RE: [CT] Using robots.txt to flag an adapting site

Again, "I don't disagree" though I prefer HTTP only mechanisms as they
can be used on content that is not HTML, such as images. I think the
mechanisms need to work equally well on images as on HTML. Consequently
anything that focuses on features of HTML such as the DOCTYPE or link
element is not as general a solution. Though I agree that they provide
"contributory evidence".

Jo


---
Jo Rabin
mTLD (http://dotmobi.mobi)

mTLD Top Level Domain Limited is a private limited company incorporated
and registered in the Republic of Ireland with registered number 398040
and registered office at Arthur Cox Building, Earlsfort Terrace, Dublin
2.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sean Owen [mailto:srowen@google.com]
> Sent: 29 September 2007 15:06
> To: Jo Rabin
> Cc: public-bpwg-ct@w3.org; public-powderwg@w3.org; BPWG; Rotan
Hanrahan
> Subject: Re: [CT] Using robots.txt to flag an adapting site
> 
> On 9/29/07, Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi> wrote:
> > I "don't disagree" with use of the link header. However I am not
sure it
> > has as much flexibility as one would like. The semantics are also a
> > little cloudy in my view - is it really appropriate to infer from
the
> > fact that there is link specifying an alternate with media handheld,
> > that this version is not itself suitable for handheld? I might
> > conceivably have versions for desktop, iPhone, series 60 and DDC,
for
> > instance.
> 
> It gets better -- really, the suggestion is to put the link to the
> handheld version *in the handheld version.* The idea is that if a
> transcoder is about to transcode a page talking about a handheld
> alternate, it should merely get out of the way and redirect to that
> target. Hence it becomes a means for a mobile page to say "hands off."
> 
> An HTTP header is possible though the advantage of <link> is that can
> be authored into the page. Also it does have the desired effect on
> GWT.
> 
> 
> > A plea not to ignore the work of the POWDER group here who as I
> > understand it have been chartered to replace robots.txt and who I
know
> > have a way of describing parts of site by URI matching. Various
POWDER
> > documents have been elevated recently, and I expect you'll find them
a
> > jolly good read.
> 
> I had also missed Rotan's point entirely about robots.txt being
> site-wide mechanism, which is valuable. And now I agree with this
> point, that this becomes close to a special case of POWDER, and a
> lovely first application?

Received on Saturday, 29 September 2007 21:55:10 UTC