SitePoint.com

ArticleBot · Oct 13, 2003, 01:28

This is a dedicated thread for discussing the SitePoint article 'Search Engine Optimisation for Web Developers'

Oct 13, 2003, 01:28

Article started out nicely, but i'm kind of surprised there are no further pages.
I expected a sitepoint-class article but this one isn't.

MG315 · Oct 13, 2003, 09:32

overall its a pretty good article, but i disagree with one of the last points in which it is said that the client should have the ability to not only edit content but also edit title, heading, alt and meta tags. Our search engine optimization consists of researching the best keywords (which relevant keywords are most searched but have the lowest amount of competition) and using those keywords we write interesting keyword rich title and alt tags and have professionally written copy (text) for the first page and any other content that will remain static (won't need to be edited. ex - upcoming events wouldnt be part of this, but services would). This copy is keyword rich and written with the intent to convince the reader to buy the companies product or service, contact the company, or whatever it is the company wishes to achieve through the site. While frequent updates to a site are necessary, the site's main information should stay the same. allowing a content manager the ability to mess with the prewritten content and tags without proper research can be detrimental to the integrity of the site and destroy one of the major parts of their search engine optimization.

client updates are necessary, but limit them to what needs updating and keep that which is important (company information, mission statement, description of services...) and anything professionally written untouched. Professional copywriting is expensive so make sure it won't be ruined a few months later by some employee updating the site.

Oct 13, 2003, 09:35

Optimisation

Shouldn't it be spelled Optimization?

Shawn Weeks · Oct 13, 2003, 13:05

AWilliams · Oct 13, 2003, 13:15

Optimisation is the British spelling.

Oct 13, 2003, 13:33

It's like spelled and spellt.

Is it the same thing with learned and learnt? Or is learnt even a word?

Oct 13, 2003, 14:34

Is there some sort of engine that will allow you to test for search engine compliance, much like the xHTML evaluators?

Oct 13, 2003, 18:51

Optimisation is also the way we Australians spell. And Spellt is not a word. Spelt is a word (and a type of wheat), so is learnt (a word, not a wheat). The way words are spelt is something I learnt at school.

KC · Oct 13, 2003, 20:10

This thread is getting off-topic. Anymore anonymous posts off-topic will not be allowed.

eXplosive · Oct 13, 2003, 21:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Article started out nicely, but i'm kind of surprised there are no further pages.
I expected a sitepoint-class article but this one isn't.

Yes, I was also looking for a few mores pages. The beginning was great though.

Oct 14, 2003, 09:44

Nice stuff.

But I guess the article ended rather abrubtly! There could have been more details..

JD

aspen · Oct 14, 2003, 14:54

Awfully short.

M. Johansson · Oct 14, 2003, 15:59

I also got the feeling that the second and third page was missing.

hotnuts21 · Oct 14, 2003, 17:22

Quote:

but i disagree with one of the last points in which it is said that the client should have the ability to not only edit content but also edit title, heading, alt and meta tags

I have to agree with this for the same reasons, after spending hours researching keywords and terms for your client the last you want is them changing them and then blaming you that you didnt do a good job.

But then this brings up problems, if a client wants the ability to add new pages/products to his site as time goes by you want him/her to be able to add there own title,alt tags etc to the NEW pages, and if they screw up or realise they want to change them they need to be able to edit there own additions. But in most systems this means they will be able to edit any work you did too!!

A bit difficult and maybe annoying to the client but the ability to lock any SEO work you have done for the client would be best, whilst any new pages added by the client can be edited at a later date by themselves or someone they hire in to do some more SEO.

Just some thoughts, oh yeah and the article was a bit short

Oct 15, 2003, 03:01

The article is precise and not too long or too short in regards to the headline.
The article keeps you reading. You think it is too short because you may want to know more about search engine optimiSation. I think the point Mister Poole makes is that webdevelopers need to know more about search engine rankings or at least work close together with a SEO company.
Good article Mister Poole!!!

(your sss still tickle me - I will not forget your article because of that. Is the Z broken on your keyboard?

Oct 15, 2003, 05:20

Was hoping to find some more specifics to help me and now I am wondering what I should do about the issues raised.

Oct 15, 2003, 05:26

I also felt the article was too short. I was just getting ready for the good part when it ended.

Oct 15, 2003, 09:10

Good article as reminders, however, the article should have gone farther, more detail, new information.

Oct 15, 2003, 12:08

It would have been nice to see more on META Data and the criteria that the various search engine spiders are looking for. Like keyword frequency in body text etc.

