New answers tagged bing
2
I wouldn't worry about "cloaking" on files that are meant only for the consumption of robots. Showing a 403 Forbidden status when the user-agent isn't Googlebot should be fine on a sitemap file. Google cares about cloaking when users see different results than Googlebot. In this case, Google is never going to refer users to the sitemap at all.
I often ...
2
Here are instructions on how to tell Bing you have moved site:
Bing Site Move tool
1
If I read your question right is that basically you do not want users or any other bots than Bing and Google having the ability to visit sitemap.xml as the contents of the sitemap are generated real time which could cause additional server load that you want to avoid.
If I'm correct you are approaching this in the wrong manner and there should be no reason ...
2
Google reads content within a element that uses display:none, it also checks to make sure there is a trigger point, i.e that the content can be revealed though JavaScript.
Many people don't put in trust in Google being able to understand their scripts and many people opt to use <noscript> as Anthony has mentioned, using noscript ensures that Google ...
3
No you shouldn't concern yourself, it makes perfect user sense.
If you want to be nice to those with javascript disabled though you could place a <noscript> element with your hidden images.
I would also put the photo numbers in the alt tags, something like alt="Photo #2 of bmw 328 manual 2008 black 18 inch rims"
Top 50 recent answers are included
