Or has my excuse for not keeping up with flash no longer valid?
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?newsid=21851
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
I think you still have quite a bit of freedom to say to your clients, “The old ways are still much better.” Flash, even if it has become semi-transparent to Google, is still not a semantic format. There is nothing even remotely similar to the HTML structure of headers, divs, lists, and paragraphs to make your content understandable to the search engine.
Google is very clever, and has googolplex servers to throw at the problem, but barring some major advance in machine intelligence or a ground-up restructuring of the Flash file format, there’s just not as many ways for their server to pluck meaning out of what is a large and disjointed mass of text. Further, it does nothing in the case of Flash text that’s been rendered to pixels.
Walter
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
I was reading it more like this would be followed up by an upcoming CS4 Flash that has copy and links in the actionscript, perhaps the ability to tag images used… doesn’t sound that far off. All Flash is really missing is keeping a relatively small amount of data in tact as it converts to an animation.
Staying on topic, hopefully FW can add editing capabilities to this the same as changing background color and links.
The SERPS will be the only proof I’ll be looking for.
Jay
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options