<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>WhirledView &#187; Search Engine Optmization</title>
	<atom:link href="http://whirledview.com/category/search-engine-optmization/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://whirledview.com</link>
	<description>Jim Robinson&#039;s Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 21:59:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Ampersands in rel=&#8221;canonical&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://whirledview.com/search-engine-optmization/ampersands-in-relcanonical/</link>
		<comments>http://whirledview.com/search-engine-optmization/ampersands-in-relcanonical/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Dec 2010 17:53:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engine Optmization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whirledview.com/?p=165</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;m using this as a workspace to provide an example for an SEO question for @dancristo, but by all means jump in here if you know the answer to this. I&#8217;m trying to determine if there&#8217;s a difference between the following two rel=&#8221;canonical&#8221; entries: &#60;link rel="canonical" href="http://www.example.com/this&#38;that" /&#62; &#60;link rel="canonical" href="http://www.example.com/this&#38;amp;that" /&#62; The first URL [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://whirledview.com/search-engine-optmization/ampersands-in-relcanonical/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Will Google Instant Help or Hurt the Long Tail?</title>
		<link>http://whirledview.com/search-engine-optmization/google-instant-long-tail/</link>
		<comments>http://whirledview.com/search-engine-optmization/google-instant-long-tail/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 21:44:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engine Optmization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whirledview.com/?p=22</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The SEO world is buzzing today (even enough to get me to do a blog post) about the release of Google Instant, which updates search results in real time as you type in your search query. We&#8217;ve seen some of this functionality for quite a while now with Google Suggest, which provides real time search [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://whirledview.com/search-engine-optmization/google-instant-long-tail/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SEO for CMSs at Refresh Rockville</title>
		<link>http://whirledview.com/search-engine-optmization/seo-for-cms/</link>
		<comments>http://whirledview.com/search-engine-optmization/seo-for-cms/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Apr 2010 19:12:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engine Optmization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canonicalization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[duplicate content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[seo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whirledview.com/?p=19</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Looking forward to my presentation this evening for Refresh Rockville on the topic of SEO for CMSs. I’m resurrecting my blog from the dead once again in case anyone finds it through Twitter or some other means. I’d like to encourage you to leave any feedback you might have on my presentation in the comments [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://whirledview.com/search-engine-optmization/seo-for-cms/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rock The Vote With Canonical URLs</title>
		<link>http://whirledview.com/search-engine-optmization/seo-duplicate-content/</link>
		<comments>http://whirledview.com/search-engine-optmization/seo-duplicate-content/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 02:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engine Optmization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whirledview.com/?p=7</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When conducting a site audit, the low-hanging fruit for most good SEO folks is identifying duplicate content issues. On-page factors and link popularity can almost always use some improvement, but they&#8217;re not usually the kinds of things that actually do harm to your search engine rankings. Duplicate content, on the other hand, can actually hurt [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://whirledview.com/search-engine-optmization/seo-duplicate-content/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is SEO Still Relevant in 2009?</title>
		<link>http://whirledview.com/search-engine-optmization/is-seo-still-relevant-in-2009/</link>
		<comments>http://whirledview.com/search-engine-optmization/is-seo-still-relevant-in-2009/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2009 02:25:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engine Optmization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whirledview.com/?p=10</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Search Engine Optimization is dead. Search engine rankings no longer matter. I see a lot of link bait to that effect floating around these days. So what&#8217;s the deal? Is SEO still relevant in 2009? Yes. More than ever. If interest in a subject is an indicator of relevance, then SEO is clearly still alive [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://whirledview.com/search-engine-optmization/is-seo-still-relevant-in-2009/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

