SEO and Accessibility

[kalidust]

I often see websites that have duplicate navigations, i.e. either top or left and then again at the bottom.

Although I still have much to learn on accessibility, I do focus on it. It is my understanding that having duplicate navigations could be confusing regarding accessibility, especially for a non-sighted person.

I usually add an anchor at the beginning of the nav, and then at the bottom of the pages have a "go to navigation" link.

Is duplicate navigations important for SEO?

[Copywriter]

Duplicate navigation is important to SEO if you have graphic buttons in your primary nav bar, or if you use mouseovers, DHMTL, etc. In those cases, the engines aren't able to read the text associated with the links. You'll want to have a text nav bar (most commonly placed at the bottom) in order to guide the engines to other pages within your site.

I don't find duplicate nav bars confusing, personally. I get aggravated when sites don't place duplicate nav bars at the top and bottom because it makes me have to do more work by scrolling up and down on the page repeatedly.

[kalidust]

Thanks for the feedback Karon. Is the SE able to read the alt text (provided that alt text was used) on graphic navs?

Duplicate navs aren't confusing to me either, however I have been told that it can be for those who use screen readers.

Also, for those who use screen readers and come across a site with duplicate navs, they have to listen to the nav a 2nd time. Not that would always be a bad thing, but having some kind of link for them to skip the nav is helpful.

[Copywriter]

SEs can read ALT tags if they are used, but that doesn't help with them being able to follow the links.

[kalidust]

SEs can't follow the links that is on a graphic?

[Copywriter]

Hang on... that's getting outside the realm of copywriting. I just called for reinforcements. :p

[kalidust]

Originally posted by Copywriter
Hang on... that's getting outside the realm of copywriting. I just called for reinforcements. :p

LOL

Good :) I really want to get more into accessibility, however I also want to understand more on SEO, and how to work with both of them so that one thing doesn't effect the other.

[Bernard]

SEs have no problem with HTML image links (and their ALT attributes). They might have problems with Javascript, Flash, etc., so your primary nav bar may or may not be spiderable depending upon how "flashy" you are.

In addition to SEs, some people surf with Javascript, images and plugins (Flash) disabled, so it is always good to include a straight text navigation.

I personally like having navigation at the top and bottom of pages - especially if they are long pages. In this case, convenience = better usability IMO.

Is this a case where usability and accessibility are at odds? I'm not sure. If any members here use screen readers, perhaps they will chime in.

If what you describe is true, then participating in forums must be excrutiatingly mind numbing as the same navigation is repeated with every post in a thread...

[polarmate]

Originally posted by Copywriter
SEs can read ALT tags if they are used, but that doesn't help with them being able to follow the links.
SEs can and do follow links wrapped around images. They index alt text (or alt attributes not alt tags - pet peeve of many, me included :D ) btu use it for ranking only when the image is hyperlinked.

Duplicate nav bars are usually placed when the main nav bar is rendered using flash or javascript. There is no need for a dup text-only nav bar when the main nav bar uses images. However from a usability point of view, it works well if there is a text-only non-intrusive nav bar at the bottom for the reason that Karon stated - the user does not have to scroll up to navigate to another page/section of the web site.

You can use the lynx viewer from delorie.com to see what a text reader might see when they surf your web site.

[polarmate]

:D what Bernard said so much better than I did!!

[WebSavvy]

On a Linux computer alt text is clickable like a link is if you use the http:// inside the alt text.

Example:
<img src="/images/somthing.gif" height="5" width="5" border="0" alt="http://www.domain-name.com/">

If the link you have is placed on the graphic using CSS, yes, it CAN be followed.

For example let's say you have a navbar background and place some buttons on it. The buttons don't have any text, but you can place it there using CSS positioning.

I hope that answers your question Karen. :)
Take a look at Blue's site. He has some CSS positioning going on and a graphic navbar (if I remember correctly) ?

[kalidust]

Originally posted by polarmate
However from a usability point of view, it works well if there is a text-only non-intrusive nav bar at the bottom for the reason that Karon stated - the user does not have to scroll up to navigate to another page/section of the web site.



For my own use, I agree that it does help to not have to scroll up. From a usability / convenience stand point, does having a "go to navigation" help if there is not a navigation at the bottom of the page?

[Bernard]

There are lots of designers who add "To The Top" links throughout a page (not just at the bottom) for convenience. I personally never use them because it clutters up the URL history in my Back button (which I use a lot).

[ihelpyou]

Hi Karen, Bernard's post is spot on.

I feel that the double nav is almost mandatory if the first nav is not a direct html type link. The need for 'text links' for disability issues far outweighs any 'stress' involved because the reader is reading things twice. :)

[kalidust]

I see your point regarding SEO Doug. Many of my customers are disability organizations, I do need to focus on the accessibility side of it. I'm afraid that something will be sacrificed no whatever which way I go with this.

[kalidust]

Originally posted by savvy1
On a Linux computer alt text is clickable like a link is if you use the http:// inside the alt text.

Example:
<img src="/images/somthing.gif" height="5" width="5" border="0" alt="http://www.domain-name.com/">

If the link you have is placed on the graphic using CSS, yes, it CAN be followed.

For example let's say you have a navbar background and place some buttons on it. The buttons don't have any text, but you can place it there using CSS positioning.

