hard for new sites to duplicate the success of the old sites.

Here's a good read from usability expert Jakob Nielsen:

Why Frames Suck (Most of the Time)

That covers pretty much everything. Another good example... find a popular website, corporate, commercial, or ortherwise that uses frames.

Not exactly a timely article to quote.

"The November 1996 browser statistics from Interse show the following distribution of browser usage:
Netscape 2: 13% of users
Netscape 3: 47% of users
Internet Explorer 3: 28% of users
Other browsers or earlier versions: 13% of users"

Here's the breakdown of browsers hiting my site from 6,476 unique visitors in March 2005.

MS Internet Explorer 86 %
Netscape 5.1 %
Firefox 3.8 %
Unknown 2.7 %
Safari 1 %
Mozilla 1 %
(the rest were less than 1%)

My site, www.KnoxvilleMLS.com has used frames from day 1 and consistantly ranks very high in most search engines.

My webmistress and search engine optimazation guy work closely together to keep me up there.

Today if you use the most searched for real estate keyword set for my area; "Knoxville real estate" my site ranks 3rd in an organic search of Google and 1 & 2 with MSN.

I like the frames because they keep visitors on your site while looking at other pages and links.

IT is very possible to get and keep high search engine rankings with frames sites.

The point is that frames have been bad since 1996.

Considering SERPs are determined by many factors it's hard to say whether or not frames have really helped or hurt your ranking. Which keyword(s) do you rank highly for?

I suppose that answers my previous question.

This is one of those things that goes against the basic principle of the web (Each page should have a unique cooresponding URL). When a user clicks on a link it should open in the current window, not a new window. It's expected that when you click on a link you will be taken to that site. When a user clicks on a link in a framed page, they end up viewing an external site all the while still stuck on your page. If you want people to keep looking at your site you should give them a better reason than the technicalities of using frames.

Is it possible to get high rankings with a framed page? Yes. Is it harder than a non framed page? Yes.

See what google has to say about frames:

If you're still not convinced that frames are no good, consider this:

1. When I view your page and click on the link "Moving in" I find some great information. Let's say I want to bookmark this for later viewing. However when I bookmark the page I actually bookmark http://www.knoxvillemls.com, rather than the page which contains the information I'm actually interested in.

2. Let's say that I search for Knoxville history and find your page. (http://knoxvillemls.com/history.htm). Wow, I like this site, but I don't see any navigation (I'm the average novice web user here). I don't know what the sites called, I can't find my way around. Oh well. I'll just click back and keep searching.

Frames are bad for bookmarks, emailing links, users who enter your site without entering through the main page, search engines indexing your site, internal PR and overall usability.

Show me something better that brings in more business for my investment in my market area and I might be convinced.

BTW, you might want to review the guestbook lots of visitors have signed saying how much they liked the site.

Not one complaint about frames (teasing). :p

I'm also not unhappy about the number of buyers that contact me as a direct result of that framed website.

There is hardly a week that goes by that I don't have to refer at least 1 or more buyers to another agent in the office because I'm too busy to work with them.

I agree with RealtyPresence about frames, they can be used but it's kind of like, well you can also technically tow a ski boat with a V6 Chevy but it isn't necessarily the best thing to do.


And on the subject of having other people's sites framed within yours, just be careful, along with the points RP noted, you can also be looked upon as violating copyright of other people's content since to the average web user you are "presenting" it as yours.

-J

Converting your site to a non-framed version would probably be pretty easy, and given the benefits I don't see why you wouldn't want to do so.

I also have to ask...

What's with the java based links? Any reason why you're not just using plain HTML and images?

Google is a mystery in lots of ways, but clear in others. Many SEO professionals are still playing with tricks and quick fix strategies. Here is a link, easy and basic. http://www.google.com/webmasters/guidelines.html Notice the comment about "frames." Why buck the system? Frames are easy to replace with normal html,
And for those folks that are a little upset with poor results online blog here: http://websitefrustrated.blogspot.com

rk

There are many outdated and poor coding practices, frames are one. The problem with poor coding is that we are in the middle of an information explosion and soon there will be a high demand for web sites rendering on many different devices such as PDAs and cell phones. Standards such as CSS and Xhtml will make it possible. If you are building a web site today or are considering a makeover then why not future proof it by using standards.

