No reason to even bother

[zihadhasan012]

And yet, thinking back, I'm almost sure that at some point, at a conference and during interactions with clients, I personally repeated this misnomer. I want to issue an apology for that now and set the record straight - SEO is a task that requires paying close attention to the needs of both users and engines. You can't be an effective SEO without it. Just think of all the specific tasks we perform that we'd never do if it weren't for search engines: Title tags: We might still make them, but agonize over keyword usage and positioning, uniqueness and flow? I doubt it.


Meta tags: Nope. XML Sitemaps: I'm pretty sure turkey mobile phone numbers database no human has ever visited this file in an attempt to sort out the pages on your site. Webmaster Tools Registration: Without engines, there wouldn't be any. Keyword Research: I think this practice would be more like advertising copy - think Mad Men. Keyword Targeting: Why worry about keyword placement for anything other than conversion rate optimization? URL Canonicalization: No need - visitors are getting the content either way.


Accessible Link Structures: So long as you're not worried about the >2% of visitors who can't see Flash, go ahead and build rich applications to your heart's content. Robots.txt & Meta Robots: No engines, no reason to direct engines. Link Building: Unless it's specifically to draw in relevant traffic, why bother? Creating Vertical Search Feeds: That's going to be time wasted. Information Architecture: While there's good reasons to do some of this for users, a significant portion of the accessibility and link hierarchy arguments are made moot.