> At 2:00 PM +1000 5/15/08, Blake wrote: >> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 6:51 AM, Brian Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> i've been using negative absolute positioning on text that i want >>> hidden, but need to be accessible to alternate devices. someone has >>> suggested that the text won't be seen by bots (like google) so it >>> won't be processed and can't be utilized for SEO purposes. in your >>> experience is this true? >> Google won't punish you for using image replacement techniques or >> hiding something that you only need to display for alternate devices. >> It can tell the difference between that and spamming keywords or links >> and then hiding them. > > As far as I know, Bob Easton was credited with the off-left technique > -- here's what happened to him: > http://www.access-matters.com/2008/04/19/off-left-banned-by-google/ > It's something to consider. > > Cheers, > tedd
Also keep in mind however these last two lines from Bob's article: "Yes, Google was right. Spam was stuffed into hidden text on my site. They were not complaining about my accessibility technique." If you read that article, it's clear his site was hacked and manipulated. Any replacement technique would have fallen victim to this (hidden, offset, covered with an image). Thus the real lesson in Bob's article is more about vigilance than about shunning a specific technique. Just my two cents. Bill Brown TheHolierGrail.com ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
