<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	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/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Definitions of Search Engine Optimization</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bartgibby.com/2006/10/05/definitions-of-search-engine-optimization/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bartgibby.com/2006/10/05/definitions-of-search-engine-optimization/</link>
	<description>Bart Gibby, Utah SEO Consultant</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Sep 2010 06:49:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Bascom</title>
		<link>http://www.bartgibby.com/2006/10/05/definitions-of-search-engine-optimization/comment-page-1/#comment-100</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Bascom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2006 04:53:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bartgibby.com/2006/10/05/definitions-of-search-engine-optimization/#comment-100</guid>
		<description>Great post, Bart. It&#039;s interesting how many different definitions of SEO there are out there. I&#039;ve seen some purists argue that we shouldn&#039;t even call what we do search engine optimization because technically we&#039;re not &quot;optimizing the search engines&quot; rather we&#039;re optimizing our own sites. Then there are those who are ok with the term, but say it doesn&#039;t apply to links and other off-page factors, only the on-page type optimization (titles, headings, content, meta, etc). 

Of all these definitions, I think I like the one from MarketingProfs best. Concise, yet it includes all the major factors I consider a part of SEO. I think they do the best job of explaining a lot with only a few words.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post, Bart. It&#8217;s interesting how many different definitions of SEO there are out there. I&#8217;ve seen some purists argue that we shouldn&#8217;t even call what we do search engine optimization because technically we&#8217;re not &#8220;optimizing the search engines&#8221; rather we&#8217;re optimizing our own sites. Then there are those who are ok with the term, but say it doesn&#8217;t apply to links and other off-page factors, only the on-page type optimization (titles, headings, content, meta, etc). </p>
<p>Of all these definitions, I think I like the one from MarketingProfs best. Concise, yet it includes all the major factors I consider a part of SEO. I think they do the best job of explaining a lot with only a few words.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Rogers</title>
		<link>http://www.bartgibby.com/2006/10/05/definitions-of-search-engine-optimization/comment-page-1/#comment-98</link>
		<dc:creator>David Rogers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Oct 2006 22:23:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bartgibby.com/2006/10/05/definitions-of-search-engine-optimization/#comment-98</guid>
		<description>The second to last one got me thinking (Website Optimization). We are not &quot;optimizing&quot; search engines rather websites to be found by people searching using search engines as a tool. SEO is therefore a misnomer...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The second to last one got me thinking (Website Optimization). We are not &#8220;optimizing&#8221; search engines rather websites to be found by people searching using search engines as a tool. SEO is therefore a misnomer&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
