W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > January 2005

Re: Suggestion: 'rel="unrelated"' (was: Re: rel="nofollow" attribute)

From: Sandy Smith <ssmith@forumone.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 09:54:50 -0500
Message-Id: <BBC8F546-6D4E-11D9-9E86-000393D76CBC@forumone.com>
Cc: www-html@w3.org
To: Trejkaz <trejkaz@trypticon.org>

Wrong. Moveable Type, to name just one example, will generate static 
pages (I'm using it).

On Jan 23, 2005, at 5:32 AM, Trejkaz wrote:

> On Sunday 23 January 2005 19:22, you wrote:
>> Actually, no, there are applications far less static than weblogs,
>> particularly the vast majority of weblogs, which are not frequently
>> updated or commented upon. Hence many are in fact implemented as I
>> describe. Many more use various caching schemes, even non-weblog Web
>> applications. So your suggestion that they serve a different page to
>> Google would not be feasible or as easy to implement as you seem to
>> suggest.
>
> Generating two static pages for every one weblog page wouldn't exactly 
> be
> rocket science, either.
>
> But anyway, the vast majority of weblogs that seem to exist right now 
> _are_
> dynamic, including AFAIK all the ones Google actually listed on that 
> page of
> theirs.
>
> TX
>
>
> -- 
>              Email: Trejkaz Xaoza <trejkaz@trypticon.org>
>           Web site: http://xaoza.net/
>          Jabber ID: trejkaz@jabber.zim.net.au
>    GPG Fingerprint: 9EEB 97D7 8F7B 7977 F39F  A62C B8C7 BC8B 037E EA73
>
--
Sandy Smith, Senior Programmer
Forum One Communications
<ssmith@forumone.com>
http://www.forumone.com/
tel. (703) 548-1855 x28
Received on Sunday, 23 January 2005 14:54:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:01 GMT