I hope that answers your question Karen. :)
Take a look at Blue's site. He has some CSS positioning going on and a graphic navbar (if I remember correctly) ?

Hi Deb, I thought that links on graphics could be followed. I'm not sure how having a link as the alt text on a graphic would be accepted for any accessibility standarsds.

I'm aware of using css positioning (but haven't used it myself yet). I've seen Blue's site and it it great, but with a bottom nav, that still would involve a site having 2 navs, which I want to avoid for accessibility.

Frustrating in what works for one thing hurts another.

Thanks everyone for all the input and feedback :)

[Darren]

I'm SORRY if this sounds like a daft question but I've been told that their is a way how to make Flash links, and some Flash content, spiderable. I don't mean duplicating content in HTML, there is some other way. It's got all to do with accessibility - it enables screen readers for blind to read links (and content).

PS) I'm new to all this but as I will be needing this information for future builds I would be very gratful for any answers Thankyou

[kalidust]

Darren, Flash 10 has accessibility features on it that allow you to enter text information so that allow screen readers to read it.

I've only dabbled a bit with Flash a while back, so I don't recall how it's done.

[ihelpyou]

Hi Darren, You can also use a <noemb></noemb> tag and put text and links in that tag for flash.

You are much better off to make sure a page is not completely in flash. It's bad for "all" users and bad for search engines. Website owners and some designers think flash is great. They fail to realize that their visitors don't like it for the most part.

[Blue]

Originally posted by ihelpyou
Hi Darren, You can also use a <noemb></noemb> tag and put text and links in that tag for flash.

You are much better off to make sure a page is not completely in flash. It's bad for "all" users and bad for search engines. Website owners and some designers think flash is great. They fail to realize that their visitors don't like it for the most part. There are, of course, exceptions to this "in general" rule. Entertainment sites come to mind as a possible exception.

Your best alternative, when using flash, is to provide a flash alternative to your HTML site or pages.

And make sure that the root of the site is in HTML.

[chrishirst]

<noembed></noembed> are a Netscape specific tag set

you need to use <noobject></noobject> tags which should work in all current browsers

[ihelpyou]

Thanks Chris. I did not know that. I've never heard of the noobject tag before. :)

blue is right. Much better to give an alternative html page for those who want it.

You can also simply detect ANY users with disabilities at the server level and send them to either the flash page (no disability) or the html page (has disability).

[polarmate]

There is no NOOBJECT tag - at least in the W3C specs. I've never heard of it either. Have you used this successfully, Chris?

W3C recommends that you simply include the text within the OBJECT tag and useragents that cannot render the OBJECT tag should render the content within. Google now shows this content as snippets in the SERPs. I am not sure if any of the screen readers follow these standards.

I had posted about this here: http://www.ihelpyouservices.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=154248#post154248

[kalidust]

Anyone interested in downloading a free trial version of the screen reader JAWS can from

freedomscientific.com

[polarmate]

Thanks for that, Karen!

[kalidust]

Here's the direct link to the download

http://www.freedomscientific.com/fs_downloads/jaws_form.asp


This will give someone a better understanding of how a screen reader works and allows you to "hear" how your webpage sounds.

[chrishirst]

I must have been dreaming it from somewhere :D

but it does seem to work ok on the machine I have without the flash plugins (Moz IE6 NS6.2) installed.

maybe more testing required!

[kalidust]

Kewl!

Will you let us know how it turns out for you?

[Blue]

I made your link live, Karen. :)

[chrishirst]

aye you're absolutely correct noobject doesn't exist (well not in html anyway) I've obviously spent too long today writing VBCode (not even web related)

time to force the dog out for a walk I think!


:cheers:

[kalidust]

Originally posted by Blue
I made your link live, Karen. :)

Thanks Blue :)


For anyone who downloads it, I would love to hear how well it works for you in reading any sites in the way the sites are laid out.

[Darren]

I've just come across a white-paper that looks interesting,
http://www.markme.com/accessibility/files/whitepaper.htm

I'm going off to read it. Cheers everyone speak 2 u soon

[kalidust]

I was recently sent this if someone would like to try it.

IBM has developed the aDesigner is a disability simulator that helps Web designers ensure that their pages are accessible and usable by the visually impaired.

The java-based program looks at color contrast, alt tag text, as well as the usual 508 or WCAG settings.

It only works on Win2000 or WinXP, and requires J2SE Java Run-time Environment 1.4.1 or higher and IE6.

It gives a grade for accessibility (A+, A, C+, etc) and has a graph to show which accessibility issues are strong and which are weak.



Main site http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/tech/adesigner

FAQ http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/aw.nsf/FAQs/adesigner

[polarmate]

LOL, Chris! Browsers are not standards-compliant, although the current versions are more compliant than before, and do their best :rolleyes: to render the page, quirks and all. Which may be why you 'saw it work' :)

Karen, I downloaded the IBM tool and I seem to be getting -ve marks for not including longdesc - http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#long-descriptions - for my linked images even though I have specified the ALT attribute. Know what that is about and why this would be an acessibility issues?? :confused:

[kalidust]

Manisha, I've seen longdesc (which is actually a link to another page for the description) recommended sometimes for images. IMO I feel that the recommendation is often uncalled for, and should be used on a case by case basis.