Is this meta tag real?

On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 14:51:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz
<newsgroups (AT) schestowitz (DOT) com> wrote:

__/ [Big Bill] on Friday 17 February 2006 14:24 \__

On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:58:25 +0000, Roy Schestowitz
newsgroups (AT) schestowitz (DOT) com> wrote:

__/ [Big Bill] on Friday 17 February 2006 09:41 \__

meta name="robots" content="follow,noimageindex,nomediaindex"

It's a new one on me. It looks like wishful thinking.

BB

It seems to be something ancient, which dates back to Altavista.

http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum11/1260-1-15.htm

I haven't heard about these tags until you mentioned them. All the ones I
know reside in a page that I use as a reference:

http://www.i18nguy.com/markup/metatags.html

Ta. I don't think they actually do anything.

BB

The way to avoid indexing of media is to centralise it under sensible,
aptly-names directories, e.g.

/images

and

/videos

Then, in robots.txt

User_agent: *
Disallow: /images
Disallow: /videos

Ideally yes. But if one bad robot ignores that and it gets published
somewhere else, then it gets out anyway.

BB
--

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/bill.kr...rs-sitemap.htm
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/memor...day/index.html
kruse (AT) crystal-liaison (DOT) com Gifty! Shiny! BB!

Big Bill <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 08:04:46 -0700, hug
contact_info (AT) sig_line (DOT) clickit> wrote:

Big Bill <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 05:23:19 -0700, hug
contact_info (AT) sig_line (DOT) clickit> wrote:

Big Bill <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

meta name="robots" content="follow,noimageindex,nomediaindex"

It's a new one on me. It looks like wishful thinking.

BB

I haven't gotten around to fiddling with it yet but it's definitely
real.

See FAQ #13 here for verification of reality <g>:
http://www.google.com/webmasters/bot.html

Or just see the following for tag-coding details:
http://www.robotstxt.org/wc/exclusion.html#meta;

Nowhere do I see anything about nomediaindex or noimageindex. Am I
missing something?

BB

In one of them there's a note "relatively few robots" blah blah.
Clearly it is leading-edge stuff.

I dunno if you're being sarky or not, I just can't tell, but I'd be
inclined to believe this is old and it never caught on.

BB

It doesn't matter whether it's new and only a few people are working
with a few robot developers to get things going, or it's old and never
caught on -- some robots don't even look at the robots.txt file to
begin with, it's the wild west out there and anything you can't count
on is just graffiti on the bathroom wall and it doesn't matter whether
the graffiti is new and bright or old and faded it's still useless.

--
http://www.ren-prod-inc.com/hug_soft...action=contact

__/ [Big Bill] on Friday 17 February 2006 21:05 \__

On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 14:51:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz
newsgroups (AT) schestowitz (DOT) com> wrote:

__/ [Big Bill] on Friday 17 February 2006 14:24 \__

On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:58:25 +0000, Roy Schestowitz
newsgroups (AT) schestowitz (DOT) com> wrote:

__/ [Big Bill] on Friday 17 February 2006 09:41 \__

meta name="robots" content="follow,noimageindex,nomediaindex"

It's a new one on me. It looks like wishful thinking.

BB

It seems to be something ancient, which dates back to Altavista.

http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum11/1260-1-15.htm

I haven't heard about these tags until you mentioned them. All the ones I
know reside in a page that I use as a reference:

http://www.i18nguy.com/markup/metatags.html

Ta. I don't think they actually do anything.

BB

The way to avoid indexing of media is to centralise it under sensible,
aptly-names directories, e.g.

/images

and

/videos

Then, in robots.txt

User_agent: *
Disallow: /images
Disallow: /videos

Ideally yes. But if one bad robot ignores that and it gets published
somewhere else, then it gets out anyway.

BB

....No worse than users following images to their origin or looking into
robots.txt out of curiosity. Still, I agree it has pitfalls. As the folks in
alt.html repeatedly say: if you don't want your graphics to be stolen or
downloaded, the only solution is to never put them on the Web. period.

Best wishes,

Roy

--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
7:15am up 19:34, 9 users, load average: 1.28, 1.32, 1.12
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine