RE: FN-FORUM: Sitecheck - Updating my website - using CSS

date posted 13th March 2008 19:31

John Deaville wrote:
> .. I can appreciate why accessibility is a primary concern for many=20
> businesses, but some industries would probably value visual design =
over=20
> accessibity - yes I am sure that it is very possible to get the two=20
> things together, but many sites that claim to be truly accessible are=20
> not the most visually stunning in the world.

> Flash for example would be described as being inaccessible, but the=20
> vast majority of pro photographers are using flash at least in part,=20
> and they probably don=B9t give a toss about google, because that is =
not=20
> part of their marketing strategy - that=B9s what agents are for .

It is nonsense to suggest that the majority of pro photographers on the =
web
"probably don't give a toss about google" (i.e., search engines). =
Qualified
click-throughs translate to enquiries - my partner is a Pro and enjoys =
most
of her wedding/commercial photography enquiries from Google users.

Obviously, if the purpose of your website is not to attract new =
enquiries,
but simply to act as an online brochure for potential clients that you
explicitly invite to visit your website, then you don't need Google.
However, this is still missing a trick IMO: ad-hoc enquiries are usually
welcome too?

There are very few businesses on the web to whom search engines are
unimportant, therefore accessible, semantic HTML+CSS is the tool of =
choice
for most business websites. I'm surprised you're suggesting otherwise, =
given
the original topic of your posting!

Cheers, Ben

--
Ben Johnson, Neogic Web Solutions
// design =95 development =95 managed hosting

w | http://www.neogic.com
t | +44 (0)1242 808 262
e | [EMAIL REMOVED]