I think this is an excellent idea.
The ANT Task could replace user-defined tokens inside both the HTML pages
and .AS/MXML files for copy.
BTW:The older Flash Ford Sync website (2009?) had an alternative HTML
version that displayed the same content as the Flash Version (complete with
images and me
Jude:
On 12-02-28 10:06 AM, "jude" wrote:
>Here is my comment [2].
>
>I think SEO search results come down to popularity. Is everyone linking to
>your page? It might have something to do with Google analytics. How long
>people stay on your page.
DN: Amen brother! That is correct.
>
>But as a c
A few years ago Google posted a proposal for making ajax crawlable [1].
You'll need to read it to get the details but basically if you used a
special URL it would return only the data result not the view. To quote,
In summary, starting with a stateful URL such as
http://example.com/dictionary.html
On 12-02-27 6:35 PM, "David Francis Buhler" wrote:
>While I respect your opinion that my theory is factually wrong, I
>respectfully disagree. The cloaking theory I suggested is possible, and
>does not require a Google Appliance. If cloaking is a violation of
>Google's
>Terms, that doesn't mean i
While I respect your opinion that my theory is factually wrong, I
respectfully disagree. The cloaking theory I suggested is possible, and
does not require a Google Appliance. If cloaking is a violation of Google's
Terms, that doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
[1] http://www.petitiononline.com/stope
On 12-02-27 5:18 PM, "David Francis Buhler" wrote:
>My hunch is that their authentication mechanism does not require bots to
>be
>authenticated. That might be why you can view the entire page without
>being
>authenticated if you request the cached version.
>
>[1]
>http://www.experts-exchange.com/
My hunch is that their authentication mechanism does not require bots to be
authenticated. That might be why you can view the entire page without being
authenticated if you request the cached version.
[1]
http://www.experts-exchange.com/Web_Development/Web_Languages-Standards/Flex/Q_27377143.html
On 12-02-27 3:51 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>I'm not saying the SDK will try to force anybody to use anything. I just
>thought there were issues where folks want to have more control over what
>text is found in a SWF, what links are found in the SWF and what buttons
>get
>pushed. I don't remember
On 2/27/12 3:22 PM, "Duane Nickull" wrote:
> DN: I have never seen any evidence of google using content it can access.
> Same for Bing and Yahoo. Flex can basically give it 500 words but for
> starters Google only takes 200 per site in most cases. They can all get
> text today, but the real
>
>I watched both videos. I'm not sure why you think there isn't stuff that
>Flex can do better to assist in the better static indexing of content, and
>making the set links available to the search engines. I thought there
>were
>things that Ichabod needed help with (like getting past authenticat
On 2/27/12 11:20 AM, "Duane Nickull" wrote:
> I honestly think that after watching these, you will all agree there is
> nothing that belongs on an SDK discussion list WRT SEO. It is simply not
> needed.
I watched both videos. I'm not sure why you think there isn't stuff that
Flex can do bett
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Michael A. Labriola <
labri...@digitalprimates.net> wrote:
> Wasn't arguing if you could.
Oh I know you weren't arguing. I wasn't saying you were wrong. Just
throwing in another opinion of how one person's results when working with
it. My solution though was also
>I've done many applications that are SEO compliant using Flex. In my blog I've
>even outlines a few ways to do this, however there was never something within
>the framework that fully supported this. I ended up having to make >a bunch of
>extra logic to make this work, but it was possible.
Was
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Michael A. Labriola <
labri...@digitalprimates.net> wrote:
> This topic is extremely interesting. I have always told my clients that if
> you needed SEO with a Flex app, you were likely pondering the wrong
> technology. I have never seen Flex apps as something that
>I used to develop my "all flash" homepages in a way that I represented
>all the data structure I accessed as HTML pages.
>So I got all indexable content out with regular lists and content first.
>Then I started with the Flash Homepage and built it entirely on the
>content of the container homepa
Compiler list? Developer mailing-list: anything Flex related :)
Anways: I think this discussion is important because a development model
on a XHTML data structure/provider could allow a Flash AND HTML
development model.
Just because websites are not made in Flash anymore doesn't mean rich
webs
It is a very valuable discussion to have. I am just not sure if it
belongs in the Compiler list.
FWIW - I used XHTML data providers. Having the keyword in for a
better initial ranking.
BTW - I will be in Vienna next week if you want to grab a beer to discuss?
Duane
___
Hello Duane,
I used to develop my "all flash" homepages in a way that I represented
all the data structure I accessed as HTML pages.
So I got all indexable content out with regular lists and content first.
Then I started with the Flash Homepage and built it
entirely on the content of the contai
It used to. To understand how the system works, watch this video:
http://technoracle.blogspot.com/2009/01/flash-search-engine-optimization.ht
ml
And this video:
http://tv.adobe.com/watch/adobe-evangelists-duane-nickull/seo-secrets-techn
ology-and-magic-behind-flash/
The second one is more imp
No. Google does not use metadata keywords.
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/09/google-does-not-use-keyw
ords-meta-tag.html
You are basing your SEO discussion on a bunch of false assumptions. To be
honest, I don't think this is even a conversation worth having unless you
want to ta
On 2/27/12 10:57 AM, "Omar Gonzalez" wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Left Right wrote:
>
>> ... and white
>> text on white background with postion: absolute top -1000px has a better
>> chance to affect the crawler than that thing does...
>>
>
> That also has a high chance of get
...@yahoo.com
Phone: 650-690-2213
Fax: 650-641-0031
Cell: 650-823-8699
From: Left Right
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 12:40 AM
Subject: Re: SEO for SWF Was: Flash Platform roadmap
> find ways to make it easy to sniff a SWF
> find ways to make it easy to sniff a SWF for searchable text
That would be easier if the rendering of SWF was be an entirely separate
program. Then, companies, who are interested in searching the output, would
be able to "see" what has been actually shown to the user. But there's a
huge differen
On 2/26/12 11:44 AM, "Duane Nickull" wrote:
> Search engines have the technology to do this but do not use it. I ran
> some tests over an 18 month period. This video shows the original
> FLashRunner
>
I would think they gave up because it didn't work well for Flex apps. I
think it could be
Search engines have the technology to do this but do not use it. I ran
some tests over an 18 month period. This video shows the original
FLashRunner
http://technoracle.blogspot.com/2009/01/flash-search-engine-optimization.ht
ml
This video explains in more details the results of the tests:
http
I think MXMLC is already doing that - all that stuff that goes into
metadata, that no one ever fills in - I think it's called XMP or something
like that. :)
> what the search engine project was doing
Was that project trying to expose more information about the content in swfs to
search engines for inclusion in search results?
Bouncing off of that, could we program a standard into our new flex compiler's
swfs where search engines can expect to find
27 matches
Mail list logo
