[uf-discuss] Re: Precise Expansion Patterns

[Sarven Capadisli]

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
engines.

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.

-Sarven