Stancy_McKatt · Oct 15, 2003, 16:31

I agree that this artical should have been a bit longer. Some explanations on how to fix the problems brought out would have been really helpful.

hotnuts21 · Oct 15, 2003, 17:20

If i get time next week I can answer some of the questions, and those I cant answer i will send to Aspen

just kidding chris!!

Actually start emailing or Pm'ing me with specific questions and I will do my best to answer them, which should provide a resource for people.

MG315 · Oct 15, 2003, 17:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by hotnuts21

I have to agree with this for the same reasons, after spending hours researching keywords and terms for your client the last you want is them changing them and then blaming you that you didnt do a good job.

But then this brings up problems, if a client wants the ability to add new pages/products to his site as time goes by you want him/her to be able to add there own title,alt tags etc to the NEW pages, and if they screw up or realise they want to change them they need to be able to edit there own additions. But in most systems this means they will be able to edit any work you did too!!

A bit difficult and maybe annoying to the client but the ability to lock any SEO work you have done for the client would be best, whilst any new pages added by the client can be edited at a later date by themselves or someone they hire in to do some more SEO.

Just some thoughts, oh yeah and the article was a bit short [img]images/smilies/frown.gif[/img]

I usually have a maintenance contract with the client and when they need pages added, i do it all for them. This is a great selling point on a maintenance contract. "While we could develop a content management system that not only alllows you to edit current pages but also allows you to add pages following a template, this is not the best way to keep your site easily found in search engines. After developing your site, we will have done research on your target market and the best keywords your site should utilize to achieve high rankings which will be applied to the pages your site starts with. But if you add pages later, you won't be able to apply the intellectual property we have to develop the most targeted, search engine optimized pages. With a maintenance contract, we will do all this and more while developing your pages."

you know what would be cool? if somehow google could release the algorithm it uses for google adsense (or adwords, not sure which is which. the one that displays ads in content sites that is targeted) to allow a web developer to attach it to a CMS and when a client adds a page, it finds out what the page is about and adds all the necessary SEO things (title tag (both page and a href), alt tags, keywords...) that way websites would be perfectly optimized for search engines, since google actually did the SEO. might not work, but sounds good in theory

BrettP · Oct 16, 2003, 01:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The article is precise and not too long or too short in regards to the headline.
The article keeps you reading. You think it is too short because you may want to know more about search engine optimiSation. I think the point Mister Poole makes is that webdevelopers need to know more about search engine rankings or at least work close together with a SEO company.
Good article Mister Poole!!!

Hi All,

The author here.

You've pretty much nailed it with this post. As much as I would have like to talk about keyword density, search term research methodologies, linking strategies and the copywriting work which makes up the majority of the SEO work, I wanted to keep the article focused specifically on design considerations for the non-SEO Web developers out there.

If the web developer can build a good template for dynamic pages, it makes the actual search engine optimisation process a lot easier for the website manager (and the SEO consultant) to perform, and saves the website going back into development post-release.

With regard to the CMS suggestion and the editable areas of a page, I see your point that great copy can get stomped on by careless editors. However, search engine optimisation strategies change constantly over the life of a website and flexiblity is required to keep ahead of the game. (If you are in fact the SEO and the Web developer, you have access to the site, so this functionality may not seem as important of course)

Also, it prevents the client having to return time and time again to the web developer to effect endless changes. One of the reasons content management systems were created was to avoid just this scenario.

I'll try to stop by as often as I can to answer any specific questions folks may have.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anonymous

(your sss still tickle me - I will not forget your article because of that. Is the Z broken on your keyboard?

I'm kinda glad it's an S here in Australia, it saves me time having to compete against those crafty Americans

M. Johansson · Oct 16, 2003, 02:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by MG315

you know what would be cool? if somehow google could release the algorithm it uses for google adsense (or adwords, not sure which is which. the one that displays ads in content sites that is targeted) to allow a web developer to attach it to a CMS and when a client adds a page, it finds out what the page is about and adds all the necessary SEO things (title tag (both page and a href), alt tags, keywords...) that way websites would be perfectly optimized for search engines, since google actually did the SEO. might not work, but sounds good in theory

This is exactly what was the idea with meta tags. Unfortunately, people just abused it.

Oct 13, 2003, 01:28	#1
ArticleBot SitePoint Articles Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 0	Discussion thread for Search Engine Optimisation for Web Developers This is a dedicated thread for discussing the SitePoint article 'Search Engine Optimisation for Web Developers'

Oct 13, 2003, 13:05	#5
Shawn Weeks SitePoint Addict Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Charleston, S.C. Posts: 323	Yes.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Oct 13, 2003, 01:28	#2
Anonymous SitePoint Community Guest Posts: n/a	Article started out nicely, but i'm kind of surprised there are no further pages. I expected a sitepoint-class article but this one isn't.

