<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The SWFFix alpha is up</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/</link>
	<description>You've got your good thing, and I've got mine</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 13:33:47 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Geoff</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-21027</link>
		<dc:creator>Geoff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 06:50:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-21027</guid>
		<description>Closing comments here due to spam, go to the &lt;a href="http://groups.google.com/group/swfobject"&gt;SWFObject google group&lt;/a&gt; if you have SWFObject 2 questions!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Closing comments here due to spam, go to the <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/swfobject">SWFObject google group</a> if you have SWFObject 2 questions!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: müzik</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-20165</link>
		<dc:creator>müzik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2008 03:18:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-20165</guid>
		<description>It is an amazing town, with so much to do. I currently live in Texas but I plan to move out there soon. I will see you there!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is an amazing town, with so much to do. I currently live in Texas but I plan to move out there soon. I will see you there!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: drcetinerdotorg</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-18860</link>
		<dc:creator>drcetinerdotorg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2007 22:45:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-18860</guid>
		<description>Flash Player 7 or later and JavaScript</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Flash Player 7 or later and JavaScript</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonny</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-18504</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2007 02:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-18504</guid>
		<description>Thanks downloaded.  Looks good.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks downloaded.  Looks good.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-17404</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:46:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-17404</guid>
		<description>I used your QTObject to create a WMPObject, to be used for Windows Media Player detection and embed. I was going to post the code in your QTObject post comments, but they currently seem to be disabled for that post. Therefore I have posted the code here: &lt;a href="http://benpowell.blogspot.com/2007/09/windows-media-player-javascript-detect.html"&gt;http://benpowell.blogspot.com/2007/09/windows-media-player-javascript-detect.html&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I used your QTObject to create a WMPObject, to be used for Windows Media Player detection and embed. I was going to post the code in your QTObject post comments, but they currently seem to be disabled for that post. Therefore I have posted the code here: <a href="http://benpowell.blogspot.com/2007/09/windows-media-player-javascript-detect.html">http://benpowell.blogspot.com/2007/09/windows-media-player-javascript-detect.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: islam</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-17353</link>
		<dc:creator>islam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Sep 2007 01:47:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-17353</guid>
		<description>Flash player 7 or later and Js.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Flash player 7 or later and Js.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stefan S.</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-17167</link>
		<dc:creator>Stefan S.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Sep 2007 01:04:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-17167</guid>
		<description>I was beginning to think the project might have died! 
I’m looking forward to checking this out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was beginning to think the project might have died!<br />
I’m looking forward to checking this out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: naidu</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-17038</link>
		<dc:creator>naidu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:28:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-17038</guid>
		<description>Flash Player 7 or later and JavaScript</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Flash Player 7 or later and JavaScript</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Geoff</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-16979</link>
		<dc:creator>Geoff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2007 15:49:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-16979</guid>
		<description>Sure, there's never a guarantee that you won't be penalized if you abuse any technique.

There's a &lt;a href="http://groups.google.com/group/Google_Webmaster_Help-Indexing/browse_thread/thread/96683bd086a01675/b22f66ab527a069a" rel="external"&gt;recent post&lt;/a&gt; from a googler in the webmaster forum that talks about SWFObject you may be interested in:

Here's the text:

&lt;blockquote&gt;
Jason-

Sorry for the late response!  As you already know, talking about Flash
and SEO can cause important conversations, and the same holds true
here at Google.  However, after soliciting the help of the inimitable
Adam Lasnik and Greg Grothaus (et al.), I hope the following can clear
up the running questions:

The goal of our guidelines against hidden text and cloaking are to
ensure that a user gets the same information as the Googlebot.
However, our definition of webspam is dependent on the webmaster's
intent.  For example, common sense tells us that not all hidden text
means webspam--e.g. hidden DIV tags for drop-down menus are probably
not webspam, whereas hidden DIVs stuffed full of unrelated keywords
are more likely to indicate webspam.

I bring this up because, although your method is hiding text behind a
very pretty Flash animation, you are still presenting the same content
to both the user and the search engine, and offering it through
different media.  This should not harm your search rankings.

However, Beussery raised a very good point when he said "Content in
plain view is golden."  If ever your SWFObject were to display an
"ElephantCo Car Trunks" logo while the standard HTML version was
showing "ElephantCo Car Trunks--well suited to every vehicle from
Altima to Z4!" then you would have stumbled into the realm of hiding
text to modify search behavior, and have crossed over the black-hat
line.

I've looked over your example site, http://www.blitzagency.com/ and I
like what I've seen.  As you describe them, your methods are not
trying to fool users or Search Engines, which means a good experience
for both.  Although the HTML versions of your pages are not always
very user-friendly, e.g. visiting http://www.blitzagency.com/clients.html
with javascript disabled loses the categorization and images
associated shown in the flash version.

The only concern I have is where links to your site will be pointing
and what the link text may say.  Googlebot deals with #anchors
differently than ?arguments.  Googlebot treats ?arguments as strict
part of the URL string, but ignores #anchors, since in normal HTML,
they all point to the same page...

