On 29/04/07, Andrew Lih <andrew.lih(a)gmail.com> wrote:
EXHIBIT A. Brion and developers say if something is on
is trusted. Brion and Rob Church rejected the feature request of being
able to customize follow/nofollow for Interwiki sites. Reason given:
EXHIBIT B. However, the meta page for Interwiki says nothing about
sites being trusted. Only "useful":
So there is the discrepancy. It would make sense to come to a common
understanding of what role the Interwiki list should play, and align
technology/software/developer decisions with it.
They are "trusted" not to be spam links. If they are "useful", it is
quite unlikely they will be spam links. Not impossible (as I'm sure
Geni is about to point out), but unlikely.