Oct 13, 2003, 09:32	#3
MG315 SitePoint Guru Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 818	overall its a pretty good article, but i disagree with one of the last points in which it is said that the client should have the ability to not only edit content but also edit title, heading, alt and meta tags. Our search engine optimization consists of researching the best keywords (which relevant keywords are most searched but have the lowest amount of competition) and using those keywords we write interesting keyword rich title and alt tags and have professionally written copy (text) for the first page and any other content that will remain static (won't need to be edited. ex - upcoming events wouldnt be part of this, but services would). This copy is keyword rich and written with the intent to convince the reader to buy the companies product or service, contact the company, or whatever it is the company wishes to achieve through the site. While frequent updates to a site are necessary, the site's main information should stay the same. allowing a content manager the ability to mess with the prewritten content and tags without proper research can be detrimental to the integrity of the site and destroy one of the major parts of their search engine optimization. client updates are necessary, but limit them to what needs updating and keep that which is important (company information, mission statement, description of services...) and anything professionally written untouched. Professional copywriting is expensive so make sure it won't be ruined a few months later by some employee updating the site.

Oct 13, 2003, 09:35	#4
Anonymous SitePoint Community Guest Posts: n/a	Optimisation Shouldn't it be spelled Optimization?

Oct 13, 2003, 13:15	#6
AWilliams SitePoint Evangelist Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: UK Posts: 554	Optimisation is the British spelling.

Oct 13, 2003, 13:33	#7
Anonymous SitePoint Community Guest Posts: n/a	It's like spelled and spellt. Is it the same thing with learned and learnt? Or is learnt even a word?

Oct 13, 2003, 14:34	#8
Anonymous SitePoint Community Guest Posts: n/a	Is there some sort of engine that will allow you to test for search engine compliance, much like the xHTML evaluators?

Oct 13, 2003, 18:51	#9
Anonymous SitePoint Community Guest Posts: n/a	Optimisation is also the way we Australians spell. And Spellt is not a word. Spelt is a word (and a type of wheat), so is learnt (a word, not a wheat). The way words are spelt is something I learnt at school.

Oct 13, 2003, 20:10	#10
KC Fine Tuned Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 2,468	This thread is getting off-topic. Anymore anonymous posts off-topic will not be allowed.

Oct 14, 2003, 09:44	#12
Anonymous SitePoint Community Guest Posts: n/a	Nice stuff. But I guess the article ended rather abrubtly! There could have been more details.. JD

Oct 14, 2003, 14:54	#13
aspen Serial Publisher Join Date: Aug 1999 Location: East Lansing, MI USA Posts: 13,283	Awfully short.

Oct 14, 2003, 15:59	#14
M. Johansson Wanna-be Apple nut Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Halmstad, Sweden Posts: 7,614	I also got the feeling that the second and third page was missing.

Oct 15, 2003, 03:01	#16
Anonymous SitePoint Community Guest Posts: n/a	The article is precise and not too long or too short in regards to the headline. The article keeps you reading. You think it is too short because you may want to know more about search engine optimiSation. I think the point Mister Poole makes is that webdevelopers need to know more about search engine rankings or at least work close together with a SEO company. Good article Mister Poole!!! (your sss still tickle me - I will not forget your article because of that. Is the Z broken on your keyboard?

Oct 15, 2003, 05:20	#17
Anonymous SitePoint Community Guest Posts: n/a	Was hoping to find some more specifics to help me and now I am wondering what I should do about the issues raised.

Oct 15, 2003, 05:26	#18
Anonymous SitePoint Community Guest Posts: n/a	I also felt the article was too short. I was just getting ready for the good part when it ended.

Oct 15, 2003, 09:10	#19
Anonymous SitePoint Community Guest Posts: n/a	Good article as reminders, however, the article should have gone farther, more detail, new information.

Oct 15, 2003, 12:08	#20
Anonymous SitePoint Community Guest Posts: n/a	It would have been nice to see more on META Data and the criteria that the various search engine spiders are looking for. Like keyword frequency in body text etc.

Oct 15, 2003, 16:31	#21
Stancy_McKatt SitePoint Zealot Join Date: May 2002 Location: NW Tennessee, USA Posts: 166	I agree that this artical should have been a bit longer. Some explanations on how to fix the problems brought out would have been really helpful.

Oct 15, 2003, 17:20	#22
hotnuts21 eCommerce specialist Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Aberystwyth, UK Posts: 1,455	If i get time next week I can answer some of the questions, and those I cant answer i will send to Aspen just kidding chris!! Actually start emailing or Pm'ing me with specific questions and I will do my best to answer them, which should provide a resource for people.