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@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
