I'm constantly surprised by web sites that still have some form of doorway page. I've always felt that such designs probably allude to the designer's origins in print media, where one might argue that the book cover has to sell the book. The cover has to attract the casual browser in the bookshop to engage them in the sales process.

Designers with this sort of background (and naive web site buyers who accept their advice) presumably feel that web sites must have some sort of "cover" in order to attract visitors, which I presume leads to the concept of a doorway page. In fact, our terminology of "having a home page" probably doesn't help matters!!

I'm not keen on doorway pages because if the user does approach the site via the home page, these often actually just serve as a barrier to the real content. It requires the user to make one further click with the risk that they will return instead to the search engine results page that got them there in the first place. (Note that I am not saying all doorway pages are wrong, but they've got to be very carefully thought out!)

However, I do certainly find Flash doorway pages a good reason to go elsewhere. I'm generally looking for some information and do not want to have to sit through a five minute presentation, which says nothing relevant to me, however stunning the visuals might be. I could have surfed another 20 sites in that time and be far more likely to have found what I was looking for.

The problem is that many people actually "fall" into the middle of a web site. They will use Google or some other search engine and will literally stumble on to a page simply because it has the right balance of key words and looks as if it might offer what is being sought.

In essence, every page has to be the front cover...!

And certainly each page must be capable of keeping the visitor engaged.

In fact, many people, when initially considering the design of their web site, do seem to imagine that it will be visited in some sort of orderly fashion - in much the same way that someone might read a book by starting from the first page.

Anyone who has ever studied web logs will know that users are far more erratic than this (although I do believe that some menu items receive more traffic by virtue of their position).

Some thought around this leads to the conclusion that site navigation is really very important. It is highly likely that a visitor stumbling upon your site may not actually be seeking exactly what is on that particular page and may feel they need more information from other pages to qualify whether your site is worth sticking with for another couple of clicks.

You must provide site visitors with an easy way to reach any page from wherever they enter the site and it must be instantly clear to them. Remember, most research suggests that you have something like three seconds to get that over!

Amazingly, I've actually had someone try to convince me that the browser's back button is a great site navigation tool and pretty much all that is required in terms of navigation. However, all they managed to convince me was that they naively assumed that all their visitors would start from their home page, so "back" was back to their home page. The painful reality is that "back" is often back to Google...!

I've just read an interesting article by Jakob Nielsen (who is an expert on web site usability) on useit.com, which reports on their research into banner blindness - the well-known effect whereby web site visitors manage to completely ignore banner advertising.

I found the article interesting and was reminded of Seth Godin's views on interruption marketing and how he believes that people are becoming immune to this form of marketing.

Ever since I supervised a student on a post graduate industrial placement who was undertaking some research into what was later to be termed search engine optimisation for a marketing agency in Exeter in the mid-90s, I have been deeply sceptical about many of the claims made by SEO specialists.

Do not get me wrong! Well-written copy intelligently presented using standards-compliant HTML can be successfully optimised and I do believe that huge placement differences exist between poor quality pages and those of a much higher standard. What I believe is that writing search engine optimised pages is part and parcel of good web design and not a black art to be practised by specialists.

At the end of the day, a lot of SEO work comes down to writing good, crisp copy that balances the needs of the reader with those of the search engine. There really isn't much of a substitute for this. The copy must pay attention to what potential visitors might search for, so keyword analysis is important as is the keyword density of the finished article, but this is surely common sense!

The text must be crisp. It must be short, snappy and to the point. It must also be written with a good understanding of how people read material on the web. Unlike print media, people generally skim read web pages far more ruthlessly than they do their Sunday newspaper. The first sentences of each paragraph must convey the message and none more so than the first sentence of the first paragraph.

The problem with many (so called) web designers is that they have a very poor grasp of copy-writing and, alas, sometimes of the grammar and spelling of their chosen language! Indeed, given the general construction quality of some web pages that we have recently analysed, I'm not sure that many web designers even grasp the basics of page construction.

If a page is to feature highly on a search engine, that page needs to be well-constructed and written using standards-compliant mark-up as an initial pre-requisite. This means marking up titles, sub-titles, headings and body text as precisely that. If the page construction merely changes font sizes to indicate titles, then no indication is given to search engine spiders that those headings should be seen as any different to body text.

I think a major part of the problem is that many would-be web designers enter the market with a view to undercut the competition. They win business because the majority of buyers do not fully understand the subtleties of web construction and therefore do not value the premium that the good designers are charging. They want a page that looks good in their browser on their machine. They rarely consider what it might look like on their customer's machine using the customer's browser!

The problem is that to produce a single web page actually takes a considerable amount of effort. First, due attention must be given to what the page is about. Good copy needs to be written that is appropriate to the web as a medium and must contain the right keywords to ensure good search engine placement. The page needs to be marked up correctly, clearly delineating titles and headings from other elements such as lists and general body text. Care needs to be exercised in ensuring that the pages comply with the relevant standards, which also helps in making sure that the page renders well in different browsers.

