Re: [rfc-i] Meta decorations in generated HTML

[John R Levine <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, 27 May 2022, Michael Richardson wrote:
> view-source:https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6698.html (which was an open tab)
> view-source:https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8995.html
>
> and in the former, I see lots of interesting <meta name="citation_...
> stuff, but in the later, I do not.

Right.  For the pre-XML RFCs, the HTML version is generated on the fly by 
the RFC Editor's web server so it was easy to adjust the script to add the 
tags.  But now the HTML is a static version created by xml2rfc, so it will 
have to add the tags.  This also means we need to re-render the existing 
RFCs to get the tags but I expect to do that for other reasons.

> In the former, I do see an almost good self-reference:
>   <meta name="citation_pdf_url" content="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/pdfrfc/rfc6698.txt.pdf"/>

That's a link to the PDF version of an HTML document.  Scholar says they 
use it, so I add it.

> I looked this up because I was thinking that some of our indexing of AUTH48
> drafts might be dealt with if the indexers could be told where the canonical
> URL of the document is.

The way to keep AUTH48 pages out of search engines is to tell them not to 
index them.  Earlier this month I helped the RPC update the web site so 
spiders will skip the authors' directory.  The AUTH48 pages that were 
already indexed will eventually age out of the search engines.

Regards,
John Levine, [e-mail], Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
[e-mail]
https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest