Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Subscribe to HRA Now!

 



Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?

Share and download Custom Google Analytics Reports, dashboards and advanced segments--for FREE! 

 



 

 www.CustomReportSharing.com 

From the folks who brought you High Rankings!



Photo
- - - - -

Noindex Partial Content Inside A Page


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 z1a

z1a

    HR 1

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 17 June 2009 - 06:51 AM

It may sounds crazy, but I wonder if there is a way to make Spiders no to index a layer inside a page. I mean the page have to be indexed except certain content that could be inside a layer.

I rather not use Iframes.

thanks

#2 T.N

T.N

    HR 4

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 174 posts

Posted 17 June 2009 - 07:10 AM

QUOTE(z1a @ Jun 17 2009, 02:51 PM) View Post
It may sounds crazy, but I wonder if there is a way to make Spiders no to index a layer inside a page. I mean the page have to be indexed except certain content that could be inside a layer.

I rather not use Iframes.

thanks


Hi,

IMO, this can be done by buidling up your page on HTML frames, add that layer on a separate page to appear in that frame, and tell the spinder not to index it.

But back to the basics, frames is not good for SEO.

#3 Randy

Randy

    Convert Me!

  • Moderator
  • 17,540 posts

Posted 17 June 2009 - 10:19 AM

Sounds like trying to trick the search engines and show them something different than what you're showing users. Which as a general concept that's a pretty bad idea since the search engines tell you not to do it.

#4 1dmf

1dmf

    Keep Asking, Keep Questioning, Keep Learning

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,167 posts
  • Location:Worthing - England

Posted 17 June 2009 - 10:23 AM

depends if they mean displaying different data to spider vs user, or excluding some data because it is only visible when a user clicks a specific button/link.

The only way I get round this is to use JS and ajax to give the onlclick, display something different functionality, but the source code of the base html file, contains only the starting / default content, and the content I wan't the SE's to associate with the specific page.

It's not stealth, it's not black hat, but only do it for the right reasons, not to fool the SE's or to show them something different than the user, but only as functionality in your website for the user benefit, keeping in mind the way the SE's work and index pages.

#5 z1a

z1a

    HR 1

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 17 June 2009 - 10:31 AM

Thanks for your answers

T.N,
I definitely would not use frames or iframes

Randy,
What I want it's like using noindex for just part of the content inside a page.
For example, I have a page with 2 sentences I want the first one to be indexed but not the second one. I don't see why this should bother Search Engines, the same way it's ok using noindex for a whole page.

1dmf,
The reason is because some of the content in my product pages of my site is provided by an external company who doesn't want SE indexing their content in my pages, they are using it too at their own site.
I'll think about the JS and ajax option. thanks

Edited by z1a, 17 June 2009 - 10:57 AM.


#6 Randy

Randy

    Convert Me!

  • Moderator
  • 17,540 posts

Posted 17 June 2009 - 10:55 AM

They don't give you that level of control, for obvious reasons. It would be badly abused if it were easy to do.

Historically people have still tried to do it via Javascript, for both legitimate and non-legitimate reasons. But seeing as how the engines are getting better at reading and even parsing Javascript every day, it's still dangerous.

The search engines want to be shown the same thing that users are shown, except for in relatively rare situations. If you step outside that box the engines get to decide if they think you're doing it for nefarious reasons or not. If they decide you are in fact doing it to hide something from them they can and will red flag the page.

#7 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 33,244 posts

Posted 17 June 2009 - 10:59 AM

You can create an image of the text and do it that way. It's likely that it won't be read in the image by the search engines.

#8 z1a

z1a

    HR 1

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 17 June 2009 - 11:02 AM

QUOTE(Randy @ Jun 17 2009, 05:55 PM) View Post
They don't give you that level of control, for obvious reasons.

That is what I was afraid of

Thank you :-)

QUOTE(Jill @ Jun 17 2009, 05:59 PM) View Post
You can create an image of the text and do it that way. It's likely that it won't be read in the image by the search engines.

The problem is that is a dynamic generated content.

#9 1dmf

1dmf

    Keep Asking, Keep Questioning, Keep Learning

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,167 posts
  • Location:Worthing - England

Posted 17 June 2009 - 11:17 AM

Your only option is to grab it with AJAX and update the DOM, if frames are not an option.

I use this method to hide an enquiry form from nasty little bots who try to spam it, which does mean that includes SE spiders as well,but hey, it's not stealth tactics for gaming the SE's and 100% legitimate reason, so i don't see how the SE's could perceive it any other way.

But as Randy says they *might* , but i'll cross that bridge should I come to it wink1.gif





#10 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,325 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 17 June 2009 - 02:55 PM

Yahoo! actually supports an in-page tag that lets you exclude some of your content from indexing. So far as I know, no other major search engines support the tag.

You can read about Yahoo!'s support of the robots-nocontent tag on their blog.

BTW -- search engines do crawl and index frame pages. I am surprised people still believe otherwise. Frames have their drawbacks but being found and indexed by major search engines is not one of them.

iframes are still ignored by major search engines.

#11 z1a

z1a

    HR 1

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 18 June 2009 - 02:39 AM

QUOTE(Michael Martinez @ Jun 17 2009, 09:55 PM) View Post
You can read about Yahoo!'s support of the robots-nocontent tag on their blog.

This is what I needed, but it would be great if Google implements robots-nocontent Tag too.
Actually I am not going to use it if only works with Yahoo.


#12 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,325 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 18 June 2009 - 01:18 PM

I think Google would only support it if the SEO community clamored for that support in great numbers. Google has been persuaded to implement some changes I've felt were pointless due to SEO community requests.

Without getting into the details of what I think is good or bad, I would say that you need to convince the SEO community there is a real need for this kind of in-page exclusion. A good business that is extensible to many verticals would suffice. Then you just have to present it in the right context to various SEO communities (like this one) and see if people will support the idea.

It takes time to persuade a search engine to change the way it handles its index. At this point, I don't see any groundswell of support for the Yahoo! initiative.

#13 1dmf

1dmf

    Keep Asking, Keep Questioning, Keep Learning

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,167 posts
  • Location:Worthing - England

Posted 19 June 2009 - 05:46 AM

QUOTE
BTW -- search engines do crawl and index frame pages. I am surprised people still believe otherwise.
Yes true, but they don't index them as part of the current page, they are indexed as separate pages, including Iframe URL's i beleive.

Edited by 1dmf, 19 June 2009 - 05:56 AM.


#14 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 33,244 posts

Posted 19 June 2009 - 05:20 PM

QUOTE(1dmf @ Jun 19 2009, 06:46 AM) View Post
Yes true, but they don't index them as part of the current page, they are indexed as separate pages, including Iframe URL's i beleive.


Yes, you are correct, 1dmf. notworthy.gif

#15 1dmf

1dmf

    Keep Asking, Keep Questioning, Keep Learning

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,167 posts
  • Location:Worthing - England

Posted 22 June 2009 - 04:03 AM

wub.gif wow , high praise from the high priestess notworthy.gif




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

We are now a read-only forum.
 
No new posts or registrations allowed.