[pmwiki-users] Google local site search
Patrick R. Michaud
pmichaud at pobox.com
Thu Dec 29 10:23:00 CST 2005
On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 03:24:27PM -0700, H. Fox wrote:
> On 12/28/05, Patrick R. Michaud <pmichaud at pobox.com> wrote:
> > [...]the approach
> > I'm using isn't modifying <a ...> tags, it's modifying the url that
> > appears in the tag. Specifically, it's removing any unpermitted
> > "?action=" that appears after "$ScriptUrl".
> So, for example, a page's Edit and History links become self-referring
> links, correct?
> If so, I think I'd rather leave the action and include the
> rel='nofollow' attribute.
> Bot the Light Skin and Lean Skin include the rel='nofollow'
> attributes, so now there might be unintentional 'nofollow' links to
> normal wiki pages -- possibly resulting in page-rank punishment.
Google is quite clear that rel='nofollow' doesn't punish a page,
it simply causes the link to not be counted at all for page
And even if the Skins include rel='nofollow' in the templates,
what about markup...?
> > > I'd expect most search engines to honor "nofollow" by not following the
> > > link anyway. [...]
> > In reality, for the first six months after rel="nofollow" was
> > introduced, Google followed the links anyway (but didn't weight them).
> > Google didn't stop following the links until sometime in July 2005.
> > So, despite the reasons you give, Google chose to follow the
> > rel="nofollow" links for quite some time after rel="nofollow" was
> > introduced.
> Since future PmWiki versions will not be run prior to July 2005 what's
> important is the fact that they're not following the links now. right?
> Maybe I'm missing something...
My point was that for at least six months Google thought it was
worth the extra code and expense to follow rel="nofollow" links
but not count the link. So, if Google chose this path, it's entirely
likely that other search engines will go ahead and follow rel="nofollow"
In fact, this is *really* the point: Many spiders/robots won't
look for rel="nofollow" at all! The robots exclusion protocol
doesn't say anything about rel="nofollow" in links, so robots
that are following the protocol are still going to follow such
links. I've looked at several of the available search engine
packages (htDig, swish-e, mnoGoSearch, WebGlimpse), and as far
as I can tell *none* of those honor rel="nofollow" in links.
So, the advantage of cloaking "?action=" is that it will work
even for robots that don't understand rel="nofollow".
More information about the pmwiki-users