Spiders don’t use Screen Readers (SEO vs Web Accessibility)

How often have you been asked “so if we don’t use Flash, this will be searchable/accessible, right”? As though there is some new compound word describing a site whose content is easily available to all non-human user agents.

Ah, we should be so lucky! While some coding practices aid in both SEO and web accessibility, there are some fundamental differences between the practices.

One of the most basic differences is the intent. When looking at a web project, it is completely acceptable to prioritize as to which content you want to be indexed for a search engine—for example, a company may not care if their short-lived events data gets indexed. SEO is about attracting traffic to your site. In contrast, web accessibility is about ensuring an individual can use your site once he’s on it.

Up until, oh, two weeks ago, Flash was commonly considered to be unsearchable. A way to ensure the content of the site could still be indexed (and therefore show up in google) was to write the content to the HTML page, and then if the visitor had Flash available, overlay the static text with a richer experience. This worked fine to allow a search engine spider to index the content, however, it didn’t always provide a user of assistive technology a good experience.

There is a common belief that users of assistive technologies don’t or can’t access Flash, so they would get the stripped down, text-only version. This isn’t always the case, they may get the Flash-enabled version, like other human visitors. Well, except their actual experience is significantly different..

For anyone who has never seen a screen reader in action, I highly recommend you check out this Introduction to Screen Readers movie.

Flash has had accessibility properties available to developers since Flash MX, and Adobe Flex provides built-in “accessible components.” However, unlike the recent announcement about .swf indexing not requiring any additional effort on the behalf of developers, creating an accessible .swf experience does require some work. As well, accessibility for .swfs depends on MSAA (Microsoft Active Accessibility), so it is platform dependent. Even a diligent developer will find his hard work is all for naught if his visitor is on a MAC.

As you can see, “searchable” and “accessible” cannot be used interchangeably. While the tactics for each don’t necessarily conflict, there are different goals and different considerations to take into account.

5 thoughts on “Spiders don’t use Screen Readers (SEO vs Web Accessibility)

  • Zune as well as ipod device: A lot of people examine the particular Microsoft zune to touch, but after looking at just how slim and also remarkably small , gentle it can be, I ponder over it to become fairly exclusive cross that combines characteristics regarding the Feel along with the Nano. It is quite multi-colored and beautiful OLED monitor can be slightly smaller compared to touchscreen display, though the gamer itself seems a lot smaller and lighter. It weighs about 2/3 while a great deal, which is noticeably more compact in width along with height, whilst being merely a hair heavier.

  • The brand new Microsoft zune browser is actually surprisingly very good, however, not as good as your iPod’s. It truely does work effectively, nevertheless is not as rapidly because Firefox, and it has the clunkier software. Should you at times consider using the web browser it’s not an issue, but if you intend to see the internet much from the PMP then your iPod’s more substantial display and much better browser could possibly be important.

  • I’ll equipment this review to 2 kinds of people: existing Zune entrepreneurs who will be contemplating upgrading, and the ones wanting to decide involving any Microsoft zune plus an iPod. (There are many players worth taking into consideration around, much like the Panasonic Walkman Times, however i hope this offers you adequate info to produce an educated selection of the Zune compared to gamers other than ipod series too.)

Comments are closed.