Because your (very ingenious) navigation scheme relies on #anchors and
then dynamically loads the content in flash, the pages people go to
might .  A link pointing to http://www.blitzagency.com/aboutUs.html#clients
should send pagerank to /aboutUs.html , though the text in the link
may be associated with the content in clients.html.  You could try to
stop this by including "Link to this page" buttons to encourage
linking with an #anchor-free URLs.

Hope this clarifies things-
-Bergy 
&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sure, there&#8217;s never a guarantee that you won&#8217;t be penalized if you abuse any technique.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s a <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/Google_Webmaster_Help-Indexing/browse_thread/thread/96683bd086a01675/b22f66ab527a069a" rel="external">recent post</a> from a googler in the webmaster forum that talks about SWFObject you may be interested in:</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s the text:</p>
<blockquote><p>
Jason-</p>
<p>Sorry for the late response!  As you already know, talking about Flash<br />
and SEO can cause important conversations, and the same holds true<br />
here at Google.  However, after soliciting the help of the inimitable<br />
Adam Lasnik and Greg Grothaus (et al.), I hope the following can clear<br />
up the running questions:</p>
<p>The goal of our guidelines against hidden text and cloaking are to<br />
ensure that a user gets the same information as the Googlebot.<br />
However, our definition of webspam is dependent on the webmaster&#8217;s<br />
intent.  For example, common sense tells us that not all hidden text<br />
means webspam&#8211;e.g. hidden DIV tags for drop-down menus are probably<br />
not webspam, whereas hidden DIVs stuffed full of unrelated keywords<br />
are more likely to indicate webspam.</p>
<p>I bring this up because, although your method is hiding text behind a<br />
very pretty Flash animation, you are still presenting the same content<br />
to both the user and the search engine, and offering it through<br />
different media.  This should not harm your search rankings.</p>
<p>However, Beussery raised a very good point when he said &#8220;Content in<br />
plain view is golden.&#8221;  If ever your SWFObject were to display an<br />
&#8220;ElephantCo Car Trunks&#8221; logo while the standard HTML version was<br />
showing &#8220;ElephantCo Car Trunks&#8211;well suited to every vehicle from<br />
Altima to Z4!&#8221; then you would have stumbled into the realm of hiding<br />
text to modify search behavior, and have crossed over the black-hat<br />
line.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve looked over your example site, <a href="http://www.blitzagency.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.blitzagency.com/</a> and I<br />
like what I&#8217;ve seen.  As you describe them, your methods are not<br />
trying to fool users or Search Engines, which means a good experience<br />
for both.  Although the HTML versions of your pages are not always<br />
very user-friendly, e.g. visiting <a href="http://www.blitzagency.com/clients.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.blitzagency.com/clients.html</a><br />
with javascript disabled loses the categorization and images<br />
associated shown in the flash version.</p>
<p>The only concern I have is where links to your site will be pointing<br />
and what the link text may say.  Googlebot deals with #anchors<br />
differently than ?arguments.  Googlebot treats ?arguments as strict<br />
part of the URL string, but ignores #anchors, since in normal HTML,<br />
they all point to the same page&#8230;</p>
<p>Because your (very ingenious) navigation scheme relies on #anchors and<br />
then dynamically loads the content in flash, the pages people go to<br />
might .  A link pointing to <a href="http://www.blitzagency.com/aboutUs.html#clients" rel="nofollow">http://www.blitzagency.com/aboutUs.html#clients</a><br />
should send pagerank to /aboutUs.html , though the text in the link<br />
may be associated with the content in clients.html.  You could try to<br />
stop this by including &#8220;Link to this page&#8221; buttons to encourage<br />
linking with an #anchor-free URLs.</p>
<p>Hope this clarifies things-<br />
-Bergy
</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sherwood</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-16978</link>
		<dc:creator>sherwood</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2007 13:49:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-16978</guid>
		<description>I attended a session with a Google engineer a couple weeks ago, where he characterized swfobject as a "dangerous" technique for optimizing Flash for search engines. He said that he could not guarantee that swfobject users would not be penalized, even if their implementation was totally above-board:

http://www.searchmatters.net/2007/07/16/google-flash-fixes-can-be-%e2%80%9cdangerous%e2%80%9d/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I attended a session with a Google engineer a couple weeks ago, where he characterized swfobject as a &#8220;dangerous&#8221; technique for optimizing Flash for search engines. He said that he could not guarantee that swfobject users would not be penalized, even if their implementation was totally above-board:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.searchmatters.net/2007/07/16/google-flash-fixes-can-be-%e2%80%9cdangerous%e2%80%9d/" rel="nofollow">http://www.searchmatters.net/2007/07/16/google-flash-fixes-can-be-%e2%80%9cdangerous%e2%80%9d/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jody</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-16970</link>
		<dc:creator>Jody</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2007 19:27:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2007/07/25/the-swffix-alpha-is-up/#comment-16970</guid>
		<description>Hey Geoff - any fix for the qtobject.js script and it not working in Internet Explorer 7. I can't view any embedded video on
your site and/or ones I'm developing.

Your expert help would be appreciated.

Cheers.

Jody</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Geoff - any fix for the qtobject.js script and it not working in Internet Explorer 7. I can&#8217;t view any embedded video on<br />
your site and/or ones I&#8217;m developing.</p>
<p>Your expert help would be appreciated.</p>
<p>Cheers.</p>
<p>Jody</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