Where do you get this BS from? I can show you AA sites that are doing well that are relatively new. Once they get out of the sandbox, they can rank as well as anyone else.

Many sites have AA links that show as backlinks. Please get your information correct before you wreck havoc on innocent webmasters, who btw, send a lot of homepage links to Epowered so you can promote your Homegain pages (www.epoweredprofessionals.com/glendale/ ) instead of agents.

There is a simple answer to your question. But first let me say there are framed sites that do well in the SEs. That doesn't mean that frames will help you. Several people here have posted defending frames but not one single poster has come forth with an advantage for using frames or has suggested that frames will help you in any way in the search engines.

The answer to your question is another question. Why purchase a framed site that will not help you or offer any advantages when there are alternatives that will provide advantages for both users and search engines?

From a practical view it is much safer and productive to have a web site built on standards with correct semantic markup. This way your web site will be both user and SE friendly, accessible to a greater number of people and usable with a broad range of web devices.

Thanks to everyone for your thoughtful responses. Your help is appreciated. I recently switched website providers and am now using Advanced Access. I am in a trial period, but so far I am happy with them, and plan to keep using them. This wasn't a hasty decision. I took many things into account before I signed on, including customer service, the look and navigation aspect of the website, their templates, reports, etc.

Then let me be perfectly clear. A properly designed frameset can be optimized to a far greater degree than a single page, giving one an advantage with a search engine like Google. In today's world, that is really the only advantage, but if you know what you are doing, its a big advantage. In the right hands, a frameset will do better in Google.

Your statement is clear, but is not supported. I don't buy it. You make a statement that it is better but do not explain how or give any references or any support of any type except you word for it. You say "if you know how to do it" well tell us, give some examples or are they "trade secrets." Sounds like snake oil to me. Provide some suppot or references. Certainly, if what you say is true other "experts" have discovered it and writen about it. I mentioned the advantages of css/xhtml, I can point to hundreds of sources to support what I say, but usually don't need to because most knowledgeable web developers are in agreement. That is not the case with your statement re: a frameset.

Others have, including people like Brett Tabke, founder of WebMasterWorld.

css/xhtml is just code. That has nothing to do with framesets. The question was "Do search engines like frames?". The answer is yes. This discussion is pointless. You have no idea what you are talking about.

According to your source
Doesn't stike me as a glowing endorsement of frames. I followed the link to the javascript and all it tells you is how to get your pages indexed using javascript. This only verified my previouse assumption it takes extra work to get your pages indexed when you use frames.

In case you are unaware an advantage is something that is easier or better than what you can obtain using a different approach and without disadvantages that outweight the advantages.

You are right css/xhtml is code, my reference was to css/xhtml was as comparison, i.e. when I make statements about css/xhtml (my area of expertise) I can speak with authority because I can reference a voluminous body of knowledge to back my statements up. You have not shown you can do that for your statements about framesets and until you can you have no credibility.

One other point, in my opinion, you have made some outlandish statements about how google loves your site yet you are anonymous, there is no way to check this out, once again, no credibility.

Please do not respond unless you are able to backup to your statements as I feel sad for some dupe who may believe you.

frobn,

I pretty sure I know who this is and I assure you that his site ranks #1 in google for a highly search keyword(30,000> last month). In your defense, I would be sceptical too, but I assure you this guy is legit!

Good for him. I am considered by myself and others to be an expert in css/xhtml, I am an amateur with SEO so I stick to the basics. If you ask me a question about css/xhtml I will give you an answer and back it up. Don't believe me go to http://open-realty.org/support and do a search on my name. Now if someone is an expert in SEO and has something to offer then great but if someone is an expert yet can not or is unwilling to answer a question with knowledge and authority what good does that do me or anyone else. He/she is simply making statements without contributing and I have no way to check their veracity or credibility. I have no vested interest in frames on non-frames. I am here to learn and to share knowledge, if you want to share you are my friend, but otherwise I prefer not to waste my time.

