Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
I'd really like to see this issue updated.
In particular, I'm wondering, whether it is worth the effort, yet, to add sound (speech) in a language other than English. Also, what requirements to quality are recommended to get google's algo understand spoken language.
among other advices I found this point:
I raised a couple of questions on video and indexing here on webmasterworld the past two weeks. The fact, that interest in this subject is relatively low, indicates to me, that there are great chances in this field at the moment.
Also note this official Google blog post from 2008:
> most notably, the Google Code division recommends SWFObject script.
I bought a license for a different swf-player. Does this mean google is going to kick those tools out of the market with a free and self-developed application? Should I switch?
I did a search for the page I noticed yesterday with the image next to the search result and today there's no image...Go Figure. Other pages have images. Looks like it's totally random how Google is pulling the image off the video and putting it next to the page. No images are showing up in Yahoo as far as I can tell.
The tips on indexing video's are appreciated.
If you really mean 'how' (not 'whether';): Most players allow to define a specific dump-jpeg in case you provide one. Another option is the video-sitemap, where you may also specify an image.
> SWFObject is a relatively small script for detecting Flash capability and then writing the embed code into the page's source.
Well, this is what my player also does. How important do you regard the alternative content with respect to SEO? I did what this code should do: Explain to my visitor why the video cannot be played and advise him to download latest Adobe flash-player upgrade. But this explanation of course does hardly contain text describing the video-content.
Maybe I shoud add such text-content, because at the moment it is really just a video, thus completely unparseable. But I'm planning to learn more abouf swf and it's active scripting in order to add text and links inside the player in the near future. Do you think it is inevitable to buy adobe flash for developing such applications?
How important do you regard the alternative content with respect to SEO?
I find it to be huge, especially for Flash-heavy pages. The indexing of Flash text, at the moment, seems to be mostly for creating the snippet. But the html content can be indexed and actually get RANKED, according to the relevance of its content. That's something I still don't see much of for a pure flash url. If a Flash enabled browser clicks on the url, they still get served the Flash.
In this way, the approach used by the SWFobject script is simply a "better mousetrap", at least for now. When a non-Flash user agent gets served the HTML content by default, you've got something very sweet.
OK. But we should assume that google will improve this in the near future.
> But the html content can be indexed and actually get RANKED, according to the relevance of its content.
Sure. But this is old scholl. What I'm aiming at is: In a way the flash-player is a browser inside a browser. You may stuff a relatively small amount of screenspace with a potentially infinite set of content, including extra navigation. And sooner or later google will be able to read and index this. Chances are now to be ahead in this field, and time has always played a major role in indexing and ranking.
I think audio-to-text conversion/indexing may even be a sooner development, and I don't expect to see that within 2009 to any major degree.
SWFObject is not so very old school. Google only recommended it within the last half year, even though some sites have been enjoying the benefits for a good while longer than that.
I think audio-to-text conversion/indexing may even be a sooner development
[edited by: SEOMike at 4:14 pm (utc) on Jan. 6, 2009]
I think audio-to-text conversion/indexing may even be a sooner developmentI agree on this as well 100% so,
My question on the above statement is since we all know our sites need to be in compatible with the handicapped we are beginning to look at adding closed caption text to the videos we produce.
This will be audible to the blind and hearing impaired can read the text produced with the video software they use to view them.
Now that all said any comments on the value this will have on the SE's indexing and possible added search value?
I believe it is quite likely this will have a positive impact on ranking. From the very beginning of the internet search engines were said to be "blind" and guaranteed good ranking for text-rich-websites.
Flash-based-sites were largely ignored. It is sort of irony of history if now flash-videos and "understanding spoken language" may on another level again boost blind-friendly websites. But it'd be the spoken text, not the videos.
Again my question: Which languages? Only english?