- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 04:05:58 -0500
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Cc: kmarks@technorati.com, dean@w3.org, shellen@google.com, www-html@w3.org, tantek@technorati.com
Le 22 janv. 2005, à 16:52, Dan Brickley a écrit : > I've been following the threads in > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2005Jan/ > about the > http://www.google.com/googleblog/2005/01/preventing-comment-spam.html > proposal, and the draft definition at > http://developers.technorati.com/wiki/RelNoFollow And I have just finished to read the whole thread… so far, I have one problem with rel="nofollow", they encourage all publishing tools to put automatically "nofollow" to all links coming from external contributions and that is just plain wrong without giving the possibility to the user to change the nature of the rel. The problem is often the same, imposing a choice to the user without giving the possibility to deactivate it. So I'm interested to know if publishing tools implement rel="nofollow", what do they implement if on my weblog (by an editorial choice), I want to say: "This link is worthwhile and should be followed." As a second thing, I can't wait the abuse made by spammers of this new attribute. After the "meta name" indexing which has been abused, and then not indexed by some search engines, I'm pretty sure there will be surprises with the rel="nofollow". -- Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/ W3C Conformance Manager *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Saturday, 29 January 2005 09:06:00 UTC