I just did a search for "Key West Real Estate" on google and guess what came up on page 1...a FRAMED Adavnced Access site.

So? Are you saying the #1 site is #1 BECAUSE OF FRAMES? Is there a Cause and Effect relationship between frames and high SERP or lacking a causal relationships is there at least a high correlation? Look over some of my posts and you find that I agree you can have a high SERP and a framed site. I will ask the question again. Are FRAMES the DIRECT CAUSE for being #1? If so please tell me how. My question is and has been "What advantage do frames have over non-framed sites?" So far NO ONE has answered the question, only feed back to me that "some framed sites have high SERPs." I say good for them. They probably worked long and hard to get there. Knowing that does not add anything to my knowledge. I would probably use frames if I there was credible advantage to using them.

This is the last response I will make on frames. If you want to move on with me to a more productive area please check my posts on SEO or on CSS/Xhtml.

In some cases, yes.

Asked and answered, but I'll try again and spell it out in more detail. With a frameset, I can optimize the frameset differently than the index page. Google looks at both as different and at the same time, as the same. There are only so many terms you can effectively optimze a page for to get top rankings. With the frameset, I can optimize it completely differently than the index page and thus get more terms optimized. That is what Doug referred to when he called it the poor man's cloaking. With cloaking, you serve up a different page than what the visitor sees. With the frameset, I can serve up to Google an additional page, and its one that the visitor doesnt see.


The advantage is the ability to effectively double the amount of optimization that can be done for the main page. Are there other advantages? Not really, and that is where you are getting hung up here. You are bringing two different, but important issues into the dialogue.

Your question is different than what was initially asked. This discussion has gone from one about frames and search engines, to one about overall functionality. In everything there are trade offs.
A Ferrari will go faster than a Ford or Chevy SUV, but try putting 6 people in a Ferrari.

If you want the ultimate in optimization, then framesets offer an advantage. Thats just a function of math. If you want the best overall functionality and give up an edge on SEO, then lose the frame. None of my new sites are in framesets, but some employ i-frames for certain purposes.

The overall winner is not the frame, but this discussion was never about which was better. It was about dispelling a myth about search engines and frames.

As for framed AA sites, the only problem those have had was improperly linking to new pages they created. They mistakenly linked to the internal page via the frameset. Educating people on that issue has resulted in indexed, high ranking internal pages that have great PR. The advantage to an AA site is the ability for an agent with no clue to create original content on their own. Done right, they are as effective as an non-framed site, and their link partners dont get cheated, as some here feel.

www.lvrealty.net is one such site that has numerous framed pages that rank well and generate leads that close.

Hopefully we can move on here and I'll read your stuff on css. My latest site used far more css. Its not my strong point and now Im in the midst of cleaning up my framed site by employing more css. I agree with you about learning. In that regard Im a sponge.

If people spent as much time trying to optimize their sites with an understandable and sensable layout as if the content were on a piece of paper as they do trying to make their site the best for the search engine, no one would be talking about any of this... content structure should make sense to the human's reading it, period. It doesn't matter how you build it to rank in a search engine if someone clicks on it and subconsciously says "wow, what is this mess?" and clicks the back button.

I'm working on the release of my CSS/XHTML compliant site to completely replace layout in my code and here is what your code should look like... another thing people need to keep in mind is page size, remember that external style sheets are cached so all the layout that is built into them does not have to be redownloaded with every page load of your site.

http://josht.com/index_2.php (Viewed with the style sheet.)

http://josht.com/index_3.php (Viewed without the style sheet.)

Go to View > Source to see what I am talking about.

Notice the page still makes sense even with out the style sheet created for monitors... keep in mind this is the home page so there is little text so it's hard to get the idea because I have icons for quick nav to other areas, but take a look at the source... have fun guys!

-J

Josh,

You did a fine job on the markup. May I make a couple of suggestions? Optimization and design architecture go hand and hand. You have placed text at the top of your site which is excellent, you could optimize it by placing it in H1 tags. The other suggestion is to use some header, h1, h2, h3 tags with key words and phases in the body.