Many designers pay little attention to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), but many of the rules and suggestions improve page quality considerably and not only allow for a greater readership, but also potentially improve search engine placement. Many web spiders have the same problems deciphering incorrect HTML that specialist web browsers aimed at overcoming various disabilities experience.

The crux of the problem is that all the foregoing is extremely easy not to do, particularly when the designer is barely making any money because they are undercutting so many other would-be designers doing the same thing. A well-constructed, highly-polished page looks much like its poor quality counter-part, but costs considerably more. The naive buyer opts for the former and does not understand why it fails to deliver.

Ultimately, using an SEO specialist is really taking remedial action on something that should have been done at the outset.

I believe that web site navigation is extremely important and designers that ignore the navigational structure of their web sites severely reduce the usability of their sites.

It surprises me how many people do not consider the likelihood of a visitor landing on anything but their site's home page. It seems obvious that the larger the site, the more likely this is to occur. Such people are also often very anxious about their site's positioning on major search engines, which implies that they at least appreciate that most visitors will probably stumble across their site via some form of search. Nonetheless, it does not seem to register with them that the first page visited is very unlikely to be their home page!

For instance, I've often been told that just using backspace or the "back to" button is adequate to return to the home page and that no explicit link is required, but this assumes that the visitor started from there in the first place - which often simply isn't the case.

Good navigational structure mandates that a site visitor can easily discern where they are within a web site and what they need to do to get where they want to go just from the information on the current page. Consequently, if they land at chance on any page, they can easily work out how to get to the information they are seeking. If they can't, the evidence points to the fact they will be off.

It is repeatedly remarked upon that web sites designed by Revell Research Systems are easy to use. This is largely down to the fact that our web design process considers site navigation and usability very early on in a site's development.

I am really surprised just how many web sites operated by UK businesses fail to comply with the UK Companies Act 2006 and the 2002 eCommerce legislation.

Most of the requirements of these laws (as far as web sites go) is just plain common sense in terms of reassuring web site visitors about the trustworthiness of the organisation behind a particular site.

They require, for instance, that a site provides the geographic address of the business operating it. Regardless of the legislation, this does serve to boost confidence in a web site as far as its visitors are concerned. Incidentally, current legal opinion is that PO boxes do not cut the mustard as far as the law is concerned. The geographic address should literally identify the business premises.

Limited companies are under much greater stricture and must disclose their registered address, country of registration and registration number.

At the end of the day, web site operators should take professional advice on these matters and should be wary if these issues are not raised by their web designers.

I read with interest the article "Government Web Sites Too Complex", which was published on the BBC News web site yesterday and covers the publication of a National Audit Office (NAO) report that states that some government web sites are too complex.

Sir John Bourn, Head of the NAO, apparently said: "Departments need to focus on understanding the cost effectiveness of their websites and who uses them and why, so that they can better meet the needs of citizens."

The Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, Edward Leigh MP, is reported to have commented that "Departments have poor information on costs, websites are still hard to navigate and citizens have to wade through masses of irrelevant information to find what they need."

I don't think that it is a problem that is totally restricted to the government. Many commercial web sites are also difficult to navigate, although I suspect that most businesses have a much better handle on how much their sites are costing them. However, what they probably do not know either is who exactly is visiting their sites. Few businesses seem to analyse their web logs in order to get a better understanding of who is visiting what.

Although most businesses have far less documentation to publish than the various national and local government bodies, some make what information they do publish very difficult to find, which undermines the effectiveness of their web sites as a communications and marketing medium.

I strongly believe that site navigation is one of the most important aspects of good web site design, but one which is often ignored.

I'm pleased to announce that we've just launched the new South West Mediation web site.

South West Mediation is a regional family mediation practice, with offices in Exeter, Plymouth, Torquay and Taunton. Family mediation helps couples (whether married or not) to discuss and resolve any issues connected with the separation or divorce in a thoughtful and co-operative way. Mediation aims to improve communication and reduce bitterness - and consequently benefit any children involved. Most of the mediators working for South West Mediation are not only highly experienced as mediators, but also have practiced for many years as solicitors in family law.

The web site has all the characteristics of a Revell Research Systems web site. Its design is crisp and the site is extremely easy to navigate. It has also been optimised so that search engines rank the site higher than many of the firm's competitors.

John Loram, a director and founder of South West Mediation remarked at the site's launch: "I am really pleased with its design and quality. It is both eye-catching and informative."

The photography for the site was done by Revell Research Systems in-house, which allowed us to present exactly the right "feel" for the site. Some of the images are very poignant and help to convey the important aspects of mediation in a non-verbal way.

Revell Research Systems is committed to designing and producing high quality sites, which comply with the relevant web standards. The South West Mediation web site is compliant with the XHTML 1.0 (Transitional) and CSS 2.0 standards. It has also been designed with people with disabilities in mind and passes the majority of automatable tests for the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 1.0). (We believe that in some circumstances, some elements of the guidelines that were published in 1999 are no longer appropriate.)

Perhaps equally important, the web site also complies with the United Kingdom's Companies Act 2006, which so many web sites simply do not comply with.

The picture below shows myself with John Loram, a director of South West Mediation.