[Previous] [Next] - [Index] [Thread Index] - [Previous in Thread] [Next in Thread]

Subject: RE: [uk-netmarketing] RE: The Rules
From: Dan Winchester
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 17:22:28 -0000

> All this criticism could be (and is!) equally levelled
> at other technologies

That doesn't make it (the criticism) wrong!

> Any system which relies upon an application server
> and built-on-the-fly pages will not be indexable,
> spiderable, emailable

It doesn't have to be that way. Very-frequently-updated dynamic content is a
different issue from unique addressability, which as you mention, maybe
warrants a seperate debate.

> Contrast that with a frames site where content is
> referenced by a "cgi" address, which may well be unique.

Every problem with frames can be solved with one fudge or another if you
really wanted to go down that road...

> application server

I'm not sure exactly what that is.

Incidently, I've heard rumours of one *big* company rolling out one of the
content management systems, and giving up half way through, specifically
because it couldn't cope with the basics:

> * spidered
> * emailed
> * linked to
> * referenced
> * logged

Anyone else heard any similar stories?


-----Original Message-----
From: Silas Denyer [silas [dot] denyeratturns [dot] net (mailto:silas [dot] denyeratturns [dot] net)]
Sent: 26 January 2001 22:02
To: uk-netmarketing from chinwag
Subject: [uk-netmarketing] RE: The Rules

[Sam says: msg chopped]

  Re: [uk-netmarketing] RE: The Rules, Silas Denyer

  Re: [uk-netmarketing] RE: The Rules, Silas Denyer

[Previous] [Next] - [Index] [Thread Index] - [Next in Thread] [Previous in Thread]