Are images loaded via JavaScript indexed by google? - javascript

I was wondering if images loaded via JavaScript on my website will be indexed by Google images?
thanks

Yes, Google can execute some JavaScript to find content but Google has limitations on what it can do, and what it can understand. The best practice remains the same: put the content you want Google to crawl and index in basic HTML. For example, use jQuery tabs to put the content on one file instead of AJAX tabs that spreads out the content across several files. In short, make it easy for Google to access your content.

I found a solution for me:
just made an Image Sitemaps.
" Image sitemap information helps Google discover images we might not otherwise find (such as images your site reaches with JavaScript code), and allows you to indicate to Google images on your site that you want Google to crawl and index."
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/178636
edit: it doesn't work. all images submitted via the sitemap are not indexed.

Related

how to manage,speed up and preload all the images on the page?

Okay, this has been my headache for long enough. I am learning to build a dynamic news/blog website which derives image sources from MySQL database. There are different section on the website which pick images from same table on database by different tags. Most of the images I use are from external sources like google, yahoo, etc. So my questions are:
Where do you keep your images? I mean should I use images from external sources or should I save image in my website directory? Or a cloud service like one drive?
How do you preload all the images on website? Because on my site they load really slow?
How to show just empty dives until the images are loaded, like Facebook does.
If the images are on other websites (of which images I am stealing) are optimised? If so then do I still need to save and optimise it again?
A cloud service would be expensive because of the quantity of images you will have and external spurces is a big no. I will always choose to put them in my website directory
Once they put the content offline or block access, your site will be broken. – Manuel Otto
I don't know about jquery, but: preload images with jquery
Javascript, DOM. The example at the bottom is completely adjustable to how you want to show the images.
I would say: don't
This is just an example.
document.body.addEventListener("load", myFunction);
function myFunction() {
document.getElementById("allMyImages").style= "background-image: src("myImage.jpg");";
}
It triggers myFunction when the webpage has been fully loaded.
Keep your own images on your own server. Don't rely on external sources to always be up/functional. But also, be careful of using copyrighted images/graphics.
You can use javascript to hide and show your page when the document has fully loaded. If you have too many images, lazyload can be an option so that you don't put too much strain on the users connection.
Specify a width and height for the container to keep the proportions while the image loads
I'm guessing the output is optimized so the 'stolen' one should be too

Big Cartel - JQuery Upload/Location

Here is a link to my site, http://johnathonpowers.bigcartel.com
Trying to play around with images on my product pages...well actually created a test page.
Unable to figure out a few things:
Where does one host a jquery file?
Do I need to have the jquery src for both jquery.min.js (many use the one hosted by google, if I am understanding any of this correctly) and jquery.elevatezoom.js?
If I end up not liking the zoom is this still an appropriate way to have a large image with small thumbnails beneath (perhaps I will explore how to click on the big image to open a full-screen version).
Should all my pictures be the same size? Right now I have square format photos and rectangle...it might end up looking horrible.
Do I put any code into CSS or just the layout and the specific page I want the images to take place?
Will these images replace the ones I upload through bigcartel's system?
There is already a jquery entry in the layout...do I just add to the end of this same section the additional src?
This is what I added to layout:
<script src="http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=24823496361920795072" type="text/javascript"></script>
This is my test page:
<img id="zoom_01" src="http://i.imgur.com/1L86Fcms.jpg" data-zoom-image="http://i.imgur.com/1L86Fcm.jpg"/>
$("#img_01").elevateZoom();
<head><script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.11.0/jquery.min.js" type="text/javascript"></script></head>
<img id="product_zoom" src="http://i.imgur.com/1L86Fcms.jpg" data-zoom-image="http://i.imgur.com/1L86Fcm.jpg" class="fade_in">
Thanks again for all the help and honestly probably biting off more than I can chew. I just wanted to play around with it and see if it would work/was something I liked, but seems like I have gone down a rabbit hole into a whole other world, way above my rudimentary html skillset.
Here is where I first saw the jquery stuff:
Can I integrate an Internal zoom on my products in my big cartel store?
The best place to host your javascript files is on a server that you have control over -but if you don't have any webspace, you can easily host files with a service like Dropbox or Google Drive.
The Luna theme you're using already loads jQuery in the <head> portion of your Layout, so you don't need to include that script again (and you'll get errors in your browser's javascript console if you try).
Since you're using a separate image zooming library that has a bunch of custom CSS, you'll probably want to have your CSS file hosted on a separate server as well. It's a good idea to put any files you're including in the Layout section, following the same format as the existing theme files.
It looks like the javascript file you're hosting on tinyupload.com is just bringing up a download page instead of actually loading the javascript content into the page, so you'll definitely need to change how that's loaded. Otherwise the HTML code you're using looks like it should work.

