When should I use no-follow on internal Links?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by subhzash

This is not at all misleading anyone. By using the nofollow link we can show the accurate link backs to search engines. More ever this is the forum to post their own reviews and everyone has the liberty. You post what ever you want. Iam very confident about my postings....


Thanks for your suggestion


Regards
Subhash

It is not misleading when you tell that some one should break his site internal navigation structure?
My apologies if you felt offended.

And I am out of here.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by kgun

John calm down man:

"Hello Webnauts,

You mix a lot of things here, which produces incorrect usage of the code. Please don't additionaly confuse some readers here.
"Rel" is related to individual link only and can have only one attribute, that is "nofollow". "Index, Noindex" doesn't exist here. "GoogleOn/GoogleOff" tags don't exist outside Google Search Appliances, so they don't work on Internet."

Source: Using No-Follow on Internal Links Cause a Drop in Rankings?

1. I was not aware one year ago that "Googleon/GoogleOff did not exist outside of Google Search Appliances.
I started a thread asking about that here at WPW that time, and I did not get a single response until today. Anyway.
2. The poster also told me there:

"Rel" is related to individual link only and can have only one attribute, that is "nofollow".

Only one attribute? And that is only "nofollow"? And were would your add your microformats, if you were using any?
Hm. What about this? Links in HTML documents

So are you also claiming that the link I am implementing on my site is wrong?

<a href="http://www.webnauts.net/" rel="popup standard 640 480 noicon, me" title="Web Accessibility, SEO, &amp; Usability Testing &amp; Consulting Company">Webnauts Net</a>

Lets not hijack the thread Kjell. If you want, start a new thread and invite me there.

P.S. By the way are we competitors?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by kgun

But you only compete with yourself according to what you have said elswhere

Where the hell did I claim that you should use the "nofollow" attribute on all your internal links of your site, breaking that way your site navigation. I think you missed something - somewhere Kjell.
And by the way I strictly do not use the "nofollow" attribute on my site.

Just FYI.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Having a site providing the information as XML files, converted to HTML with XSLT?
If that is your point, the idea is damn cool.

Yes, even mor than that, convewrting XLink to HTML links in that example. To cite from page 218 in the book:

"This is an example of using XSLT to transfrom a set of XML resources and an associated linkbase into a form that is usable with current browsers (i.e., independent from XLink/XPointer support on the client site).

So, we can now use link roles to define (rather simplistically) the semantics of a link. The next level up from this is to increase the lvel of sophistication of semantic information that we attach to a link. One way of doing this would be to use the role attribute to define a resource that specifies more complex information about the link."

Google has started to index XML driven content and sites. See links above for more precise information.

Modern browser support for XML and XSLT is Ok. There is as far as I know today ( early 2008 ) no fully XLink and XPointer compliant browser. The example shows how you can make XML files for future browsers and SE's and convert it to a format that can be rendered with current browsers.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by kgun

" One way of doing this would be to use the role attribute to define a resource that specifies more complex information about the link."

Something that we can somehow achieve today with the "blockquote" tag, adding in the cited hyperlink a title attribute?

[kgun]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

The poster also told me there: Only one attribute? And that is only "nofollow"? And were would your add your microformats, if you were using any?
Hm. What about this? Links in HTML documents

I noted that too. Who are 100 % correct 100 % of the time?

Originally Posted by Webnauts

P.S. By the way are we competitors?

Did you read my edited post?

If we are competitors, I have given you fairly much link juice

[kgun]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

[/i]Something that we can somehow achieve today with the "blockquote" tag, adding in the cited hyperlink a title attribute?

1. XLink is XML's linking model.
2. Linkbases, extended links, arcroles ++ are much more.
3. "Blockquote" is used too little. I use it on my sites to quote (cite). Some misueses it for indenting.
4. Isn't the blockquote element deprecated?

I have written much more about this on my private extranet.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by kgun

1. XLink is XML's linking model.
2. Linkbases, exdtended links and arcroles are much more.
3. "Blockquote" is used to little. I use it on my sites to quote (cite). Some misueses it for indenting. Isn't blockquote depricated?

