Hiding Divs.

Selected answers from the Dumb SEO Questions Facebook & G+ community.

• 
  Gabriel Kanes: Hi, I have a concept for a site where several divs would show intro paragraphs, and when a user clicks a "more" button the div expands in size and shows more verbose content. I can accomplish this action using CSS and Javascript by various methods of "hiding" the divs containing the expanded text, but I am concern that any hiding of text, whether by positioning off screen, or behind something, or set to display: none, will have adverse effects on my SEO. In such a scenario, would my hidden text be searched? Would I be penalized for such a strategy? I found a mountain of forum posts that say I would, from 2009, or so, and most seemed to relate to using hidden divs for nefarious reasons. I want to use them to selectively show a lot of content in a small screen area.
  Thanks for reading all that.
• 
  Federico Sasso: That's such a common scenario I wouldn't really worry about it.
• 
  Dave Elliott: i wouldn't position off page personally, its just messy code, unnecessary. Toggling Display:none would be the method I use. ;
• 
  Gabriel Kanes: The strategy I'm trying now is to place all content, visibly, in a tall column within a container div. If javascript doesn't work for you, that is what you should see. I'm hoping that's what Google sees, too. On page load, I bring up the bottom of that container to hide all but the top panel. Panels below should rise when called for. The goals are a clean display that gets all my content indexed, with no penalties. I've played with lots of code over the years but this is my first attempt at a) responsive design and b) seo, both of which bring a lot of new considerations.I appreciate any input from more experienced parties.
• 
  Blade S: +Gabriel Kanes
  Think this will answer your question - http://searchengineland.com/googles-matt-cutts-on-hidden-text-using-expandable-sections-youll-be-in-good-shape-167753
• 
  Edwin Jonk: From the expert panel in this weeks SEO Questions hangout on air on 00:31:21 into the YouTube video: https://dumbseoquestions.com/q/hiding_divs +Gabriel Kanes
  
  The cuetimes listed on this page are functional while the live broadcast continues and also once Youtube has finished processing the public broadcast. Processing time varies between 6-24 hours. During this period the clip is viewable in full but the cuetimes cannot be relied on.
  
  If our assistance with this issue was useful to you, please consider sharing your success story so that others might benefit.
  
• 
  Ken O'Donnell: It's a better user experience and should be ok. We do it with tabs. No problems.
• 
  Gabriel Kanes: Thanks. Does the content on your tabs get indexed? Do you make that content available by direct URL somehow in addition to tab-navigation?
• 
  Gabriel Kanes: I'm still struggling with this very basic strategy decision. My initial concept, what I think is the best user experience, puts all content in one html file, shifting sections in and out of view as needed. But it seems that Google wants separate individual html files so the content can all be indexed and individual sections can be served up in search results. How to I marry these two concerns? ;
• 
  Federico Sasso: +Gabriel Kanes ;in my experience text in sections collapsed with display:none are indexed with no problems. As someone (was it +Richard Hearne ;?) pointed out during the hangout panel, it might just happen its content could rank a little less, thou.
• 
  Gabriel Kanes: Thanks all for your input. I'm still undecided about the best approach. I like my concept for simplicity, performance, and ease of use. I don't like my concept for maximum searchability and the fact that I can't (yet) see a way to serve individual panels from search results, or to make a meaningful sitemap. The fact that it would essentially be a linkless site seems to be better for the user, worse for SEO. I can't seem to find a strategy that doesn't compromise one or the other. I would consider putting up both versions to see what works best in real life, but then I'd a) split my reputation and b) get hit for duplicate content, so I don't see how to prove one way is better than the other. Geez, when I started this project, I assumed the coding would be the hard part.
• 
  Dave Elliott: http://jqueryui.com/accordion/#collapsible is the best way to do this in my opinion (he says not having had time to watch the hangout yet)
• 
  Gabriel Kanes: That looks fairly close to what I put together except I don't know jquery so I used pure JS. It still leaves me with some of the same questions. How "searchable" is content in those collapsed sections, and how would that content be accessible from search results? If everything is entirely contained in index.htm, and a user searches Google for info contained on one of my hidden sections, what would be returned? Index.htm?  ;Leaving the user to figure out they need to navigate further from there?
• 
  Gabriel Kanes: Also, the answer I got from the hangout was in line with the answer I got elsewhere, "you're probably ok...but your SEO may be weak... but you're probably ok..." I'd really like a more detailed or definitive explanation if anyone has one.
• 
  Richard Hearne: You seem to be stuck between wanting something good for users and something good for search. Generally these 2 will overlap, but there are always edges where they diverge. Content in hidden elements could be one of those. IMO users prefer to see content without having to interact with additional controls. I suspect also that Google will also give less love to content that is hidden behind controls such as tabs, carousels etc.
  
  If it's up to me I'll always do what I thought was best for the user. Cant offer much more than that I'm afraid without looking explicitly at what you're proposing will happen.
• 
  Dave Elliott: yes +Gabriel Kanes ;using this method is entirely searchable as all the content appears within the source code of the page. i have used this jquery script a lot.