Re: rel="nofollow" attribute from David Woolley on 2005-01-22 (www-html@w3.org from January 2005)

From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 08:49:39 +0000 (GMT)
To: www-html@w3.org
Message-Id: <200501220849.j0M8ndE01864@djwhome.demon.co.uk>

I wrote:

> I think "nofollow" itself was established from the use in meta elements
> to inhibit all links on the page.  This was a bad choice even there, but

Whilst Google may actually not follow links poisoned with 
rel=nofollow, there is no reason why search engines shouldn't follow
such links in order to build a more complete map of the web, so
this use of nofollow shouldn't have the same meaning as meta-robots-nofollow,
which is another reason why the name is bad.

> 
> If bquote were used properly and only properly, it would probably

I meant blockquote.

Received on Saturday, 22 January 2005 08:50:52 UTC