Post by amirmukaddas on Mar 11, 2024 7:41:01 GMT
If mobile users, by force or by approach, take the first response provided as good, on the other hand those who sit in front of the computer often have every interest in interacting from the keyboard by refining the query , navigating between different pages, visiting more content of multiple sites, until they find the best result according to their needs. This type of search will always exist, or at least as long as we "sit down" in front of the computer, and it will be on these that we SEOs will continue to work, developing the current logic. It must be said that limiting voice searches to the most immediate queries does not do justice to a trend which sees a slight increase in all types of searches through the sole use of voice alone, but if you look closely the most complex voice searches coincide with what you would have written in the search bar, so I believe that even with approximation we can use the dichotomy: “immediate question –> voice search” “complex question –> search bar” Vocal search is something else Voice search is based on two key aspects, the ability to recognize human language (by country) and the ability to understand its meaning in terms of a precise request.
To fulfill this second imperative, Google has set up a Denmark Telegram Number Data highly advanced semantic engine programmed to provide "the answer", not the best in subjective terms, but in an absolute sense. If you take a look at my second study on the translator , you can get an idea of how right now Google translates what you feed it anyway, even if you use the wrong terms or make forced mistakes. If until 2015 Google simply didn't take into consideration what it didn't understand (it didn't even translate it), now it does it anyway. This mechanism is not directly linked to voice search, but it provides an indication of the degree of advancement of artificial intelligence technologies ... and what their potential is.
To get better results than future voice searches on more speculative topics, a good move is to carefully develop structured data for the pages of your website , creating unique virtual labels on definitions, locations, paths and attributes related to mobile search, without omit the specifications relating to your pages most often reached by the classic web search , often marked too sparsely and incapable of reducing the uncertainty given upstream by having to recognize and interpret human language. Every now and then, for this purpose, I compare the semantic markings on the web pages I study and I find them extremely poor in attributes compared to all those available for each family (type) of page. In short, you can do much more and much better than this.
To fulfill this second imperative, Google has set up a Denmark Telegram Number Data highly advanced semantic engine programmed to provide "the answer", not the best in subjective terms, but in an absolute sense. If you take a look at my second study on the translator , you can get an idea of how right now Google translates what you feed it anyway, even if you use the wrong terms or make forced mistakes. If until 2015 Google simply didn't take into consideration what it didn't understand (it didn't even translate it), now it does it anyway. This mechanism is not directly linked to voice search, but it provides an indication of the degree of advancement of artificial intelligence technologies ... and what their potential is.
To get better results than future voice searches on more speculative topics, a good move is to carefully develop structured data for the pages of your website , creating unique virtual labels on definitions, locations, paths and attributes related to mobile search, without omit the specifications relating to your pages most often reached by the classic web search , often marked too sparsely and incapable of reducing the uncertainty given upstream by having to recognize and interpret human language. Every now and then, for this purpose, I compare the semantic markings on the web pages I study and I find them extremely poor in attributes compared to all those available for each family (type) of page. In short, you can do much more and much better than this.