[uf-discuss] Re: Precise Expansion Patterns

Sarven Capadisli csarven at gmail.com
Sun Dec 16 11:50:26 PST 2007

On Dec 16, 2007 2:16 PM, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
<bhawkeslewis at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Martin McEvoy wrote:
> > On Sun, 2007-12-16 at 18:01 +0000, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
> >> 1. Search engines currently "ignore" TITLE on non-linking A. (Does
> >> anyone has any clear evidence to confirm this? Does that evidence
> >> hold
> >> for all major engines, or only for Google? I can't find anything
> >> solid.)
> >
> > this may help:
> > go here http://www.webconfs.com/search-engine-spider-simulator.php
> > copy and paste this url
> > http://weborganics.co.uk/files/test.html
> >
> > the test consists of four anchor texts two with href attributes two
> > without
> >
> > It isnt the definitive answer but I would say pretty accurate ;)
> That's a cute tool, but I certainly wouldn't rely on a search engine
> simulator to be an accurate guide to the details of how real search
> engines like Google and Yahoo! Search index and weight content.
> --
> Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discuss at microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

This is one of the reasons not to rely on what some of the agents are
doing with the documents. Not only is it not reliable (because they
all take a guess) but also there is no guarantee how the information
will be extracted/perceived in the future with the actual search

As I mentioned before, the formats should steer clear from what these
agents may be doing and instead focus on deriving solutions that is
sound within the document.

Jeremy Keith wrote:
> If a design pattern is going to *mandate* that authors must use a
> particular element, then the semantic meaning of that element needs
> to be pretty solid.

I totally agree with this.


More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list