W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-comments@w3.org > March 2015

Re: Prevent indexing images <img>

From: <contact@aurelienlheureux.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 21:03:45 +0100
To: "Michael A. Peters" <mpeters@domblogger.net>
Cc: public-html-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <07bfe7fb37096d74a1bfc4c2b346dc57@aurelienlheureux.com>
@Andrea :
Could you give me an exemple of code ? but this way need to specify 
height and width ? The advantage of image tag is the autodetection of 
these properties.

e.g. I have a character in my html page animated with jquery and i want 
that the page to be responsive and i can't use breakpoint.
I have just to specified percentage width and let the height adjust 
itself.
When I resize the window, the character resizes itself, and jquery 
calculates news coordinate for the animation.

Anyway, aside from my example that was just here to bring my thoughts, I 
supposed that others persons had maybe encountered this problems of  
some unwanted indexed images.

By the way, concerning  the intellectual property, I agree with Michael. 
You can reproduce an illegal situation of a copying a book on a html 
page, use the noindex meta tag and diffuses it even if you are not the 
author, it is probably illegal, but you can do it.

@Michael
Rel attribute is used for a relationship with another external document 
from a source to a target, but considering that an image is already 
included in the content, this would make it to do a relationship from 
the source to the source, do not you think ?

A sitemap image node could be indeed another approach.
The subtilitie is that with an attribute you can change the src of image 
without impact the fact that you don't want that this image particulary 
is indexed. Moreover with a dynamic content displayed with a loop, you 
can specify this attribute without take into account the image source. 
Finally you can apply the non indexation on a fully range.

Whereas the sitemap need to be continually updated with the sources 
unwanted.



Le 10/03/2015 13:32, Michael A. Peters a écrit :
> What about something like rel="nofollow" ??
> 
> That's what we do when we don't a link to be construed as related to 
> our page content itself (e.g. an advertisement)
> 
> But perhaps the right place for this isn't in the html itself but in 
> the sitemap file - maybe an image:priority child of the image:image 
> node.
> 
> As far as intellectual property implications :
> 
> A) It is not the job of HTML itself to protect intellectual property
> 
> B) If it isn't being indexed in the image search, then it may still be 
> an intellectual property violation, but at least isn't one that is 
> bringing new business to the site away from the real intellectual 
> property owner.
> 
> On 03/10/2015 03:42 AM, Andrea Rendine wrote:
>> Hi Aurélien
>> I haven't tested any case yet, but I usually prefer to maintain 
>> graphic
>> elements and page content separated in my pages too.
>> Now, it depends on what you mean by "no choice but to use an image
>> instead of ...css".
>> I incorporate graphical elements in form of transparent 1px gif images
>> and use the "real" graphic as a CSS background element.
>> Then I wrap all the content which is to be replaced by the image in an
>> element with display:none, so that only the graphic appears.
>> Would this solution help you?
>> BTW, I don't think that such an attribute could be implemented.
>> As a very basic caveat, consider the malicious use that could be done 
>> of
>> such an attribute, hiding potentially illegal content present in the 
>> page.
>> Regards,
>> Andrea


Le 10.03.2015 13:32, Michael A. Peters a écrit :
> What about something like rel="nofollow" ??
> 
> That's what we do when we don't a link to be construed as related to
> our page content itself (e.g. an advertisement)
> 
> But perhaps the right place for this isn't in the html itself but in
> the sitemap file - maybe an image:priority child of the image:image
> node.
> 
> As far as intellectual property implications :
> 
> A) It is not the job of HTML itself to protect intellectual property
> 
> B) If it isn't being indexed in the image search, then it may still be
> an intellectual property violation, but at least isn't one that is
> bringing new business to the site away from the real intellectual
> property owner.
> 
> On 03/10/2015 03:42 AM, Andrea Rendine wrote:
>> Hi Aurélien
>> I haven't tested any case yet, but I usually prefer to maintain 
>> graphic
>> elements and page content separated in my pages too.
>> Now, it depends on what you mean by "no choice but to use an image
>> instead of ...css".
>> I incorporate graphical elements in form of transparent 1px gif images
>> and use the "real" graphic as a CSS background element.
>> Then I wrap all the content which is to be replaced by the image in an
>> element with display:none, so that only the graphic appears.
>> Would this solution help you?
>> BTW, I don't think that such an attribute could be implemented.
>> As a very basic caveat, consider the malicious use that could be done 
>> of
>> such an attribute, hiding potentially illegal content present in the 
>> page.
>> Regards,
>> Andrea
Received on Tuesday, 10 March 2015 20:04:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 10 March 2015 20:04:12 UTC