Re: [HWG-Techniques]Meta Tags

by Peggi & Ben Rodgers <woodduck(at)mbay.net>

Date:	Wed, 29 Mar 2000 07:27:45 -0800
To:	"The Tack Box" <sales(at)thetackbox.com>, "HWG-Techniques" <Hwg-Techniques(at)mail.hwg.org>
In-Reply-To:	jude
	todo: View Thread, Original

Hi Judy,  I'm new to the list and a bit behind, so sorry for the late 
response.  I've run that same experiment and have not been impressed with 
the results.  My personal opinion is they aren't accurate.  The check I ran 
told me I had no meta tags on the page and no keywords.  In fact I have 
many and other validators have given me the green light on the code.  This 
makes me skeptical that without forking over the bucks you get a correct 
validation.

Peggi

At 11:38 PM 3/25/00 -0500, The Tack Box wrote:
>Hi All,
>I just updated my Meta keyword tags and then submitted the site to one of
>those things that says they will analyse your site and tell you it's
>problems with the search engines. Anyways it says I have a major problem
>with the keyword tags and they will tell me how to fix it. Course that will
>cost me $89. a month! Another site told me I was under using the keyword
>tags and could add more characters. I have 778 characters. Which one is
>right or is neither?? How many keywords are allowed, and is more better?
>Thanks
>Judy
>http://www.thetackbox.com

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA