Usability, Accessibility, Semantic, Web Standard and SEO Conflict

Posted: January 25, 2009 at 08:53:58 by Dani Iswara. Words count: 1401.
Last updated: August 9, 2009 at 03:54:01.

Again, Dani Iswara .Net post about usability, accessibility, semantic markup, web standard and SEO (Search Engine Optimization) with their conflicts. Another online-journal draft published. This is not an expert view. I am not an evangelist of those. It only based on my daily basis of blogging. I read some stories about SEO in other blogs. They already know about Google Webmaster Guidelines. How to get more traffic, website subscription, common acceptable design for search engines, building links, keywords research, etc. But I guess, there are missing links, misconceptions and myths. SEO is not black or white. SEO, technically is neither easy nor difficult. Of course, we can find many websites with so many comments, high traffic and PageRank (PR) but less/minimal technical effort. Yes, we do not need all technical rules/guidelines to be popular or to get more money on the Internet. In this topic, traffic or popularity is not the main target. This post is just my note that if we have to use the rules/guidelines, W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) as a best practice is the option. Actually, W3C is not a rule. It is just a recommendation. If you find a better idea, so there would be another best practice. In my opinion, we may use some basics (and I have my own opinion in practices):

Web Usability

Based on Wikipedia, usability is a term:
...used to denote the ease with which people can employ a particular tool or other human-made object in order to achieve a particular goal....the principles behind an object is perceived efficiency or elegance.
Web common sense is equal with visitors expected. Clickable title, 2-3 columns, underlining links, etc. But as long as visitors/readers/users easily use the web/weblog, the rules/guidelines are not that strict. Sometimes, as a volume-based Internet user (efficient and elegance in mind), sorry to say, I hate homepages which have:
  • a long scroll down
  • auto play/refresh content/widget
  • ..more on Yang Mengagetkan saat Menelusuri Web (in Indonesian; Dani Iswara .Net). Some successful websites of SEO are not usable.
In other cases, I do not like pages/comment pages which have too short in content. The last condition maybe good for your page and click-through impression, but not in my usability mind. :)

Web Accessibility

What is web accessibility? Introduction to Web Accessibility say:
...that people with disabilities can use the Web. More specifically, Web accessibility means that people with disabilities can perceive, understand, navigate, and interact with the Web, and that they can contribute to the Web. Web accessibility also benefits others, including older people with changing abilities due to aging.
Blind Internet users will often browse web pages by keyboard tabbing from one link to the next. Would they only hear of read more, click here, download, there, this, that, etc? But accessibility is not just for a blind people or blind tools/assistive technologies. Also, it is not just human first, then machine. It should works on both. Keywords stuffing in alt and anchor text link usually inaccessible. SEOers sometimes put their keywords in alt attribute which is not descriptive enough. Try to hear it using an aural agent. The other often use different link text for the same web page targeted. See some p*id reviews pages. Link text should (must?) be unique in each accessible pages. Yes, those are fine with web accessibility rules, but not usable in my mind. We should always check the status bar, where links would be landed. Are they visited links (better if they have special color for visited links)? Accessibility enhance usability. But SEO is not match with accessibility in this case. :)

Accessible for human and machines

So the point is web pages should be more available for all visitors (human and machines). Have widest access for multi media and devices (by screen sizes, multi platforms, handheld devices, etc). Easy access for disabled people means search crawlers would be easy to do the same. In other words, accessibility is crawlability (machine readability/findability) and search engine friendly in SEO. For human and machines, readability and auralability are user friendly. Alt attribute, in place of image, is what blind people will hear. In my opinion of SEO, usability and accesibility can increase web exposed to visitors. Related to visibility and reachability. I have another opinion based on availability of time information in permalink structure. See Accessible & Usable Permalink (in Indonesian; Dani Iswara .Net).

Semantic X/HTML

Semantic markup in nature (document hierarchy) will help accessibility. If we use <strong> and <emphasis> respectively rather than <b> and <i>, it is easier for aural agents (speech reader, screen reader) to read. Semantic codes or meaningfull markup will help developers to work with the meaning of source codes. Related to SEO, document structure (h1-h6 headings; do not skip any levels) are used by search engine to understand web page main topic. The keyword in title (h1) has a higher SEO score or priority rather than h2, and so on [?; I read it on webagogo dot be forum]. Semantically correct markup should enhance search engine ranking (based on folksonomy of meta search engine). What about double or more than one h1 tags on a page? There should be one h1 on each pages. At least from the DOM (Document Object Model) perspective, it only have one root. But having multiple h1 is still valid X/HTML. Are there a tricky SEO for multiple h1? The most important is it improves accessibility. Especially for users who skip heading to heading. I have another story about it, in Indonesian. Please read Semantik X/HTML, Aksesibilitas, SEO. Raven SEO Tools can check the semantic status of your web/blog pages. See some websites which got Score 100 by SEO Analyzer.

Web Standard

If we build website with (W3C) standard-compliant concept of technology, almost all of those above included. But web standard (validated website) does not mean semantically correct. Try it with some validators. It should works in any web browsers but does not mean looks with-no-different in every web browser. With the open web, means no proprietary/vendor lock-in and should have a wider support base (some HTML tags are propietary products). Then, it would be more accessible, crawable and readable. Users (human and machine) really do not care about your code--the well-structured markup and code validation. They only care about your content, your story, page load time, and page response time affecting download time. Machines, and Google too, love reduced server load and bandwidth consumption. Visitors have not seen a direct relationship between validated websites and good quality. They only need relevant content (not just keywords rich in a tricky way) rather than structural content to send your web pages to better search engine result pages or position (SERP). Using web standard will be effective and efficient in cost development and maintenance. Next, we could test our web pages with only some browsers which compliance in (W3C; open web) standards, see COI Web Standards Guidance for Browsers Testing.

SEO

SEOers try to land their products/services higher in a SERP. Someone try to share their idea and opinion through search engines. People need to know what you have. Pagination, comment paging, tagging, categorizing, archiving are very useful for usability (and folksonomy of search engines). But some SEOers said it would be identified as duplicate content/page(?) What about if it uses something like rel="nofollow" (and now we have rel="canonical")? I prefer to visit the real post rather than tag, category, archive or any bookmark pages showed by SERP. :) Search engines need to know your website quality. Why they have to trust you (read: your keywords). How is your online reputation? Better if our websites usable and accessible first, then leave Google do the rest. How to boost it? B*ying links? Sp*m commenting? Make a contest? Viral marketing? Join social networking? In this case, SEO = there always hidden tactics? :( Do you think a Busby SEO Test participant need all of those factors? Of course not. They only have a limited time. If participants think they are already found the tricks, so maybe they are really a master in SEO or Google should change their algorithm... :) I guess contestants will run faster in the last lap. Let's see who the next winner is in the SEO contest. Updated (30 minutes to finish line): Congrate to Busby SEO Test Winner. Are all of those factors always works? Usually yes. Cost-benefit analysis should prove it. And SERP is only a popularity ranking (whatever SEOers do), until users/visitor found it useful enough. :P Just unessential weblog
Dani Iswara, mail me: [myfirstnamelastname]@gmail.com.

You are free to share (copy, distribute, transmit) & adapt this blog post under the similar license (Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported; CCA-NC-SA 3.0 Unported). Please put these links on your copy:
Taken from: Usability, Accessibility, Semantic, Web Standard and SEO Conflict by Dani Iswara.

Unimportant Related/Random Posts

You may also read list of most popular posts and most popular tags of Dani Iswara .Net.

30 Responses to post titled: Usability, Accessibility, Semantic, Web Standard and SEO Conflict

  1. Comment by dewaji on January 30, 2009 at 12:25:25
    using Firefox 3.0.5 on Windows XP

    Thanks again Mas Dani :D, thanks for helping us climbing the highest mountain of this Busby SEO Test

  2. Comment by Dani Iswara on January 30, 2009 at 14:21:24
    using Firefox 3.0.5 on SuSE

    - dewaji:
    I support your charity mission on this contest :)

  3. Comment by gdenarayana on January 30, 2009 at 18:45:51
    using Firefox 3.0.1 on Windows XP

    wow, klo untuk usability itu, saya baru aja dapet ilmu disini :D

    wah more on nya perlu dibaca neh bli ;)

    wah berat banget, saya pelan - pelan aja belajar doloe bli :)

  4. Comment by Dani Iswara on January 30, 2009 at 19:39:56
    using Firefox 3.0.5 on Gentoo

    - gdenarayana:
    wah sori bli, ketangkep moderasi terus..mungkin komennya kecepetan.. :)

    sante aja bli wayan..yg gini2 kan mrk kebanyakan project idealis dan sebatas etika aja kayaknya cmiiw

    tp kl dgn itu, akhirnya kita cukup pake 1 peramban aja, kenapa ngga? :D

  5. Comment by gdenarayana on January 30, 2009 at 23:37:10
    using Firefox 3.0.5 on Windows Vista

    terus terang bli, blog ini ringan sekali ;) enak bukanya, padahal koneksi saya lambret abizz :mrgreen:

    mknya saya jadi sering maen kesini sambil baca2 artikel bli yg lama, numpang belajar ceritanya..hehehe

    bli putu lebih mengerti daripada saya, klo saya liat2 lagi...adohhh bise2 mecik sirah tiyang bli :D apalagi utk usability, etika dan estetika web design, tp klo bs seperti itu...wahhh...salut saya...sama dengan blog ini...hehehe

    usabilitynya keyennnn ;) pantes ada di sakui itu :D

    saya gini aja bli ndak terlalu serius sekali, seneng baca2 klo praktek belum terlalu bli...

    maaf klo bahasa sering engga terlalu serius..hihihi bukan bermaksud apa - apa, ya ginilah saya bli..mknya byk yang sering salah tampi saya kedek2 gini, dikira gila :mrgreen:

    maaf bli klo ngaco komennya :D

  6. Comment by Dani Iswara on January 31, 2009 at 04:47:09
    using Firefox 3.0.5 on Gentoo

    - gdenarayana:
    suksma bli
    koneksi saya jg lambat, biar kata pake 3.5G :(

    jgn dipercaya semuanya, bli wayan..saya jg newbie

    kadung basah bli..ngga sempat maenan sakui, webagogo dot be lg..

    ngeblog sebenernya jgn tll ribet aturan..lah blog sendiri ya terserah :D

    tp kl mau pake ya aturannya ada w3c itu..

  7. Comment by fanari on January 31, 2009 at 19:12:15
    using Opera Mini 4.2.13221 on J2ME/MIDP Device

    penjelasan yg lengkap pak :)
    saya perlu banyak belajar dari pak dani terutama soal aksesibilitas
    terus terang saya masih belajar bikin design yg bagus buat pengguna dan mesin

  8. Comment by Dani Iswara on January 31, 2009 at 20:44:56
    using Firefox 3.0.5 on Gentoo

    - fanari:
    maunya bikin pendek malah selalu jd panjang.. :(

    di opera mini dan peramban mobile lain mungkin ada bbrp karakter yg jd aneh di blog ini krn saya make doctype xhtml 1.1
    sori ya mas fandy, blm sempat ngecek lg

    kita sama2 belajar lah mas fandy,
    tulisan2 mas fandy enak dicerna awam spt saya..makasi :)

  9. Comment by Bagus on February 1, 2009 at 21:22:42
    using Firefox 3.0.5 on Windows XP

    bacaan yang menarik...benar2 bahasan yang lengkap..selama ini saya lebih cenderung mengoptimalkan SEO lewat konten yang unik dan backlink yang bermutu saja karena tidak memiliki dasar sebagai programmer ataupun designer tapi sepertinya jadi perlu jg nih elajar masalah semantik abis baca tulisannya bli putu :D

    ada referensi gabli buat buku yg bagus untuk belajar semantik web kl bisa yg bahasa Indo aja soalnya kl bahasa inggris takut males duluan :p

    btw salam kenal dan makasih dah mampir ke blog saya.

  10. Comment by dani on February 1, 2009 at 22:51:32
    using Firefox 3.0.5 on Gentoo

    - Bagus:
    investasi semantik sptnya ngga rugi sih scr standar web (+ semantik) umumnya backward-compatible, dah dipikirin utk cocok dipake teknologi lama apalg teknologi masa dpn, ktnya.. :)

    waduh..kl buku saya ngga tau..sama2 bukan bidang itu :)
    arsip w3c kayaknya ada yg bbrp dah ditranslasi ke bahasa Indonesia

    pengalaman praktisi desain web Indonesia ada kok yg ngulas itu
    ato minta tlg translator (google misalnya)

  11. Comment by nichive on February 2, 2009 at 09:53:27
    using Flock 2.0.3 on Windows XP

    the closing lines are so true,
    you can be popular for sure, but if that's the only aim you have for blogging.. I say you can be more than just that!

