7 replies to this topic

[ladybird]

I've been reading the threads about how to do this and it seems that the best way to optimise a flash site is to create an HTML version of the site and link to it from the flash pages using a no script tag.

I've got a couple of questions about this though:

1. Where is the ideal place to put the links to the HTML pages on the flash page? I'm guessing at the top of the page....(?)

2. Is it best to put a link to all the HTML pages or am I better off just linking to an HTML site map of the HTML pages- or both?

3. Does it matter if the index page for the site is a flash page (i.e. the page which says “enter site”)- this is the page in my signature?

4. If the index page is a flash page and I submit the site to directories I will be submitting a flash page because usually you have to submit your index page. What will the implications of this be from an SEO perspective if I have linked to my HTML pages from my home page?

[OldWelshGuy]

You are really fighting a losing battle with a flash site. If your having a html site developed, why not split the flash into elements and reconstruct the entire original site with flash animmations and plain text effects where possible. This will certainly be thre route I would travel.

[jehochman]

There is not such thing as a Flash site. Websites are built with HTML. If you don't have HTML pages, you don't have a website.

As OldWelchGuy suggested, you need to start from scratch. Sorry, that's the ugly truth. At least you can recycle the Flash movie to make images and Flash elements to decorate your new web pages.

[Martin C]

Just do a Google search for SEO Flash websites you will find a lot of helpful and unhelpful advice. Some adopt cloaking as the way to go but I would say that is a dodgy path to take - others though do have some pointers.

Google does index Flash so there is some things you can do, but you need to realises that Flash-only SEO is like doing SEO with two hands tied behind your back and your shoe laces tied together.

You still have the title tags for example that you can utilise.

Many people who have Flash sites have a HTML version, or rely totally on indrect or other marketing that doesn't rely on search engine traffic. For example articles can still attract traffic to a website.

I think that Flash still has a purpose, Flash-only websites can still be the right choice for niche websites - but in the main I would also say that a lot of Flash-only websites have sever usability issues and high maintenance costs. What can appear to be quite clever for a first time vistor can become very annoying on subsequent visits when the bells and whistles have lost their wow appeal.

Before going Flash only - you need to seriously consider if it is not a case of form over function.

[seadog]

I found this example of using Flash on a site and I am wondering if it would be considered cloaking. They are putting a bunch of HTML content in a div tag called "No Flash Content" The initial style of the div is not hidden. However in javascript they test to see if the flash plugin is installed(2nd code segment).

CODE

             <OBJECT classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,0,0"
WIDTH="560" HEIGHT="242" ALIGN="top">
               <PARAM NAME=movie VALUE="images/franch2.swf">
               <PARAM NAME=quality VALUE=high>
               <PARAM NAME=bgcolor VALUE=#FFFFFF>
               <EMBED src="images/franch2.swf" quality=high bgcolor=#FFFFFF  WIDTH="560" HEIGHT="242" ALIGN="top"
TYPE="application/x-shockwave-flash" PLUGINSPAGE="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer"></EMBED>
             </OBJECT>

             <OBJECT classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000"
codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,0,0"
WIDTH="560" HEIGHT="780" id="ownerbot" ALIGN="left">
               <PARAM NAME=movie VALUE="images/franbot2.swf">
               <PARAM NAME=quality VALUE=high>
               <PARAM NAME=bgcolor VALUE=#FAF3E1>
               <EMBED src="images/franbot2.swf" quality=high bgcolor=#FAF3E1  WIDTH="560" HEIGHT="780" NAME="ownerbot" ALIGN="left"
TYPE="application/x-shockwave-flash" PLUGINSPAGE="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer"></EMBED>
             </OBJECT>
<div id="NoFlashContent" style="width:400px; ">
<h1>Ongoing Operational Benefits And Ongoing Marketing Benefits</h1>

<!-- a bunch of other html content here basically including all the text present in flash file --!>

</div>

Then in their javascript it looks like they try and dectect if flash is installed and can play the movie. If everything is ok they set visibility to false on the "NoFlashContent" block

CODE

var MM_contentVersion = 6;

var plugin = (navigator.mimeTypes && navigator.mimeTypes["application/x-shockwave-flash"]) ? navigator.mimeTypes["application/x-shockwave-flash"].enabledPlugin : 0;

if ( plugin ) {

 var words = navigator.plugins["Shockwave Flash"].description.split(" ");

    for (var i = 0; i < words.length; ++i)

    {

 if (isNaN(parseInt(words[i])))

 continue;

 var MM_PluginVersion = words[i];

    }

    var MM_FlashCanPlay = MM_PluginVersion >= MM_contentVersion;

}

else if (navigator.userAgent && navigator.userAgent.indexOf("MSIE")>=0

  && (navigator.appVersion.indexOf("Win") != -1)) {

    document.write('<SCR' + 'IPT LANGUAGE=VBScript\> \n'); //FS hide this from IE4.5 Mac by splitting the tag

    document.write('on error resume next \n');

    document.write('MM_FlashCanPlay = ( IsObject(CreateObject("ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash." & MM_contentVersion)))\n');

    document.write('</SCR' + 'IPT\> \n');

}

if ( MM_FlashCanPlay ) {
    obj = document.getElementById( 'NoFlashContent' );
    if ( obj != null )    obj.style.display = 'none';
} else{
    // NoFlashContent
}

So is that cloaking? Looks like the SE's are indexing the text in the NoFlashContent section as they probably should but as the flash movie could contain totally different content than the text that is eventually hidden it seems a little fishy

[jehochman]

the flash movie could contain totally different content

If the Flash movie is totally different, this is a "quality problem" that could get the site banned. (Evil!)

If the movie is essentially the same content, then this is accessibility programming. (Good!)

[seadog]

If the Flash movie is totally different, this is a "quality problem" that could get the site banned.  (Evil!)

If the movie is essentially the same content, then this is accessibility programming.  (Good!)

how would the SE's be able to tell if the content in the flash movie was similar to the text content. I know they are able to index some flash so is that how? Interesting stuff

[jehochman]

Somebody rats on the website. There's a complaint form you can use to report search spam to Google.