Well? Muliple H1 tags?

[Jason Knight]

That title is a classic example of someone unqualified to write a template shitting on the page. Again that's not what the TITLE tag is even for, and it's an overstuffed mess few if any legitimate UA's are going to try to use all of. Search in particular may even ignore it, what with their 58 to 72 character limit (depending on engine). The LAST thing you should do is look at that site for TITLE, but again TITLE has little to do with heading orders or something to parse for "structure". It exists to be shown as the text on a backlink, or the window/tab title, AND THAT'S IT. It's not even considered to be content on/of the page!

I'm almost shocked and flabberghasted given the shit-show of the markup that any of the headings even come close to correct. Gah what a nightmare.

That said it shows exactly what site structure exists to do in terms of numbered headings... even if their sidebar is utter shite.

But the structure SHOULD go like this:

Code: [Select]

<h1>Wiley Online Library</h1>

<h2>
Preliminary microbiological and chemical analysis of two historical stock ales from Victorian and Edwardian brewing
</h2>

<h3>Abstract</h3>

<h3>Introduction</h3>

<h3>Methods</h3>

<h4>Samples</h4>

<h4>Yeast isolation from bottles and artefacts</h4>

<!-- etc, etc, etc. -->

<h3>Results</h3>

<h4>Wallachia Ale: McEwan's Stout, 1895</h4>

<h4>Kings Ale 1902</h4>

<h3>Discussion</h3>

<h3>Author contributions</h3>

<h3>Acknowledgements</h3>

<h3>Conflict of Interest</h3>

<h3>Supporting Information</h3>

<h3>References</h3>

<h2>Information</h2>

<h3>Metrics</h3>

<h3>Details</h3>

<h3>Keywords</h3>

<h3>Publication History</h3>

<h2>About Wiley Online</h2>

<h2>Help & Support</h2>

<h2>Opportunities</h2>

<h2>Connect with Wiley</h2>

<hr>
<!-- legal disclaimer here, HR === topic change without heading depth -->

And that's just PART of why their site's markup is utter shite and tells users on things like braille readers to go f*** themselves. Particularly with those contentless headings before the actual content for stuff where the content isn't even until later in the page. Utter /FAIL/ at web development...

And that's just PART of why they're crapping out 295k of re-re halfwit incompetent markup to deliver 34k of plaintext and a dozen content images, likely not even 64k of HTML's flipping job. (probably closer to 48k, but I'm guessing with all the broken scripttard show/hide trash)

As I often say if you don't know what's wrong with code like this:

Code: [Select]

<div class="doi-access-container clearfix"><span class="primary-heading"><span class="primary-heading">Research article</span></span>
      <div class="doi-access-wrapper"><div class="open-access access-type"><i aria-hidden="true" class="icon-icon-lock_open"></i><div class="doi-access" tabindex=0>Open Access</div></div></div><div class="doi-access-wrapper"><a target="_blank" class="access-icon-wrapper" aria-label="Creative Commons license information" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><span aria-hidden="true" class="access-icon icon-cc"></span><span aria-hidden="true" class="access-icon icon-by"></span></a></div>
   </div>
   <h1 class="citation__title">Preliminary microbiological and chemical analysis of two historical stock ales from Victorian and Edwardian brewing</h1>
   <div class="rlist--inline loa comma visible-xs mobile-authors loa-authors-trunc">
      <div class="accordion-tabbed__tab-mobile  accordion__closed"><a href="/action/doSearch?ContribAuthorStored=Thomas%2C+Keith" class="author-name accordion-tabbed__control" data-id="am1" data-db-target-for="am1" aria-controls="am1" aria-haspopup="true" id="am1_Ctrl" role="button"><span>Keith Thomas<i aria-hidden="true" class="icon-mail_outline"></i></span><i aria-hidden="true" class="icon-section_arrow_d"></i></a><div class="author-info accordion-tabbed__content" data-db-target-of="am1" aria-labelledby="am1_Ctrl" role="region" id="am1">

You probably shouldn't be building websites.

When they eventually come under fire for accessibility violations (if they were a bank, public utility, actual educational institution, etc they already would be) to fix it, an accessibility consultant like myself would literally have to tell them that entire website HAS to be thrown in the trash and started over from scratch. It reeks of the worst of a mix of 1997 and mid-2000's practices, and is in violation of accessibility norms for everything except its visual appearance. (and even then that sidebar shite is dancing the razor's edge)

[ingo]

But the structure SHOULD go like this:

Thank you.