  12. Comment by Dani Iswara on February 2, 2009 at 11:32:49
    using Firefox 3.0.5 on Gentoo

    - nichive:
    sometimes SEO is the real shortcut for the popularity..
    then they're rethinking the goals :)

  13. Comment by shaleh on February 2, 2009 at 15:34:19
    using Firefox 3.0 on Windows XP

    astaga ga ngerti bahasanya, terpaksa dech baca sambil buka kamus.

  14. Comment by Ma1210 on February 2, 2009 at 16:02:24
    using Firefox 3.0.5 on Windows XP

    wah, master SEO nih.. Salam kenal Mas :)

  15. Comment by munawar am on February 2, 2009 at 17:49:37
    using Firefox 3.0.5 on Windows XP

    I have nothing about SEO etc, I just write it in my blog in my own perspective. Thank for sharing

  16. Comment by Dani Iswara on February 2, 2009 at 18:18:53
    using Firefox 3.0.5 on SuSE

    - Ma1210:
    alo..saya newbie disini.. :)

    - munawar:
    Yup.. :) I guess SEO is own best practices too

  17. Comment by riesurya on February 7, 2009 at 06:49:13
    using Firefox 3.0.5 on Windows XP

    mantep nih ide tulisannya, kombinasi usability, accessibility, semantic markup, web standard dan SEO (Search Engine Optimization) plus konflik (kepentingan :)) didalamnya.

    IMO, dari konflik (kondisi-2) yg ada itu malah bisa belajar bgmn mengharmonisasi semuanya (wooohooo, perfectionis ON :) ).

  18. Comment by Dani Iswara on February 7, 2009 at 07:57:14
    using Firefox 3.0.6 on Gentoo

    - riesurya:
    SEO sptnya memang sudah begitu kronis buruknya di mata web standard evangelista :lol:

    tp asyik jg liat2 opini di seputar SEO :D

    pas mengintegrasikan semua unsurnya, kayak milih2 mo pake widget yg mana aja ya
    makasi pak Rie

  19. Comment by uwiuw on February 9, 2009 at 20:02:22
    using Firefox 2.0.0.1 on Windows XP

    hmm sy suka artikel ini karena sepikiran dgn sy soal usability. Walau jujur mendesign web berkonten bhs indonesia yg usaility lengkap itu rada rada waste time. Tp sejujurnya sy sangat menghormati bila ada yg berani membikin situs dia sampai bisa dibaca software reader....apalagi harus paham banyak segmen dan perintah web yg spesifik seperti alt, longdesc dll

    wah salut dah kalau ada yg mau menempuh jalan desain seperti ini :D alau saya heheheh ngk deh nanti aja hehehe perlahan aja tobatnya ke web standar yg usuability

  20. Comment by Dani Iswara on February 9, 2009 at 20:25:09
    using Firefox 3.0.6 on Gentoo

    - uwiuw:
    makasi mas aulia ashari :)
    kl khusus utk bahasa Indonesia, Ramaditya, dkk difabel ktnya masi bs baca situs detik dgn cukup nyaman :)
    sumber: Catatan oleh Rama: Kalau Tunanetra Nge-blog dan Main Game Online

    yg komplit saklek aksesibel kan biasanya (harusnya[?]) situs2 publik spt pemerintahan dan pendidikan :lol: (mis. pemkab garut, ITB, Unpad; sumber: koleksi Situs Indonesia Penganut Standar Web)

    imo sih ini cuman buat fondasi aja, kasian mereka di W3C dah buat rekomendasi tp ngga kepake.. :lol:

  21. Comment by Helda on May 1, 2009 at 22:21:48
    using Firefox 3.0.10 on Windows XP

    Ini dia kelemahan dari newbie-newbie kayak saya ini, Dok. Yg mentingin SEO dan popularitas di SERP. Padahal katanya, katanya nih, Dok, bukan kata saya, kalo' susunan halaman itu bagus (sesuai standar - W3C), bakal bagus ranking-nya di SERP.

    Nah, saya sendiri, ngga ngerti soal standar web atau apalah itu namanya, belajar web di SMA juga dikit.
    :(

    Semoga suatu saat bisa! Oya, utk blog helda.info, juga masih banyak kesalahan dalam markup-nya, waktu di-cek dimana gitu. Lupa. Pokoknya di situ masih banyak merah-merahnya.

