SEO and Microformats

[matsko]

I recently started to read the official book on Microformats. I decided to purchase the book because I was having difficulty with (X)HTML naming conventions (iditis and classitis) and consistent semantic coding principles (coding xhtml without any presentational ideas in mind). I figured that since the microformats convention dwells on semantic coding and "well recognized" coding conventions, that it would be of help.

After about 150 pages into the book, I realized that the convention of coding semantically with predefined class names and relative attributes is more confusing than ever.

I figured that microformats are a step closer to learning SEO (since markup is large part of search engine optimization), however, when applying microformats to web pages, I realized that a good portion of CSS accessibility to the microformatted HTML content is limited. Even though most of the CSS 2.1 selectors are widely supported (other than with IE6), there are still situations where markup elements are difficult to target. Thus, CSS code gets obfuscated.

Are microformats really that important to search engine optimization?

[C. Ankerstjerne]

Microformats' primary purpose is, as I understand, to create richer semantics through new applications of existing elements and attributes, in lieu of suitable HTML elements. This can help improve accessibility, assuming screen readers and other tools actually adapt the formats.

A lot of microformats will likely be rendered obsolete by future versions of HTML. As such, I would consider microformats as an unofficial testbed for future HTML elements, rather than a tool in themselves.

In terms of SEO, however, there is little point in using microformats.

[Mongoose.wa]

What C. Ankerstjerne said. Microformats are about making your markup equally (or at least as much so as possible) readable to humans and browsers. SEO isn't as much a factor.