SSI and SEO

[Toby A Inkster]

But it makes sense not to use them, I removed them from my reader's
"quote char" config because it results in false quote marking for
example whenever there is a colon at the start of a line.

And when is that? Not very often. Perhaps the occasional smiley.

 

[Toby A Inkster]

Of the three discussed, I believe ">" is the RFC-compliant one.

Quoting is not covered by any RFC. The "son of RFC 1036" document
recommends ">", though that's not an RFC yet (and at this rate will
probably never be).

Either way, ':' and '|' have been used since time immemorial[1], so any
sane newsreader should respect them.

[1] legally "time immemorial" is defined as 1189 AD. odd.

 

[Blinky the Shark]

Blinky the Shark wrote:

Quoting is not covered by any RFC. The "son of RFC 1036" document
recommends ">", though that's not an RFC yet (and at this rate will
probably never be).

Sec 4.x, RFC 2646.

 

[Mark Parnell]

And when is that? Not very often. Perhaps the occasional smiley.

Or CSS pseudo-classes. And sometimes in ASCII art. But no - it doesn't
happen often.

 

[Michael Fesser]

.oO(Toby A Inkster)

I did that until I read somewhere - possibly in here or in aww - that
some harvestors were decoding.

Well, then double-encode. [...]

<a href="x"> [...]
<a href="%78"> [...]
<a href="%78"> [...]

Even this is quite easy to decode (in PHP for example with three simple
regular expressions and preg_replace()).

Besides which, in my experience single-encoding remains an effective
anti-spam tool.

But for how long?

Micha

 

[Toby A Inkster]

Even this is quite easy to decode (in PHP for example with three simple
regular expressions and preg_replace()).

But if a spammer can spend 20 minutes knocking together a tool that can
gather 90% of e-mail addresses as it crawls the web; is the spammer really
going to spend 2 hours crafting one that can get 100%?

Of course not. Spammers are lazy. That's why simple tricks like that work.

 

[michael]

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

Thanks,

Google takes the website as it is displayed, so the view source is what Google will see. Reason why Wordpress and many other Content Management Systems are good for SEO.

If you have any more questions let me know or check out my website at
<a href="http://www.alcantaramedia.com/">Boca Raton Internet Marketing</>

 

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

If you have any more questions let me know or check out my website at <a
href="http://www.alcantaramedia.com/">Boca Raton Internet Marketing</>

Okay... ;-)

"Alcantara Media does Web Development right"

<http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http:/%
2Fwww.alcantaramedia.com%2F>
"Errors found while checking this document as XHTML 1.0 Strict!
Result: 38 Errors, 1 warning(s)"

<http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?
profile=css21&warning=0&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alcantaramedia.com%2F>
"Sorry! We found the following errors (404)"

[and that's not a Page Not Found error, that's 404 CSS errors!]

 

[dorayme]

Google takes the website as it is displayed, so the view source is what
Google will see. Reason why Wordpress and many other Content Management
Systems are good for SEO.

Why is CMS so especially good for SEO that it is worth mentioning?

 

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Google takes the website <snip>

If you have any more questions let me know or check out my website at <a
href="http://<snip>/">Boca Raton Internet Marketing</>

Oh yes, I should have asked why are you replying to an *eight year old*
post? Was it solely to spam your 'marketing' site?

 

[Lewis]

michael wrote:

Oh yes, I should have asked why are you replying to an *eight year old*
post? Was it solely to spam your 'marketing' site?

The spammer is just now catching up on USENET after their 8 year coma!