Printer Friendly Version
Email this thread to a friend
|
Featured Web Site Template |
|
Reflects user activity within the last 5 minutes
|
|
| Member |
Message |
mj1256
Joined: Jun 05, 2006
# Posts: 918
|
Posted: 2007-Jul-13 05:29
Google is coming out with a new tag called "unavailable_after" which will
allow people to tell Google when a particular page will no longer be
available for crawling. For instance, if you have a special offer on your
site that expires on a particular date, you might want to use the
unavailable_after tag to let Google know when to stop indexing it. Or
perhaps you write articles that are free for a particular amount of time,
but then get moved to a paid-subscription area of your site.
Unavailable_after is the tag for you! Pretty neat stuff!
i imagine the syntax is
<unavailable_after > cancell this content afer the next full moon </ unavailable_after >
info from High Rankings Advisor
[ Message was edited by: mj1256 07/13/2007 05:56 am ]
|
 |
beth_lk
Staff
Joined: Jun 23, 2004
# Posts: 1247
|
Posted: 2007-Jul-13 06:51
now that is just COOL !!!!! Thanks for the heads up 
|
|
SportsGuy
Staff
Joined: Aug 30, 2002
# Posts: 3600
|
Posted: 2007-Jul-13 10:23
I'm guessing they just won't index anything with this tag then...
|
|
dudibob
Joined: Oct 13, 2005
# Posts: 1462
|
Posted: 2007-Jul-13 10:27
I'd imagine it to be a meta tag but that could just be me 
Looks like this tag will be a life saver and means less chance of going supplemental
|
|
mj1256
Joined: Jun 05, 2006
# Posts: 918
|
Posted: 2007-Jul-13 13:57
i hope it is the syntax i suggested, the source wasn't clear on this, but you may be right, its could be a meta tag
|
|
g1smd
Staff
Joined: Jul 28, 2002
# Posts: 10438
|
Posted: 2007-Jul-13 16:25
It will have to be a meta tag, otherwise no documents including it will validate.
I don't think that Google would want to break the entire web with a new tag.
|
|
SportsGuy
Staff
Joined: Aug 30, 2002
# Posts: 3600
|
Posted: 2007-Jul-13 20:15
On the surface I think it'll appeal to many e-comm folks as suggested in many places today, but really, why would they index a page that's going dormant in 3 - 4 weeks anyway? oftne it takes longer than that for content to even make it into the SERPs and ratchet up the ranks, so for many sites, the tag will remain a nice addition, but practically pointless.
Further to this, as Google tracks trends with domains, will the lower performers simply have those pages tagged with this little beauty not indexed any more?
Why spin resources on indexing a page that someone is goign to take down in 2 weeks, etc.?
I see this is another way Google is "asking" webmasters to help them do their own work. "Please help us know when to remove pages from the index by putting en expiry date on them - thanks."
What if, over time, that page with the outdated info ends up ranking well for a phrase and that in turn drives users to the site via the navigational links built in?
Are we in jeopardy of leaving potential conversions and sale son the table by having pages drop out of any organic race they might (accidentally) do well in?
|
|
langardmicro
Joined: Mar 12, 2007
# Posts: 76
|
Posted: 2007-Jul-14 01:13
Political campaigns come to mind.
|
|
g1smd
Staff
Joined: Jul 28, 2002
# Posts: 10438
|
Posted: 2007-Jul-14 02:16
Index it and show it in SERPs while it is current. Dump it as soon as it is not.
Seems like a good idea for some types of content. For other types, I am not so sure.
|
|
langardmicro
Joined: Mar 12, 2007
# Posts: 76
|
Posted: 2007-Jul-15 09:49
You're right g1smd, it looks like a kind of voluntary Kill Switch which I think is great, although I'd like to see the resulting impact after it comes into widespread use.
How many pages of dead real estate, dead (so to speak) candidates, dead brass (I won't say it), etc., etc., could Google PURGE itself of -- to save valuable and expensive processing resources -- if webmasters implemented a Dead Pool tag that terminated the page crawl.
No more manipulating .404s, 301s, dah, dah, trying to keep some modicum of sensibility and avoid the dreaded penalization if you don't -- for pages that either don't exist anymore or are outdated and useless.
Why not make the domains available for something else since ICANN requires a one-year minimum? You could make wannabe senator's such-and-such domain -- after his/her overwhelming loss -- into something useful like an interactive, virtual basketball court for disadvantaged, inner-city youth struggling to become SEOs via JimWorld.
|
|
Dinkar
Staff
Joined: Aug 12, 2001
# Posts: 4391
|
Posted: 2007-Jul-15 14:39
There is no need of this tag. 404 should be enough to stop indexing the page.
|
|
dudibob
Joined: Oct 13, 2005
# Posts: 1462
|
Posted: 2007-Jul-16 10:40
I think the point of the tag is a cheat to help Google get around the supplemental ghost, where Google keeps a page indexed for years even though it's been 404'd for a looong time.
|
|
You are not permitted to post messages in this forum or topic, because of one or more of the following reasons:
- You have not yet logged in, or registered properly as a member
- You are a member, but no longer have posting rights.
- This is a private forum, for which you do not have permissions.
If you are a recent member, it's possible that you simply have not yet confirmed your account. Please
check your email for a message entitled 'JimWorld Forums: Confirm Your Account' and follow the instructions
contained within.
If you cannot find this message, click here to Re-Send it.
|
If you are still experiencing problem, please read the
Login Assistance
Article for some advice on what may be causing your login not to work properly.
|
Switch to Advanced Editor and ...
Create a New Topic
or Reply to this Thread
|
|
Inbox