I am aware of what XLink, Linkbases etc are about.
XLink defines a standard way of creating hyperlinks in XML documents.
Example:

<?xml version="1.0"?> 
<homepages xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">   
<homepage xlink:type="simple"
  xlink:href="http://www.seoworkers.com">SEO Workers</homepage>   
<homepage xlink:type="simple"
  xlink:href="http://www.webnauts.net">Webnauts.net</homepage> 
</homepages>

And blockquote is not deprecated.

What is next? XPointers?

[kgun]

Yes, you use type="simple" in a standard XLink namespace, roughly comparable to the HTML linking model.

XPointer is more general in some situations than XPath and XQuery and it is especially designed to work with XLink.

XPointer has the ability to link to page fragments and as such opens the possibility to true transclusion. You may achieve "similar effects" with anchors and JavaScript.

Example of a JavaScript solution:
DigitalLogistikk, digital kommunikasjon, informasjon og data fra et til annet sted Click on the link "Authors" under the heading "Sophisticated linking using JavaScripting"

Standard anchor solution:
W3C Technical Reports and Publications

Very Simple XPointer solution

http : // www dot org / TR / #xpointer(id('xptr')) That does not render as it is intended to in modern browsers.

Related (continue discussion there?):

Ignore the misunderstandings that have produced the present world.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by kgun

Yes, you use type="simple" in a standard XLink namespace, roughly comparable to the HTML linking model.

XPointer is more general in some situations than XPath and XQuery and it is especially designed to work with XLink.

XPointer has the ability to link to page fragments and as such opens the possibility to true transclusion. You may achieve "similar effects" with anchors and JavaScript.

Example of a JavaScript solution:
DigitalLogistikk, digital kommunikasjon, informasjon og data fra et til annet sted Click on the link "Authors" under the heading "Sophisticated linking using JavaScripting"

OK. But I have a last question before we close the topic here:

There is only some XLink support in Mozilla 0.98+, Netscape 6.02+, and Internet Explorer 6.0. If we use XPointer for sophisticated linking using JavaScript, how far is that accessible?

[kgun]

It should be able to make it accessible by degrading gracefully.

Example, you can make a CSS or XSLT stylesheet that is only visible for disabled people. It is invisible for the ordinary surfer.

Digital books and documents have one very great advantage compared to paper books ( at least in 2008 ).

You can transclude a cite directly in your document / eBook. That cite my get another colour, so it is evident that it is embedded from another source.

XLink and XPointer are among other things designed to support true transclusion.

Clicking that cite redirects you to the original source. Gives credit where credit is deserved.

Did you watch Ted Nelsons Google video?
Transclusion: Fixing Electronic Literature

John, great that there is at least one member here, that understands what I am talking about. You deserve the positive reppoint.
There we are competitors

It is not a lobbypoint.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

If we use XPointer for sophisticated linking using JavaScript, how far is that accessible?

You should try to avoid using JavaScript (in the future). Use the XML family of technologies if you can.

Scroll down? Work ahead?

[Webnauts]

Xlink and XPointer can be accessible, and their linking/pointing semantics may be recognized with certainty.
How? Here is an example using links that can be recognized reliably by XLink applications.

<myxlink xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"
             xlink:href="http://www.seoworkers.com/example.xml">
         List of resources
    </myxlink>

What is the difference?

User Agents have no way of knowing this is a link if implemented like below:

<mylink linkend="http://mysite/myfile.xml">
      Current List of references 
</mylink>

But I still do not see a way making them accessible when events like "onLoad" will be implemented.

Anyway, I think we are clear after all, and we better stop the topic here as we went far off topic. OK bro?

[Portucuenta]

I had to use it in a "report" link, as google was creating me reporting links!

[kgun]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Xlink and XPointer can be accessible, and their linking/pointing semantics may be recognized with certainty.

Modern browsers are not XLink and XPointer enabled.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Anyway, I think we are clear after all, and we better stop the topic here as we went far off topic. OK bro?

Agree.