<?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>Recruitment SEO blog &#187; architecture</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.recruitment-seo.com/tag/architecture/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.recruitment-seo.com</link>
	<description>Expert Advice for Recruiters and Web Developers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 20:15:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Meta Title tags: Good ones vs long, boring, spammy ones</title>
		<link>http://www.recruitment-seo.com/featured-articles/meta-title-tags-good-ones-vs-long-boring-spammy-ones/</link>
		<comments>http://www.recruitment-seo.com/featured-articles/meta-title-tags-good-ones-vs-long-boring-spammy-ones/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 10:40:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dave Haygarth</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Featured Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meta]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[architecture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Titles]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.recruitment-seo.com/?p=72</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[According to many sources, the optimal character length (including spaces) is 68. That is the number of characters Google will display in its SERPs (see below), and any keyword after the 68th character is cut off and I am starting to believe that it is either disregarded or given less weighting in keyword searches. I [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>According to many sources, the optimal character length (including spaces) is 68. That is the number of characters Google will display in its SERPs (see below), and any keyword after the 68th character is cut off and I am starting to believe that it is either disregarded or given less weighting in keyword searches.</p>
<p>I have seen sites come up very high in the rankings with longer title tags, so I would venture to say that Google doesn&#8217;t give demerits for title tags longer than 68 characters, though I would be wary of creating title tags much longer than 80 or 90 characters.<span id="more-72"></span></p>
<p><img style="clear:both" src="http://www.recruitment-seo.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/title-tag-characters.png" alt="Title Tags" /></p>
<p>My own Title tag basics for Recruitment websites:</p>
<ol>
<li>Jobs pages:
<ul>
<li>Get the word &#8216;Job&#8217; in early- that&#8217;s what the page is about, first and foremost.</li>
<li>Job Title</li>
<li>Location</li>
<li>Sector or Discipline</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Avoid repetition like the plague.  There is good eveidence that Google will treat this as keyword spamming.  Essentially, it is!</li>
<li>Read <a title="Google's Guidelines on Meta" href="http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=79812&amp;topic=15262" target="_blank">Google&#8217;s own guidelines</a>.   If your jobs site has good jobs on it for people searching in Google, then Google are also here to help your candidates find jobs on your site, believe it or not.</li>
</ol>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.recruitment-seo.com/featured-articles/meta-title-tags-good-ones-vs-long-boring-spammy-ones/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>w-w-w-what&#8217;s going wrong?</title>
		<link>http://www.recruitment-seo.com/seo-basics/w-w-w-whats-going-wrong/</link>
		<comments>http://www.recruitment-seo.com/seo-basics/w-w-w-whats-going-wrong/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Feb 2009 09:15:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dave Haygarth</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SEO Basics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[architecture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[URLs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.recruitment-seo.com/?p=45</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A simple post for today (it&#8217;s Saturday!!)&#8230; Does your recruitment website work with www AND without www ? If you know the web address of where you&#8217;re heading, you type it straight into the browser. I may not be indicative of the general populaous but I&#8217;d wager that a lot of YOUR candidates and clients [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A simple post for today (it&#8217;s Saturday!!)&#8230; Does your recruitment website work with www AND without www ?<span id="more-45"></span></p>
<p>If you know the web address of where you&#8217;re heading, you type it straight into the browser.  I may not be indicative of the general populaous but I&#8217;d wager that a lot of YOUR candidates and clients have tried your web address without the www.  What worries me more, is that SO MANY recruitment websites seem to not work with the www. </p>
<p>You never get a second chance to make a first impression.  If your recruitment site is not configured to display without the “www”, would your clients and candidates be impressed?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.recruitment-seo.com/seo-basics/w-w-w-whats-going-wrong/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