Here are a couple of my posts which might interest you.

SEO Basics

Why Use Background Images

Wow!

Lots of bad info in here about frames. I don't care if you're framed site does "well" in search engines. There are so many drawbacks to using them, it shouldn't even been an issue.

A non framed site is always better than a site with frames. End of story. Ask anyone in the web development community. I'll get to responding to particular posts in a second.

Are framesets also not "just code". Please, find somewhere in any of the major search engine's documentation where it says that they "like" frames. Don't hold your breath, you're not going to find it.

This is just absolutely false. Unless of course you're speaking of some dubious tactics where you're actually spamming and trying to trick the search engine. But it's 100% false that a framed page can be more "optimized" than a single page. Please provide an example.

Wow, you're calling BS on him AND talking about the sandbox in the same post!

I didnt say there wasn't any drawbacks to using frames, and that wasnt the topic. What I said was that search engines have no problem with a framed site built correctly.

Please find somewhere in any of the major search engine's documentation where it says that they "like" reciprocal links, or that just one way links are better.

Once again, the topic was whether or not SEs have a problem with frames. They do not if they are dont correctly. Google's comments on frames are basically a troubleshooting guide, saying if there is a problem and you are using frames, then you have probably done something wrong.

Google's explanation on how it handles pages of a framed site:

I didnt say that either. What I said was that a "frameset" could be more optimized than a single page. I know that you know the difference.

What do you have to say about this?


From Google:
Google supports frames to the extent that it can. Frames tend to cause problems with search engines, bookmarks, emailing links and so on, because frames don't fit the conceptual model of the web (every page corresponds to a single URL). If a user's query matches the site as a whole, Google returns the frame set. If a user's query matches an individual page on the site, Google returns that page. That individual page is not displayed in a frame -- because there may be no frame set corresponding to that page.



Why you chose to only quote the last part of that paragraph I don't know.

Because that section clearly explains how Google returns pages in framed sites.

No one is arguing that frames dont have drawbacks, but it is possible to turn lemons into lemonade. That is done by exploiting the SEO advantages that do exist with framesets. If you have frames and dont/cant change, then what I offered was a solution to improve the overall performance - and that is to optimize the frameset, which many people, SEOs and web dev/designers alike, dont always do. If you do that, then this part of the Google quote, "If a user's query matches the site as a whole, Google returns the frame set." applies.

Okay, so let me ask you this. If you were going to build a site from scratch would you use frames or not?

Maybe.

I've used them for so long now they're starting to grow on me.

Google and all the other major search engines don't seem to mind them too much either. :p

Jim "I like frames" Lee
www.KnoxvilleMLS.com (framed)

So even knowing all of the drawbacks to using frames, and that it's easier to get better search engine results without frames, you'd still consider using them?

First off, please explain "more optimized" since if you read that carefully it doesn't make much sense. Next, explain how a frameset can be better optimized than a regular page.

How do you get better search engine results that multiple top 5 positions???

You're the gentlemen talking about the drawbacks of frames; I'm the guy with the top rankings and making money from my successful framed website (my definition of "successful" is generating clients who buy and sell houses leading to a paycheck for me).

The title of this forum is "Successful Web Presence - Net success!" and not "Who knows the most about www minutiae" isn't it???

Maybe the easiest way isn't always the best way.

How about a more usable site where people continue to come back?

What about gaining even more visits then you currently already do?

Unless your content with what you have, why not always look to better your position?

The business that isn't always looking for and setting up the next competitive advantage is the one that falls behind.

-J

It seem to me people come pretty regularly and like what they find.

Some random testimonials from my guestbook:

"Comments: I am in your area often on my way to South Carolina. Love your site. "

"I often look at other agent's sites to get ideas and to see how mine measures up. Jim, you have a great site. It's easy to navigate, is totally soft sell and approachable, and it gives the viewer the impression that you're just there to help. Good job."

"Your website is such a wonderful help. Thank you."

"Great site."

"KUDOS on your website!!"

