|
|
Posted by Number 11950 - GPEMC! Replace number with 11950 on 09/20/06 00:18
"Dr John Stockton" <jrs@merlyn.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:jX2E5TB9H+DFFwy3@merlyn.demon.co.uk...
> JRS: In article <450caef2$0$33171$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net>,
> dated Sun, 17 Sep 2006 11:41:52 remote, seen in news:comp.infosystems.ww
> w.authoring.html, Number 11950 - GPEMC! Replace number with 11950
> <number@fieldcraft.biz> posted :
> >
> >Frames mess up your accessibility and search engine rankings - even the
> >noframes content is largely ignored in my experience. Google for
"Different
> >and yet indifferent", then have a look at www.fieldcraft.biz/topics
>
> Naive statement.
Perhaps. Like I later said, I may well have done something to deter the
search engines on my framed pages, but I am yet to find out exactly what
that is...
> Frame capability is harmless.
Agreed - only client-side scripting presents a risk. Even if you whitelist a
site (given you've disabled all client-side scripting by default, IE in the
"Internet Zone") and they load a page from another site in a frame - the
scripts from the white-listed site will run but the scripts from the other
site loaded in the frame will not run unless that other site is whitelisted
as well.
> Forcing frames is deleterious.
No doubt because it requires client-side scripting. There might be some
server-side methods but I wonder if this could present problems for some
brail readers or vision impaired visitors?
> A site can be designed to be fully usable without frames,
Plenty are, such as:
www.geoceanis.com
www.fieldcraft.com.au
www.qaisoft.com
However, I'm not so sure that the colour schemes are not deleterious! :^)
> but also to
> have, at the reader's request, an index (or other) frame. See via sig
> line 3.
Is there still a market amongst visitors for frame-set functionality? What
percentages of this year's visitors to http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk went on
to spend more than thrity seconds at http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/toc.htm
or http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/tic.htm?
BTW I think your site map is one of the best I've seen. Although I'd be
inclined to give, "Index to Pages within this Site" a page of its own. Also
I'd be inclined to give the rest of this index the same treatment as you've
given index items under the headings, "Astronomy & Astronautics", "4.
Computer Usage", "5. Date & Time", "8. Europe", & Particularly "13.3
Directories". The explanatory content makes the link targets much clearer
and I've heard that explanatory content attached to the links is good for
your search rankings... I noticed you are using formatted lists. Perhaps
some headings might improve search engine rankings (even if they have to go
outside the list stucture). I've read that a mix of noraml text and headings
is good for search engine rankings - but that was a couple of years back...
--
Timothy Casey GPEMC! >> 11950 is the number@fieldcraft.biz 2email
Terms & conditions apply. See www.fieldcraft.biz/GPEMC
Discover valid interoperable web menus, IE security, TSR Control,
& the most advanced speed reading application @ www.fieldcraft.biz
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|