One of the reasons I dont use html validator for SEO is because search engines all have different algorthms especiialy google (which seems to evolve). So, when you talk about SEO are you talking about SEO for Google only? or all the engines... and so, heres my point with this. If you create a site thats SEO for Google... it might not necessarily apply to other engines...
If you create your site that fits a SEO validator those validators are checking for the generic acceptable standard, however, Google might not be. I agree with SEO, but in my experience theres a lot more to it (i.e. quality link backs, branding approach, site structure) etc but, I also know what youre saying. Its like, people dont build sites in flash because search engines cant read them... yes. Apparently, there's rumours google has algorthms etc for them, but theyre someway off. So, theres a good balance. Everyone says content is king. That may be a fact, however, what about other factors of a site such as: bounce rate conversion rate retention member traction / interactivity turning a profit (for the site owner) If these things above are not answered, SEO is wasted effort. On Mar 20, 12:42 pm, "Michael Brandon-SearchMasters" <[email protected]> wrote: > " What really matters is results. " > > What peeves me off is the developers of wonderful looking and standards > compliant websites that are meant to get search engine traffic > > - and CAN'T receive search engine traffic because the Search Engine > Optimisation is not "standards compliant" > > Most websites that I see fail the basics > * What are the phrases that people are looking for - category, product and > regionally based > * Putting those phrases properly onto pages > * Getting the mechanics of a website SEO friendly > * Getting higher quality and quantity of links than competitors > > There are no W3C type SEO standards, but the above are generally accepted > principles of quality SEO. > > Why can't web developers who are so intent on providing world class html and > website programming etc able to do even the basics of SEO properly??? > > " but I also believe that if you create > something for a client and it achieves no results [read "Search Engine > Traffic"] (albiet perfect code > underneath) then, you've wasted your clients time (and your time) and > money." > > Kind Regards > > Michael > > Michael Brandon > Search Engine Mastery > Getting you to the top of the Search Engines > > http://www.SearchMasters.co.nz > Ph: 09 950 4057, Mob: 021 728889, Skype: SearchMasters > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > > Of vincenz2004 > Sent: Saturday, 20 March 2010 12:18 p.m. > To: NZ PHP Users Group > Subject: [phpug] Re: web programming and development services or > consultation > > I agree with Nick here. > > What really matters is results. Good standards and best practice is > important for stability and longevity, but I take the same approach > that you have to make an impact with what you have. Otherwise, whats > the point? > > For example, back in the day, those marketing gurus made lots of money > on the internet (if making money is your thing) and their sites looked > like crust... some of them also had lots of typos and they even said > they decided to "leave them in" because it made the site more real and > down to earth. > > Dont take me wrong, I agree with making something robust, > standardized, scalable etc, but I also believe that if you create > something for a client and it achieves no results (albiet perfect code > underneath) then, you've wasted your clients time (and your time) and > money. -- NZ PHP Users Group: http://groups.google.com/group/nzphpug To post, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nzphpug+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words "REMOVE ME" as the subject.
