SSI and SEO

Discussion in 'HTML' started by AyntRyte, Jul 3, 2004.

  1. AyntRyte

    AyntRyte Guest

    Just curious...
    Does Google (and other bots) consider the content of includes when
    indexing a page?

    Thanks,
    --
    \\// Robert

    ayntryte @ (that new Google email thingy) dot com
     
    AyntRyte, Jul 3, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. AyntRyte

    brucie Guest

    in post: <news:ZjoFc.4525$>
    AyntRyte <> said:

    > Just curious...


    curiosity killed the cat and my next door neighbor when he stuck his
    nose into something that didn't concern him.

    > Does Google (and other bots) consider the content of includes when
    > indexing a page?


    think about it for a few seconds. how is google (or anyone/thing else)
    supposed to be able to determine if you're using includes or not?

    --
    b r u c i e
     
    brucie, Jul 3, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. AyntRyte

    Neal Guest

    On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 20:56:27 -0500, AyntRyte <> wrote:

    > Just curious...
    > Does Google (and other bots) consider the content of includes when
    > indexing a page?


    Google and other bots consider the page as served. So if you serve a page
    assembled from 47 different includes, that's what Google will see.
     
    Neal, Jul 3, 2004
    #3
  4. AyntRyte

    AyntRyte Guest

    Neal wrote:

    > On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 20:56:27 -0500, AyntRyte <> wrote:
    >
    >> Just curious...
    >> Does Google (and other bots) consider the content of includes when
    >> indexing a page?

    >
    >
    > Google and other bots consider the page as served. So if you serve a
    > page assembled from 47 different includes, that's what Google will see.


    Thanks. I thought it odd that on a search result, the snippet following
    a listing would contain irrelevant content from the bottom of the page
    instead keyword-heavy content from the include.

    Google can best be compared to a woman: Don't waste your time trying to
    understand it; just appreciate it for what it is :)

    --
    \\// Robert

    ayntryte @ (that new Google email thingy) dot com
     
    AyntRyte, Jul 3, 2004
    #4
  5. AyntRyte

    Mitja Guest

    AyntRyte <>
    (news:tJqFc.2317$) wrote:
    > Neal wrote:
    >
    >> On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 20:56:27 -0500, AyntRyte <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Just curious...
    >>> Does Google (and other bots) consider the content of includes when
    >>> indexing a page?

    >>
    >>
    >> Google and other bots consider the page as served. So if you serve a
    >> page assembled from 47 different includes, that's what Google will
    >> see.

    >
    > Thanks. I thought it odd that on a search result, the snippet
    > following a listing would contain irrelevant content from the bottom
    > of the page instead keyword-heavy content from the include.


    Weird... You don't, I hope, consider <iframe> a method of "including"
    content? Or possibly any JS? Or even <object>? Google won't see those, only
    server-side merged thigs count.

    > Google can best be compared to a woman: Don't waste your time trying
    > to understand it; just appreciate it for what it is :)
     
    Mitja, Jul 3, 2004
    #5
  6. AyntRyte

    Big Bill Guest

    On Sat, 3 Jul 2004 13:26:57 +1000, brucie <>
    wrote:

    >in post: <news:ZjoFc.4525$>
    >AyntRyte <> said:
    >
    >> Just curious...

    >
    >curiosity killed the cat and my next door neighbor when he stuck his
    >nose into something that didn't concern him.
    >
    >> Does Google (and other bots) consider the content of includes when
    >> indexing a page?

    >
    >think about it for a few seconds. how is google (or anyone/thing else)
    >supposed to be able to determine if you're using includes or not?


    See? This is what happens when you ask questions in the wrong group.
    Brucie answers, that's what!

    BB
     
    Big Bill, Jul 3, 2004
    #6
  7. AyntRyte

    Big Bill Guest

    On Sat, 03 Jul 2004 00:12:41 -0400, Neal <> wrote:

    >On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 20:56:27 -0500, AyntRyte <> wrote:
    >
    >> Just curious...
    >> Does Google (and other bots) consider the content of includes when
    >> indexing a page?

    >
    >Google and other bots consider the page as served. So if you serve a page
    >assembled from 47 different includes, that's what Google will see.


    and Neal.
    Sometimes.

    BB
     
    Big Bill, Jul 3, 2004
    #7
  8. AyntRyte

    Hywel Guest

    In article <>, brucie says...
    > in post: <news:ZjoFc.4525$>
    > AyntRyte <> said:
    >
    > > Just curious...

    >
    > curiosity killed the cat and my next door neighbor when he stuck his
    > nose into something that didn't concern him.