"Comments: Terrific site
Wonderful content"

"Comments: I am taking the ePRO course and was directed to your site as an example of what an exceptional site looks like."

I understand these comments aren't from SEO experts and heavyweight, professional website designers; just ordinary people that buy and sell houses and put money in my bank account.

Oh, wait; that's who we're doing this for......................aren't we??

It's not what you see that is hurting you, it's what you don't see. The comments you don't hear, the people who simply hit "back" on the browser bar... look I'm not picking on you specifically, what I'm saying is that everything can be better especially a site that is currently built using frames. There are absolutely no advantages to frames that can't be handled in other more efficient and cleaner methods, and that is the point.

And about the site bringing in money, that is good, that IS what it is supposted to do. However, there are ways it can be better, ways it could bring in even more money... that would have been like me walking into my first web development position I ever got, it was a relatively small business (around 90 employees) but they had a real niche market and did pretty well, they already had a website up and running that pulled in a steady stream of cashflows but it wasn't what it could be (at least in my vision) so me and the other developer set out to launch a completely new and improved site, revamp the shopping experience, etc. It wasn't one month after the site was complete that we were already doubling sales, and doubling each month thereafter for the next few months... the previous site had been great, provided a wealth of information to people, people liked it, but what they didn't know was it could be even better! The increase was so dramatic that it fully covered our department alone, internet sales alone went from just a fraction of total sales to actually paying for both of our salaries completely, covering dedicated server expenses ($600 monthly at Verio), and all other costs associated with the department plus with profit left over after that... now that is turning a site around.

-J

Do you know what a frameset consists of? If so, then you should be able to figure out the "more". Once you get that, you will understand "better".

Frames are also known as "poor man's cloaking" and if you check the source of the website in question you find out why frames help search positions in this case - and many other cases.

Here is a resource you can use that explains the way to do optimization of a framed site.

http://www.searchinnovation.com/optimizing-frames-for-search-engines.asp

The SEO advantage to a frameset is that you have 3 or 4 pages that can be optimized, each a little different than the others, to pick up competitive secondary terms as well as primary terms. That is what I mean by "more", and IMO, ranking #1 or #2 for more terms is "better".

Josh, overall, I agree with you, but you are assuming that all framed sites need to be turned around. I get 20-30k uniques a month. The entire focus is to feed an mls search program that in turn has produced an average of 40+ buyer leads a day for close to 3 years. All organic serps, no ppc. In my case, losing the frames would be a mistake as I would lose a few highly effective pages that Google associates as one. Better just to build additional sites.

I have never suggested that people should use frames as a first choice. But if you are using frames, you can use turn the problem of an unfriendly frameset into a big SEO advantage.

note: There is a js solution for orphaned pages in that linked article. The downside is that it appears to "break" the back button. You have to hit it twice.

Judging from all the responses I'm getting, this turned out to be a good question. Next question: Can you name some companies that don't use frames that you would recommend? Thanks.

I just need to address a remark by BW made earlier in the thread -

BW, I was referring to AA Template sites - not sites that have been custom designed but hosted by AA like yours.

As for AA links showing as backlinks - I have noticed this too on occasion except they usually only seem to last for a month or two and then dissappear. Of all the agents listed at Epoweredprofessionals.com (where I regularly check to make sure there are valid backlinks) I don't think there are any still listed that actually have a valid backlink from their "Favorite Links" page. Some were valid initially but the links page soon dissappeared - and after waiting for several months for the pages to reappear I soon come the conclusion that it ain't goin' to happen.

As for your comment about Homegain - There are only Homegain BuyerLink
pay-per-click links to MLS listings(not their referral fee program) on some city-specific areas of the site that are not covered by a Realtor - like the Glendale page. There are a few cities that are looking for agents - more info can be found at http://www.epoweredprofessionals.com/citysites.html

Anne,

AA uses a iframes. If you are happy with the options you have there, then you can make a website that will perform well in all 3 search engines and is highly customizable. If you want an unframed site, then you will be better off hiring someone that knows what they are doing and staying away from the template companies.

