Hidden Layers

[cholo77]

I was wondering if anybody could give me some advice on a subject thats been beat to death. I am using images for much of my text and using hidden layers for search engines to pick up that text. The text in the layers are completely the same as the image text. Is this something that search engines will frown upon?

 

[vip-ip]

LMAO I never heard of search engines indexing words in IMAGES :o

 

[cholo77]

read the second to last sentence. :gl: DORK

 

[vip-ip]

The text in the layers are completely the same as the image text. Is this something that search engines will frown upon?

So?

 

[LeeRyder]

SE's cannot read pictures. they dont have eyes and therefore have no clue if it is a picture of a lion or a letter.

 

[identity_00]

Right the search engines dont know what is on the images (yet), however, the alt tag can be read and is a factor in ranking. Having hidden text is frown upon such as making white text on a white background.
That is a no no.

 

[fisicx]

Even worse, you can be blacklisted for using hidden text.

Far better to use alt tags, but even then the SE will want to see real words on the page. If your alt tag matches your text then you will improve your chance of a listing.

Why do you need to use images for most of your text? It removes the resize option and slows down the the download...

 

[cholo77]

thanks

I understand that search engines cannot read images, hence the use of a hidden layer for the search engine to read. I guess my question was whether those in charge of regulating the search engines would take into consideration that the hiddent text is actually what is viewable on the page. The hidden layer is viewable but only by rollover (the layer is located on the bottom of the page, so one would have to pagedown).


I used an image for asthetic reasons. I don't want the font to change, nor the size.

It does take longer to load, but more people are using broadband. Also, dial-up isn't as slow as it used to be, due to web-acceleration.