    Curiosity is the very basis of education and if you tell me that
    curiosity killed the cat, I say only the cat died nobly. I can't speak
    for your neighbour, but he really should have given you your gimp suit
    back on time, and clean, shouldn't he?

    --
    Hywel

    Big Brother Petition - Better TV Wanted!
    http://www.petitiononline.com/BBFlood/
     
    Hywel, Jul 3, 2004
    #8
  9. AyntRyte

    brucie Guest

    in post: <news:>
    Big Bill <> said:

    >>> Just curious...


    >>curiosity killed the cat and my next door neighbor when he stuck his
    >>nose into something that didn't concern him.


    >>> Does Google (and other bots) consider the content of includes when
    >>> indexing a page?


    >>think about it for a few seconds. how is google (or anyone/thing else)
    >>supposed to be able to determine if you're using includes or not?


    > See? This is what happens when you ask questions in the wrong group.
    > Brucie answers, that's what!


    what was wrong with my answer? it was very informative:

    1. if you're ever my neighbor mind your own gowd damn business.
    2. if you think for a few seconds (or less) of how SSIs work then the
    answer is self evident.

    i'm going to tell my mommy on you


    --
    b r u c i e
     
    brucie, Jul 3, 2004
    #9
  10. AyntRyte

    brucie Guest

    in post: <news:ZjoFc.4525$>
    AyntRyte <> said:

    > ayntryte @ (that new Google email thingy) dot com


    so what you really mean is ?

    why didn't you just say ? its much easier to click on
    than fart about changing ayntryte @ (that new Google
    email thingy) dot com into

    --
    b r u c i e
     
    brucie, Jul 3, 2004
    #10
  11. AyntRyte

    AyntRyte Guest

    brucie wrote:

    > in post: <news:ZjoFc.4525$>
    > AyntRyte <> said:
    >
    >
    >>ayntryte @ (that new Google email thingy) dot com

    >
    >
    > so what you really mean is ayntryte@gmail. com ?


    And what did I do to you to merit you posting my valid address to Usenet?

    >
    > why didn't you just say ayntryte@gmail. com ?
    >


    I'll repeat what you said to me word for word:
    *think about it for a few seconds.*

    --
    \\// Robert

    ayntryte @ (that new Google email thingy) dot com
     
    AyntRyte, Jul 4, 2004
    #11
  12. AyntRyte

    brucie Guest

    in post: <news:5cHFc.3877$>
    AyntRyte <> said:

    >>>ayntryte @ (that new Google email thingy) dot com


    >> so what you really mean is ayntryte@gmail. com ?


    > And what did I do to you to merit you posting my valid address to Usenet?


    whats wrong with posting a valid address to usenet?

    >> why didn't you just say ayntryte@gmail. com ?


    > I'll repeat what you said to me word for word:
    > *think about it for a few seconds.*


    the only thing i could think of was that you wanted to make it difficult
    for people to email you.

    --
    b r u c i e
     
    brucie, Jul 4, 2004
    #12
  13. AyntRyte

    AyntRyte Guest

    brucie wrote:

    > in post: <news:5cHFc.3877$>
    > AyntRyte <> said:
    >
    >
    >>>>ayntryte @ (that new Google email thingy) dot com

    >
    >
    >>>so what you really mean is ayntryte@gmail. com ?

    >
    >
    >>And what did I do to you to merit you posting my valid address to Usenet?

    >
    >
    > whats wrong with posting a valid address to usenet?


    Probably for the same reason that you think its wrong to post a valid
    address, but that didn't answer my question.

    >
    >
    >>>why didn't you just say ayntryte@gmail. com ?

    >
    >
    >
    >>I'll repeat what you said to me word for word:
    >>*think about it for a few seconds.*

    >
    >
    > the only thing i could think of was that you wanted to make it difficult
    > for people to email you.
    >



    --
    \\// Robert

    ayntryte @ (that new Google email thingy) dot com
     
    AyntRyte, Jul 4, 2004
    #13
  14. AyntRyte

    Neal Guest

    On Sun, 4 Jul 2004 09:36:10 +1000, brucie <> wrote:

    > the only thing i could think of was that you wanted to make it difficult
    > for people to email you.


    My hunch is that he doesn't mind people emailing him as much as spambots
    doing it. I suppose he feels that if someone's bright enough to figure out
    the puzzle, ok, email him.
     
    Neal, Jul 4, 2004
    #14
  15. AyntRyte

    brucie Guest

    in post: <news:eek:>
    Neal <> said:

    >> the only thing i could think of was that you wanted to make it difficult
    >> for people to email you.


    > My hunch is that he doesn't mind people emailing him as much as spambots
    > doing it.


    why would spambots be so interested in ? he must be
    paranoid to think spambots would be interested in
    looks like a boring address anyway. if i signed up to
    gmail i would have thought of something more exciting than


    --
    b r u c i e
     
    brucie, Jul 4, 2004
    #15
  16. AyntRyte

    Neal Guest

    On Sun, 4 Jul 2004 15:56:28 +1000, brucie <> wrote:

    > in post: <news:eek:>
    > Neal <> said:
    >
    >>> the only thing i could think of was that you wanted to make it
    >>> difficult
    >>> for people to email you.

    >
    >> My hunch is that he doesn't mind people emailing him as much as spambots
    >> doing it.

    >
    > why would spambots be so interested in ?


    They're probably just as interested in , but that's
    likely not your real address, is it?

    Brucie, you've unmunged a person's email for what purpose? Is there a
    deeper lesson I'm missing here?
     
    Neal, Jul 4, 2004
    #16
  17. AyntRyte

    AyntRyte Guest

    Neal wrote:

    > On Sun, 4 Jul 2004 09:36:10 +1000, brucie <> wrote:
    >
    >> the only thing i could think of was that you wanted to make it difficult
    >> for people to email you.

    >
    >
    > My hunch is that he doesn't mind people emailing him as much as spambots
    > doing it. I suppose he feels that if someone's bright enough to figure
    > out the puzzle, ok, email him.
    >


    Thank you for clarifying what i thought would be obvious for most Usenet
    regulars. I suppose that "think about it for a few seconds" didn't work
    in this case.

    --
    \\// Robert

    ayntryte @ (that new Google email thingy) dot com
     
    AyntRyte, Jul 4, 2004
    #17
  18. AyntRyte

    Big Bill Guest

    On Sun, 4 Jul 2004 08:48:41 +1000, brucie <>
    wrote:

    >in post: <news:>
    >Big Bill <> said:
    >
    >>>> Just curious...

    >
    >>>curiosity killed the cat and my next door neighbor when he stuck his
    >>>nose into something that didn't concern him.

    >
    >>>> Does Google (and other bots) consider the content of includes when
    >>>> indexing a page?

    >
    >>>think about it for a few seconds. how is google (or anyone/thing else)
    >>>supposed to be able to determine if you're using includes or not?

    >
    >> See? This is what happens when you ask questions in the wrong group.
    >> Brucie answers, that's what!

    >
    >what was wrong with my answer? it was very informative:
    >
    >1. if you're ever my neighbor mind your own gowd damn business.
    >2. if you think for a few seconds (or less) of how SSIs work then the
    >answer is self evident.
    >
    >i'm going to tell my mommy on you


    My mommy's bigger than your mommy. In fact, her bum has its own
    post-code. Also, moons.

    BB
     
    Big Bill, Jul 4, 2004
    #18
  19. AyntRyte

    Big Bill Guest

    On Sun, 4 Jul 2004 09:36:10 +1000, brucie <>
    wrote:

    >in post: <news:5cHFc.3877$>
    >AyntRyte <> said:
    >
    >>>>ayntryte @ (that new Google email thingy) dot com

    >
    >>> so what you really mean is ayntryte@gmail. com ?

    >
    >> And what did I do to you to merit you posting my valid address to Usenet?

    >
    >whats wrong with posting a valid address to usenet?
    >
    >>> why didn't you just say ayntryte@gmail. com ?

    >
    >> I'll repeat what you said to me word for word:
    >> *think about it for a few seconds.*

    >
    >the only thing i could think of was that you wanted to make it difficult
    >for people to email you.


    Not now though!

    BB
     
    Big Bill, Jul 4, 2004
    #19
  20. AyntRyte

    brucie Guest

    in post: <news:eek:>
    Neal <> said:

    >> why would spambots be so interested in ?


    > They're probably just as interested in , but that's
    > likely not your real address, is it?


    its real. my newsfeeds TOS says i have to use a real one.

    > Brucie,


    i like the way you say my name, it makes me hot.

    > you've unmunged a person's email for what purpose?


    it really annoys me. i have much better things to do than unmunge some
    clowns email address if i want to email them.

    > Is there a deeper lesson I'm missing here?


    the solution is to effectively manage your email, not to make it
    difficult for people to email you.

    --
    b r u c i e
     
    brucie, Jul 4, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Alvin Bruney [MVP]
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    760
    Bryce
    May 1, 2007
  2. Alvin Bruney [MVP]
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    563
    Hendrik van Rooyen
    May 9, 2007
  3. Rune
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    454
    John L.
    Nov 14, 2007
  4. Rune
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    410
  5. shland

    ASP and IIS and SSI...please help

    shland, Sep 22, 2003, in forum: ASP General
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    146
    Ray at
    Sep 23, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page