My problem often is that people/websites tell a lot but explain nothing on a subject.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

I thought multiple h2,s etc were allowed but only one h1...?

[coothead]

I thought multiple h2's etc were allowed...

Your thinking is excellent and also correct. 

coothead

[Jason Knight]

My problem often is that people/websites tell a lot but explain nothing on a subject.

That pissed me off way back when I was first starting with web  technologies, as all the programming I'd done in the two decades prior it was all clearly and well laid out with good documentation.

These ALLEGED "specifications" and modern languages are some of the most poorly written CRAP, and most of the third party options -- books, tutorials, etc -- leave a lot to be desired.

I think it's why I stick with PHP as much as I do, as PHP.NET is some of the best documentation -- online or print -- I've dealt with since the age when a $100 Borland language included 20 pounds of books.

But no, today these half-tweet TLDR nose-breathers run around screaming "AAH!!! WALL OF TEXT!!!" at anything longer than a paragraph, then wonder why they don't actually understand how anything works.

Which is how we end up with people that think an orange moron with a 4th grade vocabulary is a "really stable genius", idiots eating tumeric as a cure-all, and women shoving jade eggs up the holiest of holies.

Enjoy our toxoplasmosis ladies!

Sometimes the stupid is so loud it's painful.

More so though, a lot of people say things without backing it up with examples, or even facts. It's how predatory scam-artist BS like "front-end" frameworks are media darlings even as they screw over site owner after site owner. People will spew a lot of praise and "glittering generalities" but be unable to explain WHY or provide legitimate examples to illustrate their claims.

Hell, half my articles on Medium could be summarized as "This popular thing and those promoting it are full of manure, here's why!" and in MOST of those it's because people make wild unfounded statements that cannot be backed up with by facts, but everyone accepts as true.

It's why I compare mainstream programming and many of the "accepted truths" as being more akin to cultism or the idiocy known as "faith".

[GrumpyYoungMan]

As much as it is soul destroying the feedback you get - when I look back and see how much my coding has improved its because of the knowledge and advice I have got from this forum. I am only a novice so I appreciate the professional advice and comments I receive from here, I have also got a mental image of Jason with his head in his hands every-time he reads one of my many many topics...

[benanamen]

...it is soul destroying the feedback you get

Critique of code no matter how harsh, is just that, a critique of code and not a personal attack and should be welcomed and sought out. As you said, you become better a better programmer as a result.

Now, if you insist "your way is better" and it is clearly not, "it doesn't matter", "as long as it works", "you may be right but I don't care", "It's OK, I haven't been hacked yet" and the like, then it is likely to turn to a personal attack.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

...it is soul destroying the feedback you get

Critique of code no matter how harsh, is just that, a critique of code and not a personal attack and should be welcomed and sought out. As you said, you become better a better programmer as a result.

Now, if you insist "your way is better" and it is clearly not, "it doesn't matter", "as long as it works", "you may be right but I don't care", "It's OK, I haven't been hacked yet" and the like, then it is likely to turn to a personal attack.

Totally I agree - But sometimes it’s hard separating the two and sometimes you need to take a step back and regroup before you realise that! But as I said I like the approach around here and as I’m still here I think that proves I’m thick skinned! 😂

It is also hard sometimes that something you have worked hard on to get working is ripped apart - but I guess that is sometimes the difference between the professionals around here and the novices around here like myself and I always listen - everyday is a school day after all!

I like to think I’m grounded and have taken the advice I have always been given.

[ingo]

As much as it is soul destroying the feedback you get -

Nothing unexpected here. No worries.

Cheers

[ingo]

[...] predatory scam-artist BS like "front-end" frameworks [...]

You are not alone: https://unixsheikh.com/articles/javascript-malware-infested-nightmare.html

[Evg]

I try to treat a page like a document, and a document can have one "master" title. That's all. It's easy enough, if you don't over complicate things.

As for the search engines, most of them have learned to determine what they consider important. And less and less to rely on webmasters, who often out of ignorance or negligence try to give them different garbage. And in the worst case, to manipulate and deceive the poor search engines, which have already been in difficult conditions for a long time. )