__/ [Big Bill] on Friday 17 February 2006 21:05 \__
> On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 14:51:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz
> <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>__/ [Big Bill] on Friday 17 February 2006 14:24 \__
>>
>>> On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:58:25 +0000, Roy Schestowitz
>>> <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>>__/ [Big Bill] on Friday 17 February 2006 09:41 \__
>>>>
>>>>> <meta name="robots" content="follow,noimageindex,nomediaindex">
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a new one on me. It looks like wishful thinking.
>>>>>
>>>>> BB
>>>>
>>>>It seems to be something ancient, which dates back to Altavista.
>>>>
>>>>http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum11/1260-1-15.htm
>>>>
>>>>I haven't heard about these tags until you mentioned them. All the ones I
>>>>know reside in a page that I use as a reference:
>>>>
>>>>http://www.i18nguy.com/markup/metatags.html
>>>
>>> Ta. I don't think they actually do anything.
>>>
>>> BB
>>
>>The way to avoid indexing of media is to centralise it under sensible,
>>aptly-names directories, e.g.
>>
>>/images
>>
>>and
>>
>>/videos
>>
>>Then, in robots.txt
>>
>>User_agent: *
>>Disallow: /images
>>Disallow: /videos
>
> Ideally yes. But if one bad robot ignores that and it gets published
> somewhere else, then it gets out anyway.
>
> BB
...No worse than users following images to their origin or looking into
robots.txt out of curiosity. Still, I agree it has pitfalls. As the folks in
alt.html repeatedly say: if you don't want your graphics to be stolen or
downloaded, the only solution is to never put them on the Web. period.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
7:15am up 19:34, 9 users, load average: 1.28, 1.32, 1.12
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine
|
|
