<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: what&#8217;s the deal with&#8230; findability, searchability, indexability and accessibility?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.afhill.com/blog/2008/07/01/whats-the-deal-with-findability-searchability-indexability-and-accessibility/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.afhill.com/blog/2008/07/01/whats-the-deal-with-findability-searchability-indexability-and-accessibility/</link>
	<description>Accessibility, Social Media, Online Branding, User-Centered Design -- Web Development isn't all about code anymore!</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:31:40 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Andrea</title>
		<link>http://www.afhill.com/blog/2008/07/01/whats-the-deal-with-findability-searchability-indexability-and-accessibility/#comment-30728</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 02:38:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.afhill.com/blog/?p=964#comment-30728</guid>
		<description>Hi Matt, thanks for stopping by! Your comment about both SEO and Accessibility  benefitting from strong IA and semantic markup is definitely well-received. That's actually a major part of the *real* blog post I was supposed to be writing when this one came into being. I wanted to highlight how coding for one unwittingly led to the other in that respect,  (as Andy Hagans wrote in &lt;a href="http://www.alistapart.com/articles/accessibilityseo" rel="nofollow"&gt;High Accessibility Is Effective Search Engine Optimization&lt;/a&gt;.)   I was then going to call out the divergences, particularly in the area of interaction/navigation. I'll be interested to hear your thoughts on that one! :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Matt, thanks for stopping by! Your comment about both SEO and Accessibility  benefitting from strong IA and semantic markup is definitely well-received. That&#8217;s actually a major part of the *real* blog post I was supposed to be writing when this one came into being. I wanted to highlight how coding for one unwittingly led to the other in that respect,  (as Andy Hagans wrote in <a href="http://www.alistapart.com/articles/accessibilityseo" >High Accessibility Is Effective Search Engine Optimization</a>.)   I was then going to call out the divergences, particularly in the area of interaction/navigation. I&#8217;ll be interested to hear your thoughts on that one! <img src='http://www.afhill.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt Bailey</title>
		<link>http://www.afhill.com/blog/2008/07/01/whats-the-deal-with-findability-searchability-indexability-and-accessibility/#comment-30555</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt Bailey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:08:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.afhill.com/blog/?p=964#comment-30555</guid>
		<description>Andrea,

I like your analysis.  My definition of accessibility would be the ability of a website to be available to any device, at any connection, through any combination of computer, OS, or browser while retaining a persuasive message and the ability to navigate the content.  In this case, accessibility branches out to include mobile devices, cell phones, and commuters on laptops getting a 1K/hour connection.

The more I get into accessibility, I find that the majority of accessibility goes beyond programming and into the realm of usability, at which point, search engine optimization is simply a natural by-product.  I tend to find that many organizations focus on the technical aspects of accessibility, but neglect the usability and information architecture features that produce a well optimized, findable and searchable website.

I see your statement of SEO being a page-based mentality, however I would suggest that good SEO focuses on the information architecture in order to produce the most relevant pages as possible for ranking.  Ideally, it happens naturally, as the architecture points visitors and SE's to the most relevant pages for their query.

Thanks for the article - i wasn't ready to use my brain today, but Jennifer Laycock recommended that I visit your blog - subscribed now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Andrea,</p>
<p>I like your analysis.  My definition of accessibility would be the ability of a website to be available to any device, at any connection, through any combination of computer, OS, or browser while retaining a persuasive message and the ability to navigate the content.  In this case, accessibility branches out to include mobile devices, cell phones, and commuters on laptops getting a 1K/hour connection.</p>
<p>The more I get into accessibility, I find that the majority of accessibility goes beyond programming and into the realm of usability, at which point, search engine optimization is simply a natural by-product.  I tend to find that many organizations focus on the technical aspects of accessibility, but neglect the usability and information architecture features that produce a well optimized, findable and searchable website.</p>
<p>I see your statement of SEO being a page-based mentality, however I would suggest that good SEO focuses on the information architecture in order to produce the most relevant pages as possible for ranking.  Ideally, it happens naturally, as the architecture points visitors and SE&#8217;s to the most relevant pages for their query.</p>
<p>Thanks for the article - i wasn&#8217;t ready to use my brain today, but Jennifer Laycock recommended that I visit your blog - subscribed now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
