thr3ads.net - Rails spinoffs - scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines [Sep 2006]

If this information is useful, please help other people find it:
Share via:

Michael

2006-Sep-19 15:26 UTC

scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Hi all,
in addition to the post "Detecting AJAX Support" by Ed C. I want to
know, if there''re any ideas, discussions or strategies, how to
implement a "search-engine-friendly" detection of an AJAX (or
non-AJAX)
support.

We all know the problems with AJAX and search engines. Is
"Ajax.getTransport()" the only solution? Any other ideas?

PS: avoid RoR-specific answers, because I use "scriptaculous" with
PHP... (be ashamed ;-)

Greetinx
Michael


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Martin Bialasinski

2006-Sep-19 22:15 UTC

head link

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

On 9/19/06, Michael
<mail-u1jPNj63thlNl3dD/f30obNAH6kLmebB@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Is "Ajax.getTransport()" the only solution?
What is wrong with this feature detection? You want to check if the
User Agent supports some feature, then the best way is to test for
this feature.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Michael

2006-Sep-20 07:54 UTC

head link

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Martin Bialasinski wrote:
> > Is "Ajax.getTransport()" the only solution?
>
> What is wrong with this feature detection?
Search engines don''t execute JavaScript, do they?
We could use something like (pseudo code):

if Ajax.getTransport() = true
then do something like Ajax.Update() /* load the first page */

If this condition is not executed, we assume that the client can''t run
scriptaculous/AJAX and could be a search engine.

My question to the community is, if there''re any other (better) ideas?

-- 
Michael


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Martin Bialasinski

2006-Sep-20 08:02 UTC

head link

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

On 9/20/06, Michael
<mail-u1jPNj63thlNl3dD/f30obNAH6kLmebB@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> My question to the community is, if there''re any other (better)
ideas?
What are your evaluation criteria for "better"?

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Michael

2006-Sep-20 09:24 UTC

head link

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

As you can read in my original post, I asked if there''re any ideas,
discussions or strategies, how to implement a "search-engine-friendly"
solution (in any way).
A little bit brainstorming, you know? :-)


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Clay Loveless

2006-Sep-20 14:33 UTC

head link

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

On Sep 20, 2006, at 12:54 AM, Michael wrote:
> If this condition is not executed, we assume that the client can''t
run
> scriptaculous/AJAX and could be a search engine.
If it''s a search engine that can''t run JavaScript,
there''s not going
to be anything you can do in that browser session to check that the  
condition wasn''t executed. No JavaScript, after all. :)
> My question to the community is, if there''re any other (better)
ideas?
If your concern is primarily about search engines, you''d probably be  
better off with either a user-agent detection check on the server  
side, or using the old standby <noscript></noscript>.

-Clay

--
Killersoft.com




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Michael

2006-Oct-04 11:28 UTC

head link

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Ok, here is my solution (if anybody wants to know)... and it seems to
work:

<div id="searchengines">content for search engines</div>

var ajaxSupport = (Ajax.getTransport()) ? true : false;
if (ajaxSupport = true) {
        new Element.update(''searchengines'',
'''');
       
window.setTimeout(''Ajax.Update(\''human_page\'')'',
500);
}

The "content for search engines" (see <div>-tag above) includes
the
content of the start-page (with keywords describing the site etc.) and
static links to sub pages. A search engine "reads" this page, follows
links and does NOT execute the JavaScript off course.

The page (or some content-elements on the page) will be updated
immediately (ok, after 500ms) in a browser with JavaScript by
Ajax.Update(). Further navigation is done by AJAX.


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Tobie Langel

2006-Oct-04 11:43 UTC

head link

scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Your website might get banned by Google:

http://ma.gnolia.com/people/tobie/bookmarks/scoscuste

regards,

Tobie



On 4 oct. 2006, at 07:28, Michael wrote:
>
> Ok, here is my solution (if anybody wants to know)... and it seems to
> work:
>
> <div id="searchengines">content for search
engines</div>
>
> var ajaxSupport = (Ajax.getTransport()) ? true : false;
> if (ajaxSupport = true) {
>         new Element.update(''searchengines'',
'''');
>        
window.setTimeout(''Ajax.Update(\''human_page\'')'',
500);
> }
>
> The "content for search engines" (see <div>-tag above)
includes the
> content of the start-page (with keywords describing the site etc.) and
> static links to sub pages. A search engine "reads" this page,
follows
> links and does NOT execute the JavaScript off course.
>
> The page (or some content-elements on the page) will be updated
> immediately (ok, after 500ms) in a browser with JavaScript by
> Ajax.Update(). Further navigation is done by AJAX.
>
>
> >

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Christophe Porteneuve aka TDD

2006-Oct-04 12:04 UTC

head link

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Michael a écrit :> var ajaxSupport = (Ajax.getTransport()) ? true : false;
a.k.a. "var ajaxSupport = !!Ajax.getTransport();
> if (ajaxSupport = true) {
Ahem.  With a single = sign, you''ll reassign ajaxSupport, and therefore
ensure it''s true.  Beware!  This is why I always put rvalues on the
left
side:

	if (3 == myVar)

Also, this code is redundant.  It could as well be:

	if (ajaxSupport)
>         new Element.update(''searchengines'',
'''');
>        
window.setTimeout(''Ajax.Update(\''human_page\'')'',
500);
What is this Ajax.Update thing?

