[SWFObject] SWFObject VS Google Quality Guidelines

[Jeremy Nicoll]

    The content is visible to all users who do not have Flash installed 
and/or do not have JavaScript enabled.  Therefore, the content is still 
visible by users and does not violate the Google terms.  There are 
millions of pages out there that employ similar methods using a 
so-called Web 2.0 interface, and they are not banned from Google.  They 
are only concerned with things like making a link invisible or 
delivering content which is /only/ for Google (by doing a bot check on 
the server script, for instance and delivering different content).

--
Jeremy Nicoll

> Subject:
> [SWFObject] SWFObject VS Google Quality Guidelines
> From:
> Pablo Garayzábal <pablo at dinamik.es>
> Date:
> Thu, 17 Aug 2006 01:51:52 +0200
> To:
> <swfobject at lists.deconcept.com>
>
> To:
> <swfobject at lists.deconcept.com>
> CC:
> 'Gonzalo Riera' <gonzalo.riera at skydivelillo.com>
>
>
>  
>
> Hi,
>
>  
>
> As previously discussed here, another advantage of using SWFObject is 
> that you can place html content inside the div layers so that it will 
> be read by search spiders but won't be visible to the visitors.  (It's 
> replaced by a swf file).
>
>  
>
> For example
>
> <div id="myLayer">
>
>             Here is a text with keywords, links etc, just for search 
> engine optimization.
>
> </div>
>
> <script>
>
> var fo=new SWFObject(....);
>
>             fo.write("myLayer");
>
> </script>
>
>  
>
> So, If you do this, the fact is that you are creating content just for 
> the search engines, and that it is invisible or hidden for the visitors.
>
> Doing this seems to break the two first rules of Google Quality 
> guidelines:
>
>  
>
> As you can see in this link:
>
> http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=35769#quality
>
>  
>
> *Quality guidelines - basic principles*
>
>     * Make pages for users, not for search engines. Don't deceive your
>       users or present different content to search engines than you
>       display to users, which is commonly referred to as "cloaking."
>     * ...
>
> *Quality guidelines - specific guidelines*
>
>     * Avoid hidden text or hidden links.
>     * Don't employ cloaking or sneaky redirects.
>     * ...
>
> Placing content inside the SWFObject target layers can be considered 
> as "cloaking"? ...or as hiding text or links?  ...both?
>
>  
>
> These are the FIRST two things google claims to be avoided.
>
>  
>
> So... what do you think? 
>
>  
>
> A first approach can be: "Don't place content for google, just a 
> message for people who don't have flash installed."  Ok but... what is 
> the difference? Can google see the difference?
>
>  
>
> As Geoff said in a recent post: Try to search for this in google: 
> "This text is replaced by the Flash movie."
>
> This text is the one used in Geoff's examples, and a lot of people 
> have just copied and pasted it in their pages, so google has about 
> *5.140.000 *results, so it must be aware of this issue now (...or not?)
>
>  
>
> Does google recognize semantics? Is it allowing the "This text is 
> replaced by the Flash movie.", but will penalize other messages like, 
> for example, "The best IT company, IT services, consulting",?
>
>  
>
> Pablo.
>
>  
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> SWFObject mailing list
> SWFObject at lists.deconcept.com
> http://lists.deconcept.com/listinfo.cgi/swfobject-deconcept.com
>   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.deconcept.com/pipermail/swfobject-deconcept.com/attachments/20060817/b07e4a3a/attachment-0005.htm>