I use my own info windows because I find the standard ones too big and obtrusive for small/thin gadgets (like Blogger sidebars etc). It would be nice to be able to submit my content for consideration when indexing.
On Dec 4, 5:12 pm, Papa Bear <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the FAQ, it helps quite a bit. However on the one question > I asked (last on the list): > > Q: If my map is in an iframe that is part of a larger page, which URL > or page will you link to? > A: See the background information below (and the related article it > links to) on how Google handles frames and iframes in general. > > The answer is not relevant to the question. The explanation discusses > how Google navigates though a page with frames and iframes to generate > indeses. This is relevant to the top-down issues of index building > when web crawlers find a site with frames and how it navigates through > that site. > > My question, OTOH is about the bottom-up issue of indexing when the > Map API feeds indexable information to the search engine, which > information is at the "bottom" or innermost layer of the web page. A > simple solution would simply to use the location property of the "top" > object to generate the url of the page that put the map in an iframe. > > The situation is very common. You do it yourself on your blog. In my > guest blog post when I did some development > (seehttp://googlemapsapi.blogspot.com/2007/08/you-can-always-go-back-to-w... > ), one of my maps showed Central Park, in New York City. Yet the blog > post was about the drag-zoom method. So if you index "Central Park" > and associate it with the map's url it would be rather meaningless. > If you associate it with the blog post, the viewer will "get" what the > map is all about (although he/she may be disappointed there's not > more information about Central Park). > > Thanks > > On Dec 2, 2:03 am, "pamela (Google Employee)" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Update: > > We've posted answers to the common questions that developers have been > > asking > > here:http://groups.google.com/group/google-maps-api/web/map-indexing-faq > > > Please keep in mind that this is an early experiment and we plan to > > iterate and improve it over time. > > Thanks for all the interest and questions. > > - pamela > > > On Nov 27, 3:00 pm, "pamela (Google Employee)" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > Hey developers- > > > > Just wanted to let you know that we've seen all your questions here, > > > and are working on a set of answers for you from the API team. > > > > - pamela > > > > On Nov 25, 2:25 am, Mike Williams <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Wasn't it Joe Edelman who wrote: > > > > > >My app opens and live-updates infowindows based on real-time streaming > > > > >data coming in through polled or long-running requests. It's already > > > > >unusually bandwidth and CPU intensive for javascript. The idea of a > > > > >many additional xhrs or fetches to google while this is happening > > > > >seems like a bad one. Am I right? Should I opt out even though I > > > > >don't mind being indexed? > > > > > There would appear to be nothing to be gained by having your infowindow > > > > content indexed if the content will have been be replaced by different > > > > data by the time someone follows the link to your page. The only thing > > > > you lose by switching indexing off is getting page hits from people who > > > > are looking for stuff that you used to have in your infowindows but > > > > probably don't any more. > > > > > -- > > > > Mike Williamshttp://econym.org.uk/gmap -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Maps API" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-maps-api?hl=en.
