Website Code Tidy-up/Make compliant

[dgphotography]

Hi

I have been informed my website is not compliant to the relevant web standards, and I am all too aware of how this will affect my google position.

I am looking for someone to tidy up the code and make it compliant. I am a new business and if Im honest havent got loads of money, so I need a competitive quote.

My site is a Flash site with an CMS 2.0. That is about all I know, so over to you.

site is davidgreensmith .co.uk

Thanks

 

[YODspica]

Many Flash sites are difficult to get noticed by google, although there are some techniques.

 

[SFD]

Hi David,

As your site is flash there is very little content for the SE's to index. Getting some text content on there would be my first suggestion.

I think making websites compliant is one of the final touches, whereas adding content should be the first.

 

[dgphotography]

Hi David,

As your site is flash there is very little content for the SE's to index. Getting some text content on there would be my first suggestion.

I think making websites compliant is one of the final touches, whereas adding content should be the first.

The whole site is flash apart from the splash page at the front. I am setting up a blog to give me the additional content, apart from that I dont know what else I can do to add text?

 

[SFD]

Are you getting someone to design and install the blog for you?

If you are I would seriously consider getting them to design the complete site using wordpress. They could make it look very similar to your current site but the search engines would actually be able to index the content on your site.

If you are wanting hits through search engines then this is the way you should be heading.

 

[An Oasis]

I have been informed my website is not compliant to the relevant web standards, and I am all too aware of how this will affect my google position...

I've never seen any proof that a website needs to compliant to the relevant web standards, or they'll kick yer arse down the SERP's.

 

[dgphotography]

Are you getting someone to design and install the blog for you?

If you are I would seriously consider getting them to design the complete site using wordpress. They could make it look very similar to your current site but the search engines would actually be able to index the content on your site.

If you are wanting hits through search engines then this is the way you should be heading.

I was going to get a them and use wordpress, I dont have the spare money to get a blog made.

 

[dgphotography]

I've never seen any proof that a website needs to compliant to the relevant web standards, or they'll kick yer arse down the SERP's.

Im only going on the advice Ive been getting from some other web designers. If there is no difference, whats the point of having web standards?

 

[fisicx]

The compliancy isn't really a problem but the flash is. You can easily get rid of the flash and replace it with siome highly indexable HTML pages.

And as already suggested, if you are going to have a blog put the whole site on wordpress as there are some nifty galley plugins you can use.

 

[dgphotography]

The flash looks so much better though! Indexable text is one thing, but in my line of work its the Photos that does the talking! Im not looking to completely change my site!

The blog is an extra which will help with the indexable content. So what you guys are saying is I dont need to worry about web standards!?

Adobe and Google have also said they can spider the flash content to an extent. It will only get better with time. But hey back to the point.

 

[SFD]

If you are keeping your website as-is then I wouldn't worry about web standards at all.

 

[chromofoam]

Contact primate designs, they will be able to help you - they helped me.

 

[Dawg]

I'd think about embedding a photoblogging site into a website. Use the website for content and SEO, and the blog for the pics. I prefer Pixelpost to any of the WP photo adaptations.
(You could embed Pixelpost into a WP set up...might get messy.)
Lose the Flash. Doesn't serve any purpose, or doen't have enough purpose to be a valid choice.
Web standards are of secondary importance, nice to aim in their general direction but don't get all geeky-freaky about them.

 

[dgphotography]

I found this on for wordpress prophotoblogs .com/

This is what I was thinking of using for the blog, its completely customizable.

 

[fisicx]

The flash looks so much better though! Indexable text is one thing, but in my line of work its the Photos that does the talking! Im not looking to completely change my site!

But it doesn't work on a mobile phone! And you don't need the popups and you can get it looking just as good with a bit of CSS.

The blog is an extra which will help with the indexable content. So what you guys are saying is I dont need to worry about web standards!?

The blog won't help. You don't need to worry about standards.

Adobe and Google have also said they can spider the flash content to an extent. It will only get better with time. But hey back to the point.

They can only index the text. The bit that might make a big difference to your search engine presence are your images and they really are invisible and will remain so for many years if you keep the flash.

If you don't want to change the that's fine but adding a contact form is only really possible from the homepage. Which means those flash popups are even more redundant.

 

[woodss]

Web standards are of secondary importance, nice to aim in their general direction but don't get all geeky-freaky about them.

Why build a website if it isn't going to be done properly. Reasons for web standards include maintainability, structural integrity and accessibility. And remember, the worlds biggest blind visitor is Google. If your pages are structured correctly and contain decent content, you'll make it much easier for search engines to index them.

I can't see why anyone wouldn't make their pages compliant when it's not exactly difficult to do.

 

[dgphotography]

But it doesn't work on a mobile phone! And you don't need the popups and you can get it looking just as good with a bit of CSS.

If you were looking for a wedding photographer, would you be looking for them on a mobile phone?

 

[Dawg]

Why build a website if it isn't going to be done properly. Reasons for web standards include maintainability, structural integrity and accessibility. And remember, the worlds biggest blind visitor is Google. If your pages are structured correctly and contain decent content, you'll make it much easier for search engines to index them.

I can't see why anyone wouldn't make their pages compliant when it's not exactly difficult to do.

Not adhereing to Web standards is not the same as not doing it properly. The reasons you gave for standards are valid but the marginal benefit of adhereing slavishly to web standards is less than the benefit of a site that attracts and converts more visitors. That is the essential tradeoff, and one which large players, for instance Amazon, and Google, are well aware of. Pages can be well structured, very readable and yet non compliant.

