Reputation
6,534
Top tag
Next privilege 10,000 Rep.
Access moderator tools
Badges
11 35
Newest
 Nice Answer
Impact
~244k people reached

Apr
11
comment Googlebot is still attempting to crawl old content
@StephenOstermiller Good idea. Although, if the reason Google keeps crawling those URLs is because some other sites still link to them, disallowing them in robots.txt may cause Google to reindex them based on the links alone.
Apr
11
comment Googlebot is still attempting to crawl old content
What advantage (besides the dubious one of sponging up residual link juice) do you think serving a 301 redirect to a "forum closed" page would have over simply serving a 404 / 410 error page with the same content?
Mar
15
comment Say a customer is an observant Jew and wants his site to be offline on Shabat - SEO problem?
@ThorstenS: Hmm... the Retry-After header can also take a timestamp, so if you could somehow obtain next Saturday's date, that would work. But it might be easiest to just use a dynamic 503 error document (e.g. in PHP) and make it emit the correct Retry-After header.
Mar
13
comment Say a customer is an observant Jew and wants his site to be offline on Shabat - SEO problem?
+1 for a correct status 503 implementation. Your answer could be even better if you also made it send a Retry-After header indicating when the site will be available again, though.
Mar
12
revised Difference between the Accept and Content-Type HTTP headers
thanks for the edit, but let's not break the grammar quite so badly; also added some extra information
Feb
24
comment Do 301 redirections carry Google penalty?
I could've sworn this had been asked before, but if so, my search skills are failing me. :/
Feb
3
awarded  Nice Answer
Jan
31
answered Robots.txt should be in the root-directory or can be in sub-directory?
Jan
11
awarded  Yearling
Dec
25
answered How to submit shortened URLs to Google so that they are included in the index
Dec
18
comment When using a stacked font-family, what does the browser use when NONE of the specified fonts are present?
(And of course, if we really start picking nits, there's the fact that CSS font fallback is done on a per-glyph basis. So while the standard requires every browser to have a "sans-serif" font family, it does not, AFAICT, require the fonts in that family to actually contain any glyphs.)
Dec
18
comment When using a stacked font-family, what does the browser use when NONE of the specified fonts are present?
Technically, the standard says that "All five generic font families are defined to exist in all CSS implementations (they need not necessarily map to five distinct actual fonts)." So every CSS-compliant browser does have a "sans-serif" generic font family, although it's not strictly guaranteed to map to an actual sans-serif font. But yes, this is a very hair-splitting distinction.
Dec
18
comment When using a stacked font-family, what does the browser use when NONE of the specified fonts are present?
If your browser is using Times New Roman as its default sans-serif font, something is seriously screwed up. But, yes, without that sans-serif at the end, the browser would pick its default fallback font, which is typically the same as the default serif font, and quite often Times New Roman or something similar.
Nov
17
revised Does it make sense to return a 410 instead of 404 when some page has been permanently removed?
edited tags
Oct
31
awarded  Revival
Oct
30
awarded  Nice Answer
Oct
24
awarded  Nice Answer
Oct
22
answered Should we drop AJAX crawling scheme?
Oct
11
awarded  Revival
Aug
25
comment Can an HTTP status 400 be a substitute for a 410?
@AnubianNoob: "Gone" is, more properly, a subset of "Not Found"; if it's gone, it's not there to be found any more. Indeed, the 410 Gone status code was added in HTTP/1.1 basically as a more specific and emphatic version of 404, to let servers explicitly indicate that a formerly valid resource has been deliberately and permanently removed (as opposed to, say, just being accidentally or temporarily inaccessible).