__/ [Borek] on Monday 19 December 2005 00:01 \__
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 00:29:03 +0100, Big Bill <kruse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> If you want to be crawled regularly, you need regularly updated text
>> content in the body of the page. The more you have, the better. The
>> meta tags don't have anything to do with it. Some are superfluous, as
>> I've indicated, and you can do without them.
> No. My pages are static (in terms of static content) and they are
> spidered on the regular basis.
> not changed since October 26th, spidered 20 times in December (up to now),
> 40 times in November. More than once a day.
I concur with Borek on this. Based on what I observed, change does not
necessarily affect the crawling cycle of one particular page. I suspect
that static sites (as a whole), as opposed to page, are less likely to be
There are sites on the Web that have not changed for years, so why invest
effrot in re-fretching and re-organising the index? Such sites attract
traffic only at the start, but it later diminishes.
For better and faster crawling, it might be worthwhile to give an illusion
of change. I never do this, but I know some who do. it's one of these ar-
eas that search engines are hoping to address using penalties. They simply
crawl the wrong sites and make poorer use of their resources.
Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: penguins are the greatest birds
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
5:05am up 8 days 12:13, 8 users, load average: 0.35, 0.50, 0.52
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms