Hi, This sounds like a good idea to me :-)
There's one small issue possibly, to changing the folder structure. The DOCBOOK schemes have some fancy way to link between docbooks; these require that the books be kept relative to one another in some file tree structure. As long as that's not changed, I think there will be no problem. If anyone's curious, the relevant bits of config info are in the uima-docbook-olink project, in the various "site.xml" files. You can see refs to the famous "d" folder there. There may be a dependency on the "books" being just one directory layer under d/, so putting an extra layer might break things (but I'm not sure...). Maybe there's a way to do this without introducing a new level in the directory? -Marshall On 4/6/2016 4:43 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: > Hi all, > > I believe some time back we were talking about a strategy to avoid search > engines pointing to ancient version of the UIMA documentation. > > I have read a bit on rel="canonical" and robots.txt. > > 1) per webpage - Apparently, one can place a `link rel="canonical"` element > on any HTML page. Search engines seeing this tag will then not index this > page because it is considered to be a duplicate of whatever other page the > link points to. > > 2) via http header/htaccess - Since we probably don't want to patch up all > our JavaDoc files, the information about a canonical source can also be sent > in the HTTP header, e.g. via a suitable htaccess file. > > I guess the idea would be that for any old documentation page, we would want > it to point to its latest version as its canonical source. I mean for every > page, not only for the index page. This seems a bit tedious. > > My suggestion would be an alternative that exploits the website folder > structure and uses robots.txt. > > We disallow indexing of the "d" folder on the UIMA website. > We place all the "*-current" folders (svn copies of the latest documentation > versions) under a dedicated folder (e.g. "d/current") and allow indexing that. > > In that way, the outdated versions of the documentation should be hidden from > the search engines and the respective latest versions should be indexed. > > Opinions? Does anybody have experience with SEO? > > Cheers, > > -- Richard > >
