I don't think it would be a good idea, but we could replace the edit
this page link with a form and button that does the same thing.
Surely, google doesn't post forms when indexing (btw., I was quite
amused by the florbling discussion).
Jason
Brion Vibber wrote:
On Thu, 2003-04-10 at 19:58, Nick Reinking wrote:
I think the misunderstanding is not on
Google's part. As far as I can
tell, Google isn't indexing that page.
A quick search on google for "wibrator wikipedia" shows a subsection for
the edit link. Note that it doesn't have any 'Cached' link. This means
that google saw a link to the edit page in a page that could be indexed.
I didn't say it was being cached, that its content could be
word-searched, or that it had been spidered through to other pages. I
said it was *indexed*. Now, maybe Google uses some word other than
"indexed" to mean "contained in a database of links which are shown to
users when they search for words contained in the link". I'll buy that.
Maybe the word they use is "florble". In that case, the page is being
florbled despite our best efforts to stop it from being florbled.
Is there any way we can tell google not to florble pages that are
explicitly excluded by our robots.txt file so that people will stop
complaining to *us* about google's overzealous florbling?
Hypothetically we could jimmy the page to not produce edit links if the
user agent is googlebot, but that would be very annoying for several
reasons:
1) The google-cached page would be missing those links.
2) This would screw with page caching. Google hits a lot of pages, and
we'd have to either not cache any of its hits or be very careful in
coding around it.
-- brion vibber (brion @
pobox.com)
--
"Jason C. Richey" <jasonr(a)bomis.com>