- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 08:13:52 +0000
- To: public-html@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6609 Summary: negative keywords-not meta tags Product: HTML WG Version: unspecified Platform: PC OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: HTML 5: The Markup Language AssignedTo: mike@w3.org ReportedBy: Nick_Levinson@yahoo.com QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org CC: public-html@w3.org Rumor to the contrary notwithstanding, keyword meta elements do work, albeit within limits. I did a test and also found confirmatory recent discussion online about major search engines. Insofar as they work, what's needed is a way to clarify relevance to one theme by distinguishing it from another. Negative keywords would thus be helpful. For example, a page about "virus" could be about computer viri or biological viri but usually won't be about both. While major search engines may be intelligent enough to distinguish in that well-known case, new subjects may not be well known to search engine managers, and thus an author may prefer to control how their theme is understood from the date of going live. A negative keyword could quickly clarify the theme of the page. Using body text may not be adequate. Consider a doctor writing a carefully exhaustive article about aspirin's less-well-known uses and thus without discussing headaches, since almost everyone already knows about that use. Being careful, the doctor writes in the introduction that "the article will not discuss headaches." Someone does a search for "aspirin NOT headache". They should get that paper but they do not. A negative metatag may aid a search engine in understanding the doctor's thematic intention and thus in supplying what a searcher is seeking. Search engine designers would have to do some careful work to handle the aspirin case as intended but they could do that far more easily if we page authors have an HTML facility that would give search engines something to work with. Keyword metatags long ago lost favor after their widespread abuse. However, they are used by search engines; and I don't see how negative keywords are any more susceptible to abuse than positive ones. Further, a page author could use either positive or negative keywords without having to offer both so there'd be no unwanted increase in the designer's workload. Optimizers could use essentially the same tools to generate either kind of keyword. The only risk, I think, is putting a word in both, but I think that would only be an author's error, so each search engine could prepare for that eventuality any way they see fit and editing software and validators could choose to alert an author to the apparent conflict without requiring an author to change an element. Thus, if a page author uses the same word in both but with differing case because one represents a common product and the other a brand name the page author would take the risk of being misunderstood by a search engine while a search engine might observe the case distinction and consider how to handle it. The page author could also use longer phrases either positively or negatively and thus ease distinguishing themes. Because of the relevance of Boolean NOT searches and for relative brevity and to avoid an abbreviation that may not be familiar to speakers of other languages, I propose calling it "keywords-not". I'm shortly proposing it in the Wiki at http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions. The synonyms I'll list there do not relate to legacy content, of which I know none, but are what people would likely think of. I'm preparing to include keywords-not in a website I'm designing, but I don't know when the site will go live. My method will probably be to use a separate meta tag following the metatag for keywords used positively, since they can't be combined into one element, but I see no reason to require any position other than that both go into the head, as one tag already must. E.g., <head> . . . . . <meta name="keywords" content="aspirin,heart,blood" /> <meta name="keywords-not" content="headache" /> . . . . . </head> <body> <h1>Aspirin Except For Headaches</h1> <p>. . . .</p> </body> This responds to <http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/single-page/>, Working Draft, 12 February 2009. For Bugzilla, I selected all OSes; I develop on Win95a and 98SE and Linux and want pages to work on whatever users use. Thank you. -- Nick -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 22 February 2009 08:14:02 UTC