  22. Comment by Dani Iswara on May 2, 2009 at 01:06:57
    using Firefox 3.0.9 on Gentoo

    Helda,
    IMO, kayaknya google ngga seketat itu, kecuali nanti blogspotnya sesuai standar web w3c, mungkin iya.. :D

    ngga masalah dengan kode, selama pengunjung masi bisa baca konten dgn baik, kan..

  23. Comment by ganda on December 23, 2009 at 10:35:48
    using Google Chrome Frame 4.0 on Windows XP

    This post is also long enough. Hihihihi...

    Auto refresh is a regular feature in online bulletin board, it is should be left like usual or need to remove auto refresh content feature?

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Pingback by Posts about Web Standards as of January 30, 2009 | XHTML and CSS on January 31, 2009 at 08:35:46
    WordPress 2.6.1

    [...] 30, 2009 Usability, Accessibility, Semantic, Web Standard and SEO Conflict - daniiswara.net 01/25/2009 Usability, Accessibility, Semantic, Web Standard and SEO [...]

  2. Pingback by SEO Blog Trekking - Dani Iswara .Net on February 3, 2009 at 21:37:33
    WordPress 2.7

    [...] Google. Khususnya blog yang berbahasa Indonesia. Tulisan ini sebenarnya bahan dari artikel Usability, Accessibility, Semantic, Web Standard and SEO Conflict. Mengapa menggunakan istilah trekking, bukan blog walking (jalan-jalan ke blog [...]

  3. Pingback by XHTML-CSS validation are not that Important - Dani Iswara .Net on February 12, 2009 at 16:25:10
    WordPress 2.7.1

    [...] are SEO conflicts (Dani Iswara .Net). But, it does not mean that we opening the outdoor as soon as visitors click [...]

  4. Pingback by Div mania is not Semantic XHTML - Dani Iswara .Net on February 14, 2009 at 15:54:35
    WordPress 2.7.1

    [...] my previous note about web standard vs semantic markup (Dani Iswara .Net), valid XHTML (Extensible HyperText Markup Language) is not the same as [...]

  5. Pingback by Creating Social Bookmarking without Plugin | Gde Narayana on February 23, 2009 at 17:50:43
    WordPress 2.7.1

    [...] sebuah websites, saya merekomendasikan baca dulu segala artikel di Dani Iswara [dot] Net seperti Usability, Accessibility, Semantic, Web Standard and SEO Conflict. Bukannya saya melemparkan pertanyaan mas ini atau tidak mau menjawab, tapi saya memang baru tahu [...]

  6. Pingback by Menguji Fujitsu Web Accessibility Inspector | Gde Narayana on April 18, 2009 at 18:20:47
    WordPress 2.7.1

    [...] Manfaat yang diperoleh adalah semoga di dalam menyajikan sebuah tema/themes bisa memenuhi rekomendasi dari W3C, meskipun W3C itu hanyalah sebuah rekomendasi dan tidak ada unsur paksaan sedikit pun bagi semua orang untuk mengikuti aturan yang sudah direkomendasikan, karena saya pun melakukan pengujian ini atas dasar keinginan, kemauan pribadi, suka - suka, dan untuk belajar mengenai aksesibilitas selain pemula menggunakan WordPress. Tidak ikut - ikutan ataupun menyaingi siapa pun, hanya melihat banyaknya manfaat yang diperoleh dari rekomendasi W3C terutama untuk aksesibilitas sebuah tema/themes. Saya masih newbie dan akan selalu newbie (dan memang itu adanya). Jika tertarik, sebelumnya baca dulu Usability, Accessibility, Semantic, Web Standard and SEO Conflict. [...]

  7. Pingback by Myths and Facts of Tags on Web Pages - Dani Iswara .Net on May 1, 2009 at 15:42:59
    WordPress abc

    [...] You don’t have to worry about h1 tags. Those search results are the fact. Any other evidence, please! You may see SEO conflicts. [...]

Sorry, for some reasons (sometimes due to sp*ms attack), the comment form is closed at this time. If You have any suggestions, please contact me. Thank you.

Dani Iswara .Net

Return to TOP
›› Older entries: SEO Blog Trekking
‹‹ Newer entries: The Safety of Health-Medical Information on the Net