-- 
Christophe Porteneuve aka TDD
tdd-x+CfDp/qHev2eFz/2MeuCQ@public.gmane.org

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Christophe Porteneuve aka TDD

2006-Oct-04 12:05 UTC

head link

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Hello Tobie,

Tobie Langel a écrit :> Your website might get banned by Google:
> 
> http://ma.gnolia.com/people/tobie/bookmarks/scoscuste
This is wonderful FUD.  I see nothing whatsoever on the Google
guidelines referred to by this article, that says anything about
banning.  Especially since Google *is* pretty smart about AJAXy pages.
After all, they use the technology all over the map.

So, what exactly did you mean by that?  What info did you allude to?

-- 
Christophe Porteneuve aka TDD
tdd-x+CfDp/qHev2eFz/2MeuCQ@public.gmane.org

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Michael

2006-Oct-07 22:44 UTC

head link

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

The single = sign: oops, sorry - you''re quite right. Should one of the
following:

	if (ajaxSupport == true) {}
	if (ajaxSupport) {}
	if (Ajax.getTransport()) {}

And the Ajax.Update() thing should be pseudo code. Sorry for the lack
of clarity. It should be the scriptaculous function "Ajax.Updater()",
see:

	http://wiki.script.aculo.us/scriptaculous/show/Ajax.Updater

Let me describe my idea in another way: on the first page there''s a
<div>-tag with the id="searchengines". This <div> contains
the content
of all pages (very small web-site) or static links to the pages (a kind
of link-list). Furthermore the first page contains the JavaScript part
to check if the current client has AJAX capability. If AJAX is not
supported (ajaxSupport==false) or the JavaScript is not executed (e.g.
the client is a search engine), there is just the start page with the
static links (for human-visitors AND for search engines).

If the client has AJAX capability the content of the <div>-tag
(id="searchengines") is cleared (or its visibility is hidden) and the
page is updated by Ajax.Updater(...) with content of the second page
(e.g. the first static link on the link-list).

Conclusion: a modern web-browser with AJAX support doesn''t see the
content of the <div>-tag because it''s cleared as soon as possible
and
the page-content is updated with the second page. A search engine or a
very old browser without AJAX support sees the <div>-tag with links to
the pages (and may follow them). These are the same pages as updated by
AJAX - but more "static"... you know?


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Michael

2006-Oct-07 22:47 UTC

head link

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

I think Tobie meant the problem with cloaking: if a site doesn''t meet
Google''s quality guidelines, it may be blocked from the index. A
mechanism to show different page content for search engines or for
human-visitors is strictly prohibited.

On the one hand Tobie is right, because my solution uses a kind of
"hidden text" and two different ways to deliver the content to the
clients (one for clients with AJAX support and one without). On the
other hand you can argue that delivery method is not cloaking: the page
contents are stored in a database and there''re no differences if you
access the page by AJAX or by static links. The pages are the same!
It''s just a nicer layout/design if the client has AJAX capability.


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Tobie Langel

2006-Oct-07 23:02 UTC

head link

scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Hi Michael,

I actually wrote a small rant about this issue on my blog which you  
can find here: http://tobielangel.com/bytesandpieces/2006/10/05/ajax- 
no-nos/ (I''ve been heavily hit by comment spam lately, so comments  
are moderated for the moment and will thus not appear immediately).

Quite by coincidence, I am currently working on a plugin that will do  
just what you are looking for but will remain accessible,  
unobstrusive, and will not get you in trouble with google ;-) (not  
that in your case the latter really was not an issue considering what  
you wrote below).

I''ll let you know as soon as it is released.

Regards,

Tobie

On 7 oct. 2006, at 18:47, Michael wrote:
>
> I think Tobie meant the problem with cloaking: if a site doesn''t
meet
> Google''s quality guidelines, it may be blocked from the index. A
> mechanism to show different page content for search engines or for
> human-visitors is strictly prohibited.
>
> On the one hand Tobie is right, because my solution uses a kind of
> "hidden text" and two different ways to deliver the content to
the
> clients (one for clients with AJAX support and one without). On the
> other hand you can argue that delivery method is not cloaking: the  
> page
> contents are stored in a database and there''re no differences if
you
> access the page by AJAX or by static links. The pages are the same!
> It''s just a nicer layout/design if the client has AJAX capability.
>
>
> >

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Thomas Fuchs

2006-Oct-08 11:35 UTC

head link

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Am 08.10.2006 um 00:44 schrieb Michael:
> And the Ajax.Update() thing should be pseudo code. Sorry for the lack
> of clarity. It should be the scriptaculous function
"Ajax.Updater()",
> see:
>
> 	http://wiki.script.aculo.us/scriptaculous/show/Ajax.Updater
>
Just for clarification, Ajax.Updater is class in Prototype, not  
script.aculo.us
(which is an add-on to Prototype).

Best,
Thomas

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Rails spinoffs - Sep 2006 - scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines

Re: scriptaculous, AJAX and search engines