RKG Logo 434-978-4300

I’ve recently noticed Chrome’s “Destination Search” doesn’t work for sites with unconventional search-form HTML. Not a big deal itself, but I think there’s a broader lesson there about standards.

OK, what is Chrome “destination search”? Here’s an example. If I start typing “cnn.com”, Chrome suggests “Search cnn.com for <enter query>”:

chrome-cnn-0

If I select that option, or if I finish typing out “cnn.com”, Chrome presents what I’ll call a destination-search box in the address bar or the browser:

chrome-cnn-1

See the light blue search button for the specific site in the address bar? If I enter a query there, Chrome searches CNN for “obama” (or whatever), using CNN’s own site search.

(Note this is different from Google’s Search-Within-A-Site feature, which uses Google Search, and of which I’m not a fan.)

chrome-batteries-plus

Chrome can do this because it “understands” the site search box on the destination site.

I noticed Chrome Destination Search works for some retailers (Crutchfield, Zales) but not others (Overstock, PetCo), and wondered why.

After some poking around, I think that using non-conventional HTML forms (eg using Javacript submits) in your site search confuses Chrome. I’m not 100% certain, but this held for the sites I checked. If Chrome can’t figure out your site search, Chrome doesn’t give your site the desirable Destination-Search presentation.

Now, Chrome has under 5% browser share, so who cares about any of this? Valid point. Four thoughts:

  • As much as possible, urge your web developers to favor “semantic” HTML. Simple well-formed HTML helps ‘bots better understand meaning from markup. Spiders typically ignore Javascript. If your forms aren’t constructed conventionally (that is, input fields with an input type=”submit” button), spiders won’t understand them. Semantic HTML helps not just Google, but the entire web.
  • If you need fancy Javascripty actions, go ahead and use them, but add them clientside using progressive enhancement. Few retailers use progressive enhancement. More should. The idea is simple: send simple lean standards-compliant pages, and add all the bells-and-whistles to the page after it loads before it renders. Your human visitors won’t even notice, and your site becomes much friendlier to ‘bots (and visually impaired humans, and mobile devices, too).
  • I’d wager that Google drives Chrome marketshare during 2009, perhaps reaching 15% by 2010.
  • If better markup leads to better presentation in Google Chrome, might not the same hold for Google natural search results too?

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,

If you like this post, consider subscribing to our RSS feed. You can also have new posts sent to you via email.


Related Posts

    No related posts.

No Comments Yet

Your comment will be first!

Your Comment

Trackback

http://www.rimmkaufman.com/rkgblog/2009/01/02/chrome-destination-search-foiled-for-some-retailers/trackback/

Email Updates

Categories

Recent Comments

  • Mark Ballard: Cory, I don’t see this as an SEO v. PPC issue. The core of my argument is that CTRs are lower primarily due to misleading...
  • Cory Grassell: What are your thoughts on stats that suggest consumers are more apt to click on organic search results than PPC results? As a...
  • George Michie: Kevin, Marc, thanks for your comments. Help is coming, but not the solution. There are a number of instances when the CTR on the...
  • Marc Adelman: George, You have been an advocate of “the advanced control option” for years now. Depressing right YEARS! Eh…listen...
  • Kevin Hill: Is what they really need is a fourth match type. Here’s google’s help documentation on broad match: This is the default...
  • Kevin Micalizzi, Dimdim Web Conferencing: Jim (& George)- We still offer a free version of Dimdim. Just click Sign Up Now at the top of the...
  • Tomas: indeed, i can’t talk about it either… :)
  • Philip Price: Thank you for the RegHack, it worked for me, tho at first when i made the reg file with the information i copied from above i also...
  • George Michie: Sorry Jim, this post was written in 2007. Apparently some of those products are gone.
  • Jim: Hey, I checked two products like dimdim and cutepdf but none is free. What are you talking about free and open source?
  • George Michie: If they keep hearing the same message, and seeing evidence in the data to back it up, something will have to give. There is hope on...
  • Tomas: I’ve been having the same argument with Google for months now and in the end there does seem to be a feature in the algorithm that...
  • George Michie: Doesn’t have to be, it can be intra-adgroup as well.
  • Josh: George – I take it you’re referencing a scenario where your exact-match keywords are not listed as negative exact match keywords...
  • George Michie: Melissa, you’re right, it’s always happened to varying degrees, particularly since the advent of extended broad match....

Blog Stats

  • Posts: 948
  • Words: 451,089
  • Comments: 2,877

Administration