I assume frobn built www.broadwaykeys.com. It is an extremely well designed, tableless design that loads fast. The advantage to xhtml strict is that it is designed to work with xml browsers that will soon be all you will get with pda/cell type web enabled devices. He obviously knows what he is doing with xhtml strict and css.

Have him give you a bid. If you are not pinching pennies and plan to make your site an integral part of your business, there are many advantages to going this way that you will not get with the template companies. The downside usually is that you wont be able to make changes yourself because of the risk you could screw something up if you have access to the server.

Do you mean appearing as links in Google? If so, then this doesnt matter. Google went to a more random display of backlinks several months ago. As long as the page is indexed (cached doesnt matter) in Google, it's fine.

I guess I dont understand the HG pages like Glendale since http://www.epoweredprofessionals.com/ca-real-estate.html shows Phyllis Harb as an epowered recommended agent. Glendale is one of the 4 cities mentioned with her name. How would one find her in your directory if looking for one of those 4 areas?

Just like other services out there Bob - like one you are involved with for example - there may be several agents listed for free in the California page servicing the San Diego area but you pay extra to have an exclusive city specific page in the directory's domain to take advantage the site's favorable treatment by search engines. The same applies with the Epowered Directory.

No, I mean that the links page is not actually listed in Google - by searching by url (not using the Toolbar because that will take you to the page even though it is not listed).

Question: Can you name some companies that don't use frames that you would recommend? Thanks.

Also, I forgot to mention the incompatibility of frames on other devices such as handhelds, cell phones, etc...

-J

Sometimes. Depends on the site and the appliance. Mine is functional on a pocketPC, blackberry or treo. Havent tried anything else.

Lots of non-framed sites have issues with those devices though. The biggest problem is using the most appropriate form of html and DTD. xhtml is designed for xml enabled devices and is backward compatible to IE5.

This is exactly what doug is talking about. You're basically saying that because you have extra areas of content (that wouldn't be necessary without frames) you can also optimize them. That's basically cloaking, are you disputing that?

Um, no. The DTD and form of html don't matter. It's not like PDAs only render "transitional" HTML. Secondly, xhtml wasn't designed for xml enabled devices and has nothing to do with IE5.

The reason a lot of sites have problems with rendering "correctly" on a PDA or cell phone is because they have a lot of presentational markup in the HTMl and because they don't use a different stylesheet when necessary.

I said it was easier to get better search engine results without frames.

Yes, obviously your particular site is working. However, like Josh said, it could be better, and you could have more clients.

I'm not trying to sound like a know-it-all, I'm just trying to post useful information about the realities of using frames so that others who read this thread might think twice about using them on a site that they're building.

This isn't a matter of taking the easy way out. Frames are unnecessarily difficult to use on many levels. It's not that they require more skill or knowledge to use.

I'm not discussing non-framed sites, I'm discussing the problems with framed sites, lets not get off subject here. A framed site is not going to work well with a text only browser OR screen reader... if it's a person on their cell phone, well I'll just say "good luck"... the point is frames are old, outdated and not the proper way to do things. Best case scenario, HTML does not need to be used for layout, it should be used for the content structure, (ie title, menu, content, menu, footer, copyright) but not as what defines where those items lay on the page.

Tell me one good thing of frames and I'll explain to you the better way to do it without or why you shouldn't be doing that at all.

...and saying your real estate site (which is framed) ranks high in many searches doesn't mean squat. I would hope it would if it has relevant content and compared to what it is going up against when 99% of the real estate sites out there that are complete garbage. Show me a "big player" like someone who would compete with Amazon that ranks high that uses frames, that would do a better job of convincing me that frames are okay, but not that your site (which is competing against other garbage) ranks high and is framed.

-J

Thank you for your comments. The site was built using Open-realty 2a2 for the backend, albeit with several of my customizations especially for the integrated IDX. Using OR has many advantages that I would not have the time to do myself. Version 2 has an integrated html editor, that I personally dislike, but does make it easy to add and integrate pages. I removed the menu from the template and add it back as a php include which lets me add a nav item by adding a list item to the menu file. My knowlege of php is not much, but I do not need to know much php to add a list item (li) nav item. It does help when the css/xhtml for version2 templates and menu system are based on my design archetecture.