This argument is as old as, and as futile as, macs vs pcs. I'm for conversion rather than W3C badges.
Now, end of hijack?

 

[woodss]

I might be if I was out and about.

If I clicked on your site from a Google search on my phone it'd be nice if it were written using web standards so that the browser on my phone could parse through and at least show me the information without any styling.

Mobile phone usage shouldn't be overlooked - what if the bride and groom were discussion options over coffee in Starbucks, and decided to do a quick search for local photographers using their phone? Wouldn't you like to be able to service their request?

It's like the days gone by - people who advertised in the Yellow Pages etc didn't have photographs on display; what they did have was have their contact details, and people could call them up... then it's up to you to reel them in to show off your photos.

Seriously - mobile phones are not to be discounted!

 

[woodss]

Amazon etc were built loooong before thee were any decent web standards, and also before there were browsers capable of conforming to them.

I'm sure they'd take a different approach if they could build their massive sites from scratch today.

 

[dgphotography]

Ok, so saying I was to go with your opinions!

I paid, £137 for my site. Could I have got a CSS site with the same capabilities, design, look, slick transitions, music and a content management system for the same money?

As a new business I have had to be really strict with money. The new business was never planned, I got made redundant and I have started with next to nothing. I have no outgoings and most of photographic equipment I could need. Essentially my start-up funds have consisted of my Job seekers allowance of £60 per week.

 

[Dawg]

Amazon etc were built loooong before thee were any decent web standards, and also before there were browsers capable of conforming to them.

I'm sure they'd take a different approach if they could build their massive sites from scratch today.

Amazon and W3C were both started in 1994...

 

[woodss]

Yes, but the standards weren't public in 1994...

 

[dgphotography]

Ok guys, I was hoping for some advice and not a full scale war on what is better. Any advice on my previous post?!

 

[chromofoam]

my view is that the best direction for you to go in is the one which gets you the most business....

...for your line of work, a website is really just an extended business card, and a showcase of your work. Nothing more.

Get a blog, make some microsites to increase traffic, check out Google Analytics to find out where your traffic is coming from (this is all stuff that I've been advised to do for my site) and rely on traditional methods of finding business; Networking, using your interpersonal skills, and using a telephone. The internet can do you favours, but don't rely on it.

 

[SFD]

Ok, so saying I was to go with your opinions!

I paid, £137 for my site. Could I have got a CSS site with the same capabilities, design, look, slick transitions, music and a content management system for the same money?

As a new business I have had to be really strict with money. The new business was never planned, I got made redundant and I have started with next to nothing. I have no outgoings and most of photographic equipment I could need. Essentially my start-up funds have consisted of my Job seekers allowance of £60 per week.

OK, money is an issue.

At christmas I built my Dad a site in wordpress, here is the thread:

http://www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=91265

I had never used wordpress before and I think in total it cost me £25

I admit the site isn't the prettiest.

The site now ranks quite high on the first page of google for ~10 chosen key phrases.

Last week the site brought in 6 new customers which is an extra £1000 + future business.

OK, it's not the prettiest but at this moment in time which would you prefer?

Another member on the forum owns this site

I believe he did this himself in wordpress. Quite a nice looking site in the same field as you which could easily be optimised to get good search results

 

[dgphotography]

Yeah thats good, but being a photographer, the look and images are really key to my success. So it needs to be quite "pretty"

I think I will add the blog and hope that it will add the content I need. If I can get the business going with that, then I will consider a new site in the future.

 

[SFD]

These might be of use to you.

http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2008/01/08/100-excellent-free-high-quality-wordpress-themes/

Good luck with the blog

 

[mike1337]

I usually advise not to build a complete website in flash... only where its needed (gallery/animations) this way you get the best of both worlds.

 

[awebapart.com]

I paid, £137 for my site. Could I have got a CSS site with the same capabilities, design, look, slick transitions, music and a content management system for the same money?

As a new business I have had to be really strict with money. The new business was never planned, I got made redundant and I have started with next to nothing. I have no outgoings and most of photographic equipment I could need. Essentially my start-up funds have consisted of my Job seekers allowance of £60 per week.

David, the biggest issue with your site is the music. Given your budget, more likely than not, you have not paid any licensing nor got any permission to use that music (popular mainstream music, Stereophonics?) on your site, which means you run the real risk of getting mcps-prs-alliance.co.uk asking you for quite a lot of money. In which case your cheap website could end up costing you a lot of money.

Adhering to web standards isn't going to bring you search engine rankings directly, only incorporating search engine friendliness and search engine optimisation will do this.

Converting a Flash image gallery with no text, to a HTML/XHTML/CSS image gallery with no text isn't going to bring you much in the way of search engine optimisation either, since search engines like text, they don't care what your site or images look like (adding descriptive image alt tags to normal HTML would be a start).

Is your Flash gallery currently content manageable?

You asked about alternative solutions for people on your kind of budgets, and for your budget, situation and domain name (.co.uk), I would have recommended purchasing the domain name from a domain name registrar (like 123-reg), then making use of the free Microsoft Office Live sitebuilder. This system has been used by a number of UK photographers (some websites better than others), it has a CMS, a gallery (including an animated gallery without using Flash), and has some SEO capabilities.

Microsoft Office Live has been discussed on a few threads on this forum before.