下拉菜单javascript菜单是一个糟糕的选择？ [英] Dropdown menu javascript menus a bad choice?
问题描述
这听起来像是一个经常被问到的问题，但我没看到任何常见问题解答中的答案。
我对使用
（生成javascript）下拉菜单的智慧有疑问。
问题：
google是否解释了javascript？
或者换句话说，是客户端javascript生成的链接
对搜索引擎不可见？
这不是一个强有力的论据，不使用javascript，
最少生成任何类型的链接？
好像是css-located菜单将是一个更好的选择。
This sounds like a frequently asked question, but I
didn''t find the answer in any faq I''ve looked at.
I have a question about the wisdom of using
(javascript generated) dropdown menus.
Question:
Does google interpret javascript?
Or, in other words, are client-side-javascript-generated links
invisible to search engines?
Isn''t this a strong argument for not using javascript, at
least for generating links of any kind?
Seems like css-positioned menus would be a better choice.
推荐答案
sandy写道：
sandy wrote:
google是否解释了javascript？
No.
或者换句话说，是客户端javascript生成的链接对搜索引擎不可见？
是的。
这不是一个强有力的论据，不使用javascript，
No. < a rel =nofollowhref =http://www.onlinetools.org/articles/unobtrusivejavascript/target =_ blank> http://www.onlinetools.org/articles/...ivejavascript/
至少用于生成任何类型的链接？
是的。
看起来像css定位的菜单会是更好的选择。
Does google interpret javascript?
No.
Or, in other words, are client-side-javascript-generated links
invisible to search engines?
Yes.
Isn''t this a strong argument for not using javascript,
No. http://www.onlinetools.org/articles/...ivejavascript/
at least for generating links of any kind?
Yes.
Seems like css-positioned menus would be a better choice.
正确定位很棘手。在许多情况下浮动是更好的
选项。
-
David Dorward< http://blog.dorward .me.uk /> < http://dorward.me.uk/>
Home是〜/ .bashrc的地方
Positioning is tricky to get right. In many cases floating is the better
option.
--
David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
Home is where the ~/.bashrc is
星期五，22 2005年7月22:06:53 -0700，沙滩
< sa ******** @ slowtorture.spammers.com>写道：
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 22:06:53 -0700, sandy
<sa********@slowtorture.spammers.com> wrote:
这听起来像是一个经常被问到的问题，但我找不到任何常见问题的答案。
我对使用
（生成javascript）下拉菜单的智慧有疑问。
问题：
google会解释javascript吗？
编号不作为规则。
或者换句话说，是客户端javascript生成的链接对搜索引擎不可见？
差不多。有蜘蛛模拟器你可以检查这些东西
，快速谷歌会显示负载。
这不是一个强有力的论据，不使用javascript，在
至少用于生成任何类型的链接？
绝对。
看起来像css定位的菜单会是更好的选择。
This sounds like a frequently asked question, but I
didn''t find the answer in any faq I''ve looked at.
I have a question about the wisdom of using
(javascript generated) dropdown menus.
Question:
Does google interpret javascript?
No. Not as a rule.
Or, in other words, are client-side-javascript-generated links
invisible to search engines?
Pretty much. There are spider-simulators you can check these things
with, a quick Google will reveal loads.
Isn''t this a strong argument for not using javascript, at
least for generating links of any kind?
Absolutely.
Seems like css-positioned menus would be a better choice.
我也用sim来检查它们。 CSS仍在以这样的速度发展
我不会理所当然。
BB
-
www.kruse.co.uk/ se*@kruse.demon.co.uk
猫王做我的seo
-
I''d check them with a sim too. CSS is still evolving at such a rate
I''d take nothing for granted.
BB
--
www.kruse.co.uk/ se*@kruse.demon.co.uk
Elvis does my seo
--
sandy写道：
这听起来像是一个经常被问到的问题，但我没有找到答案我看过的任何常见问题。
我对使用
（生成javascript）下拉菜单的智慧有疑问。
问题：
google是否解释了javascript？
或者换句话说，是客户端javascript生成的链接对于搜索引擎是不可见的？
这不是一个有力的论据吗？不使用javascript，至少生成任何类型的链接？
看起来像css定位的菜单将是一个更好的选择。
This sounds like a frequently asked question, but I
didn''t find the answer in any faq I''ve looked at.
I have a question about the wisdom of using
(javascript generated) dropdown menus.
Question:
Does google interpret javascript?
Or, in other words, are client-side-javascript-generated links
invisible to search engines?
Isn''t this a strong argument for not using javascript, at
least for generating links of any kind?
Seems like css-positioned menus would be a better choice.
i有一个js包括为用户导入我的菜单+一个带有链接的noscript
回到我的主页面上有蜘蛛等的非js菜单，所以
要么我被覆盖的方式...
i have a js include importing my menu for users + a noscript with a link
back to my main page which has the non-js menu on for spiders etc, so
either way im covered...
这篇关于下拉菜单javascript菜单是一个糟糕的选择？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