Tell me one good thing of frames and I'll explain to you the better way to do it without or why you shouldn't be doing that at all.

So you think most sites are garbage? Is your site one of the 99%? If not, then it must do really well.

Most real estate sites are garbage, I would not consider my site one of them, I will also add that I am currently (actually as I post this) reworking the entire thing, the site has only been up in it's current state for about 5 months now, and since that short period I have had leads from it and slowly rised in the rankings...

Back to the question, "Tell me one good thing of frames and I'll explain to you the better way to do it without or why you shouldn't be doing that at all."

-J

You are arguing for the sake of arguing. Do your homework before you make those statements. xhtml was designed to marry html 4.01 with xml for the very purpose of xml browsers (which represent the future), while at the same time being backwards compatible with older browsers. That has everything to do with IE5, since it is still in use.

From http://www.w3schools.com/xhtml/xhtml_intro.asp

From http://www.w3schools.com/xhtml/xhtml_why.asp

The problem with sites that dont work well in xml browsers is a result of bad code. Same with text readers. A simple link from the frameset to the index page is all that is needed. There are lots of sites that use frames. Frames cover a lot of ground. Google AdSense is displayed on sites via a type of frame.

You really can't discuss one without comparisons to the other.

I already did.

I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Are you saying 99% of all sites are garbage? based on what? Content (which is subjective), layout/design (again subjective) or code (not subjective)?

I think it a bit insulting to paint everyone with that broad a brush, since you have just labeled every real estate site in my market garbage (since they all rank below me in Google). That includes Realtor.com, HomeGain, CB, Prudential and the agent sites of some people in this forum.

I truly dont care if I convince you about anything with regard to frames. I simply provided info on how to make them work better if you are using them. Some people here will use that info to their advantage, others will not. But then, according to you, 99 out of a 100 on this forum have crap for sites, so it shouldn't matter either way, since garbage is garbage, right?

Is yours one of the 99%? If not, then I would assume it ranks well for the terms you are targeting (usually those in the title).

Let's substitute the majority for 99% since you're so stuck on that, the majority of real estate agent websites are garbage. And what exactly do you rank above realtor.com above in? Not that I really care, but realtor.com is covering such a broad spectrum of information that if anyone used any keywords that narrowed their search down to a particular area they are going to come up with something other than realtor.com... and why do you keep only referring to Google, Google is not the only player out there and frankly I believe Yahoo returns better results.

And since you like to quote the W3C so often, let me see a link to your site... you claim to like frames, lets see if you're even using them correctly for people who would not otherwise be able to use frames.

-J

I'm not disputing or arguing. I'm trying to clarify and educate, so let's start with defining cloaking.

A cloaked 'web page' on your server is just a CGI script which identifies the IP address (or User-Agent) of the requestor. It's purpose is to compares that IP against a list of IP addresses (or User-Agents) that are used by the spiders of the search engine. If it matches one on the list, then the requester is identified as a spider belonging to said search engine spider.

The script serves up different content based on the identity of the requesting IP or User-Agent. If it is considered to be a bot, then it can serves up a highly optimized web page specific to that search engine.

So with cloaking, search engine spiders get one page while everyone else gets a different web page from the same URL. The important part here is that the search engine never sees the other page.

With frames, the search engine bot can get all of the pages, and you WANT it to get all of them. The spider only has a problem when you fail to link from the frameset to the main page.

Unless you risk getting banned by cloaking, you cannot give me the same SEO advantage with an unframed site. You have one optimized title, I have three. You have one page with optimized text, I effectively have three. I can match you link for link, anchor text for anchor text, and anything else you consider to be part of good SEO. This is the SEO advantage of a frame.

Now, would I build a new site like my old one? No. Would I redesign a site and take it out of frames? Depends on where it is in the serps and how competitive they are. If it is page one or two for competitive terms, then no. I would just optimize the frame set, watch it climb, and build a second site along the lines of frobn's tabless css design and target different keywords.

