> They are in the first entry. Personally I don't mind the second one > being displayed as it is, however I doubt the use of linking directly > to SWF files. I mean, a lot of SWF files require input (e.g. > flashvars, JavaScript communication) with their hosting HTML page. > Also there is no correct sizing (original width and height). A SWF > file is simply often not used like a more static pice of plugin > content like a PDF file.
Totally, I don't "mind" both either but according to Google there should be one entry. Just so you know, your image isn't the norm in most cases only the time only the Flash is indexed without the (X)HMTL. > Why show this to e.g. an iPhone user if he even can't > open the search result? That is my point... try the query on an iphone. > That would be a bad direction indeed. Maybe work in progress. Please > send your feedback to the Google Webmaster Central team. I think you're right, a work in progress for sure. Google's Flash folks are looking into these issues and I'm happy to provide any additional information they request. Hopefully they can be resolved in short order. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SWFObject" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/swfobject?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