General questions about #! hashbang urls and am I using them correctly

I'm in the process of writing a website that includes a reasonably large gallery. First page of the gallery the user will be displayed a bunch of thumbnail images with a url of: website.com/gallery.php
When they click a thumbnail image, if javaScript is turned off it will follow the url in the href and go to a page called gallery.php?img=67. If javaScript is turned on the href click will not execute, instead it will perform an ajax request to display the larger image and some text about it. The url changes to gallery.php#!img=67. The back button will take you back to the thumbnails, pressing f5 will keep the big image displayed with the text. If someone copies the address with the #! and sends it to someone they will get the same image displayed (assuming the receiver has javaScript turned on).
My question is, have I sorted this out correctly for google to index the individual gallery pages? Will google index them twice, once with the ?img=67 and once with the #! and if so is that a bad thing? I'm using javaScript/Ajax to preload the larger images once the thumbnail page is loaded for speed. I've read a lot of backlash against using hasbang ajaxy things recently and wondering if you think can justify using it here?
Google will follow your links and index the ?img=67 pages, and will not index your #! pages, because it can't see those links. You can tell Google about those links by doing the following:
Add <meta name="fragment" content="!"> to the <head> of your document, and
Handle requests for /?_escaped_fragment_= by returning an "HTML Snapshot" of your page that has all your #! links in the <A> tags.
Also, to make the most of this feature, you should also handle requests for /?_escaped_fragment_=img=67 by returning an HTML snapshot page with the big image displayed. Remember, GoogleBot doesn't execute Javascript. Using the #! URL tells Google to retrieve an alternate version of the page (A version where #! has been replaced with ?_escaped_fragment_=) that should render without Javascript.
THe use of #! tags in URLs are in the news recently, with updates to a well known blog.
http://isolani.co.uk/blog/javascript/BreakingTheWebWithHashBangs has a good description of what they are best used for - and when they can be bad. I think your use in a gallery is quite valid.
In short, a URL like http://lifehacker.com/#!5753509/hello-world... is rewritten by Google, and other compatible web-spiders as http://lifehacker.com/?_escaped_fragment_=5753509/hello-world...
Google may index them twice, but you can also use the canonical meta-tag to ensure it knows what the 'official' copy is.
Possible solution (as suggested in http://isolani.co.uk/blog/javascript/BreakingTheWebWithHashBangs) is to use regular links and translate them to #! in the OnClick() event. This ensures that the site displays regular links and not the shitty #!.
It does mean extra work for the server though, since the server needs to support both versions (the Ajax version and the regular version), but I think it worth it.These #! are so ugly..

Google "Sitelinks" for a website with almost only dynamic content?

I have a classifieds website, and the index.html is just going to be a simle form, which uses javascript alot to populate drop lists etc...
I have a menu also, put into a div container, but is this enough?
I mean, I have no content in index.html (almost), but a search form, which submits to a search results page, where all the content is.
So I am worried google might not find suitable sitelinks for my site?
Anybody know if I need to add something to the links in the index.html, which google might use for sitelinks? title tags etc...?
Thanks
Instead of changing your site around you can just create a good sitemap.xml file. That is of course if you're using GET for transferring data to your processing page. I would create a dynamic sitemap.xml page that is based on the form data that your processing page can read.
http://sitemaps.org/
http://www.smart-it-consulting.com/article.htm?node=133&page=37

Ajax entire page - display only one div and retain CSS and other header material?

A client wants a merch shop on their site, and has set one up. I could iFrame in the whole page to the merch page, but frankly the merch site is an eyesore, and their site has a very particular feel to it. So I'm considering using an AJAX GET to grab the whole page, then javascript to display only the div with the merchandise in it. However, there are a lot of javascript includes (etc) on the merch site that I'd need to make sure are still present for the div to work correctly.
Any feeling on if this would work or not? Would the displayed div take its stylesheet and scripts from the AJAX'd page? Can I put the div in an iframe instead?
Opinions?
It sounds like an ugly solution. Isn't it better to do this serverside instead, for example let a PHP script read in the page and to whatever magic it takes to display it?
Using AJAX to load entire pages is ugly for a couple of reasons, including:
It breaks the URLs (can be worked around but requires extra work)
It's hard for search engines to crawl your site
It breaks some GUI elements in the browser, such as loading visualisations
looks like you can use jquery load function http://docs.jquery.com/Ajax/load

Categories