If the serps Im targeting arent that competitive, then I can probably get #1 in time without needing the "poors mans cloaking" advantage and without dealing with the navigational drawbacks of framed pages being orphaned. This means no js hack and leaner code. I'm just finishing a site redesign where I did take it out of frames. I used tables for layout and css for everything else. It used to be #1. We'll see what happens.

The problem is you think a site with a seperate page for a menu and a seperate page for content is more valuable to the search engine than one that contains both (no frames)... you think Google/Yahoo haven't figured this stuff out?

By the way, where is this site that you so highly tout?

-J

Well since we're arguing for the sake of arguing...

IE5, IE5.5, and IE6 cannot render xhtml sent as xml, which it's supposed to be, so IE5 doesn't have anything to do with xhtml.

That's a nice definition for your particular situation. But there is more...

Or you can just give it different content from what a regular user would see.

In your case it sounds like you're allowing your visitors to see one page and search engines to see that page and then some.

YES! I think Josh has hit the nail on the head with that one.

I've been asking for two days now.

...and the thing is he wouldn't even have to do all that if his page was setup correctly in the first place. LOL!

Quality of serps is subjective. I only care about visitors. Google delivers more visitors for the same placement. More visitors equal more leads, and more leads equal more money.

I still think labeling most sites as garbage is insulting.

As for Realtor.com, they have several cities that they have aggressively gone after. Dont underestimate them or HomeGain. They have hired topnotch SEOs and know what they are doing. Here's a Google search for your neck of the woods. Those 2 plus Doug are doing ok.

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=na...ity+real+estate

RP- Why did you just rephrase what I wrote? What's your point? I wasnt justifying cloaking, just explaining it and the differences between the two.

Nope. Use an old browser and you'll get just what Google, Yahoo and MSN crawl. The browser just gets you through the frameset faster, whereas the bot reads all the code, then follows the link, as does the browser. Again, you are missing the point. There is lots that a SE cares about that the visitor doesnt. You dont show your visitor the code source, do you?

You are missing a page. That's where you are also missing the point. And what do you think a SE considers to be a valuable page?

Josh, before you criticize, at least optimize your title correctly.

I have looked on in amusment over the last few days as this thread has became more and more bogged down in retoric. I said that I would not respond to any more posts on frames. This is not a response to any particular post but to the thread in general.

Disregarding the retoric here is a summary of what is pretty much agreed upon:

Framed pages but not the framesets can be optimized. Agreed. I did not know this, and I plan to investigate it further. Why? Becasue if it is possible to better optimize a page with a frameset it is a trivial thing to set up one or two pages within a frameset and take advantage of the better optimization that frames purportedly give. I am spending numerous hours tweaking my broadwaykeys.com becasue what I learn from there I will be able to use over and over again.

Some people are used to frames and like them. Agreed.

To optimize framed pages you must know what you are doing. Agree. Let me add that no matter what you use to code your site you must know what you are doing. I believe there are advantages to using css/xhtml in many cases but without a good knowledge of them they will not help your pages or site but can hinder them. Knowledge and experience is what makes a professional.

Frames have many disadvantages. Agreed.

Conclusion: Draw your own from your ability to weight the advantages against the disadvantages.

You still won't post a link to your site... what a talker... either put up or shut-up. My title on my site tells exactly what site they are at, and what particular page they are on within the site. I also strive to make sense for the common person not just a search engine.

Either post a link to your site that is "#1 in everything in my market" or stop touting it in your examples...

-J

What I'm trying to get to is what specifically is different between what the se sees and what the visitor sees. It sounds like you're taking advantage of the fact that the bot sees more code than the visitor.

If you would just post a link to your site I could answer my own question.

Which he doesn't seem to want to do, that would answer all the questions I have asked of him too... we'll see, he'll probably reply back just ignoring what we've both just asked... which he did, haha... nothing but talk.

-J

Frobn, nice summary.


"It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence. It biases the judgment."
Sherlock Holmes in 'A Study in Scarlet'

Still no link... you going to take care of this bw by posting a link to your site or not?

+1