You have? I don't rmember that...
> Recently, while
>looking at altavista and infoseek I notice they used <META
>HTTP-EQUIV=description ...>. In fact, infoseek says that if description
>is used, they will display that in the results page.
I believe the concensus is to use <META NAME="description" CONTENT="..."">
but I'm not objective :-)
>My question then is which should I use? Do all search engines that pay
>attention to stuff like this use description, or do some use abstract, or
>both?
Not heard anyone using "Abstract", a few use "description" and "keywords",
some think it leads to too much spamming and drop it altogether.
Reinier wrote:
> However, if this was a conscious decision on their part,
>it is rather interesting: it allows you to get your images,
>sound bites, etc., indexed by sending them out with Description: headers.
By using <IMG> and stuff you mean? I would expect them to escape that
or drop it...
-- Martijn
Email: m.koster@webcrawler.com
WWW: http://info.webcrawler.com/mak/mak.html