<meta name="robots" content="none">

[rpo]

Ce tag meta qu'on voit dans le code source de toutes les NOTES écrites dans Geneweb, d'où vient-il ?

Je comprends que pour la base de données ce tag peut-être encombrant (à cause des boucles d'indexation des robots) mais a-t-il sa raison d'être pour les 'NOTES' écrites ? Peut-être qu'il est possible de l'enlever avec un paramètre du fichier gwf mais j'ai pas trouvé comment. J'ai une centaine de Notes écrites dans Geneweb mais elles restent inconnues parce que non indexées par les robots Google à cause de ce tag no-Index ! La solution serait peut-être d'avoir la possibilité d'ajouter des tags meta pour les notes dans le fichier gwf et avoir ainsi le choix entre no-index et index-all ou follow?

!! Je me rend compte aussi que sur Geneweb, pour toutes les pages produites pour les individus de la base il y a ce no-index alors que pour celles produites par Geneanet on a : <meta name="robots" content="index,follow" /> Ça explique pourquoi nos individus Geneweb ne sont pas trouvés lors d'une recherche ?

[par le même occasion je remercie Henri de se pencher sur le phénomène semblable qui touche les fiches individuelles de la base de données qui demeurent inconnues du grand public alors que celle des Geneanet sont indexées ]

Merci.

[hgouraud]

this could be handled at the template level:
%if;bvar.no_robot;<meta name="robots" content="none">%end;

[rpo]

There is the template 'note.txt' module that apply to individuals notes within an individual page (notes for death, birth, burial etc.) .

But where is the template for the NOTES that are written indpendently of the individus ?

[hgouraud]

m=NOTES does not use a template (unfortunately).
The note is displayed with some .ml code.
The <meta ...> command comes from hutil.ml line 43
I will see if a test on bvar.no_robot can be added

[rpo]

Thanks ... Is it the same for the individual page ?

Ex:

Geneanet : https://gw.geneanet.org/rpoulin2010?lang=fr&n=garneau&oc=0&p=georges has <meta name="robots" content="index,follow" />

Geneweb : https://genepoulin.net/gene/geneweb7.cgi?b=poulin&p=georges&n=garneau has <meta name="robots" content="none">

I understand the possible problems with the robots in the base but if we could have an option to make it index: follow for the individuals page like Geneanet do it it will very welcome, so our pages could be searched ,

[hgouraud]

PR #1728 should handle robot indexing.
I changes the bvar name to "robot_index=yes" and "robot_index_forum=yes"

[rpo]

Will this applyed to already written Notes in the database - i guess no ?

Will this applyed also to pages for individus, since all pages for individus published now are given index=none ?

[hgouraud]

this applies to pages dynamically created.
if you want the notes to be indexed, you have to create a static document pointing to all the notes, in a fashion similar to what was done for individuals.
you could also include in the static document for individuals a set of direct pointers to the files in notes_d folder.

[rpo]

this applies to pages dynamically created. if you want the notes to be indexed, you have to create a static document pointing to all the notes, in a fashion similar to what was done for individuals. you could also include in the static document for individuals a set of direct pointers to the files in notes_d folder.

For those pages already written (NOTES), Goggle refuse to index them since there are already tagged with index=none. No way to change that.

And about my other question, the individual dynamically produced pages (ex; georges garneau), they also get that index=none tag, so they are not indexed. Will PR #1728 manage that?

[hgouraud]

For those pages already written (NOTES), Goggle refuse to index them since there are already tagged with index=none. No way to change that.

The files in notes_d are not tagged.
Displaying a note (m=NOTES) generates dynamically a page which will not be tagged with PR #1728

And about my other question, the individual dynamically produced pages (ex; georges garneau), they also get that index=none tag, so they are not indexed. Will PR #1728 manage that?

yes

[rpo]

Thanks.... appreciated - for when ?

[a2line]

Thanks.... appreciated - for when ?

8 hours ago! ; )

[rpo]

Thanks.... appreciated - for when ?

8 hours ago! ; )

THanks :-] - i need to wait for a compilation. Great addition!