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.



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 

Reply via email to