Move __doPostBack to include file
-
Hi all I've had a look around and can't find any reference to this, which probably indicates that I'm stupid trying to do it, but here goes... We've got an SEO consultant/master of the dark arts involved in one of our current projects and he's keen for the auto-generated __doPostBack to be in an include file rather than inline. Has anyone got any ideas how to do this, or, indeed, if it's possible? Thanks Ben
-
Hi all I've had a look around and can't find any reference to this, which probably indicates that I'm stupid trying to do it, but here goes... We've got an SEO consultant/master of the dark arts involved in one of our current projects and he's keen for the auto-generated __doPostBack to be in an include file rather than inline. Has anyone got any ideas how to do this, or, indeed, if it's possible? Thanks Ben
-
Hi all I've had a look around and can't find any reference to this, which probably indicates that I'm stupid trying to do it, but here goes... We've got an SEO consultant/master of the dark arts involved in one of our current projects and he's keen for the auto-generated __doPostBack to be in an include file rather than inline. Has anyone got any ideas how to do this, or, indeed, if it's possible? Thanks Ben
I catch the scent of a consultant who doesn't have fricking clue what he's talking about...
-
Hi all I've had a look around and can't find any reference to this, which probably indicates that I'm stupid trying to do it, but here goes... We've got an SEO consultant/master of the dark arts involved in one of our current projects and he's keen for the auto-generated __doPostBack to be in an include file rather than inline. Has anyone got any ideas how to do this, or, indeed, if it's possible? Thanks Ben
Why...?
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
-
Why...?
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
'Why' is a very good question.... The crux of his argument is that the cleaner the page (in his ideal world, the page would only be one css reference and H1 to H6 and P tags - obviously would not have functionality, but, hey, what does that matter), the better it will get indexed by the search engines - personally, I think this is a load of old horse sh!t, as I'm sure that Google have just about managed to figure out that it doesn't need to look inside script tags. However, the business have engaged him to be involved in the project which means we either need to come up with reasons not to implement suggested changes, or find ways to do them. If there's any easy way to do this, then I avoid a fight, if there isn't, and there's no value to it anyway, then I can go back to the business and suggest that most of what is being suggested has no value. Oh, the joy of mixing politics with technology.... Thanks in advance! Ben
-
'Why' is a very good question.... The crux of his argument is that the cleaner the page (in his ideal world, the page would only be one css reference and H1 to H6 and P tags - obviously would not have functionality, but, hey, what does that matter), the better it will get indexed by the search engines - personally, I think this is a load of old horse sh!t, as I'm sure that Google have just about managed to figure out that it doesn't need to look inside script tags. However, the business have engaged him to be involved in the project which means we either need to come up with reasons not to implement suggested changes, or find ways to do them. If there's any easy way to do this, then I avoid a fight, if there isn't, and there's no value to it anyway, then I can go back to the business and suggest that most of what is being suggested has no value. Oh, the joy of mixing politics with technology.... Thanks in advance! Ben
-
'Why' is a very good question.... The crux of his argument is that the cleaner the page (in his ideal world, the page would only be one css reference and H1 to H6 and P tags - obviously would not have functionality, but, hey, what does that matter), the better it will get indexed by the search engines - personally, I think this is a load of old horse sh!t, as I'm sure that Google have just about managed to figure out that it doesn't need to look inside script tags. However, the business have engaged him to be involved in the project which means we either need to come up with reasons not to implement suggested changes, or find ways to do them. If there's any easy way to do this, then I avoid a fight, if there isn't, and there's no value to it anyway, then I can go back to the business and suggest that most of what is being suggested has no value. Oh, the joy of mixing politics with technology.... Thanks in advance! Ben
Also check this out: Add website to google
The answers posted by me are suggestions only and cannot be used in anyway against me.
-
'Why' is a very good question.... The crux of his argument is that the cleaner the page (in his ideal world, the page would only be one css reference and H1 to H6 and P tags - obviously would not have functionality, but, hey, what does that matter), the better it will get indexed by the search engines - personally, I think this is a load of old horse sh!t, as I'm sure that Google have just about managed to figure out that it doesn't need to look inside script tags. However, the business have engaged him to be involved in the project which means we either need to come up with reasons not to implement suggested changes, or find ways to do them. If there's any easy way to do this, then I avoid a fight, if there isn't, and there's no value to it anyway, then I can go back to the business and suggest that most of what is being suggested has no value. Oh, the joy of mixing politics with technology.... Thanks in advance! Ben
I have a plan for you. Since you have to play the game... Write a quick email to the consultant (and cc your boss) saying that you are not familiar with how to put all the javascript in an includes file. Rather then wasting time trying to figure out something he is obviously familiar with, ask him for some sample code. If he can't produce any sample code of how to do this, then tell him you don't know any more than he does... There's nothing wrong with admitting you don't know how to do something. No developer knows everything and since it is the consultants plan, surely he can show you some sample code.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
-
My understanding was that google did not store scripted tags as part of their index criteria rather they look at the content text of the page.
The answers posted by me are suggestions only and cannot be used in anyway against me.
Thanks - that was my understanding as well. A simple 'more clarification on the impact' question may head this off. Ben
-
I have a plan for you. Since you have to play the game... Write a quick email to the consultant (and cc your boss) saying that you are not familiar with how to put all the javascript in an includes file. Rather then wasting time trying to figure out something he is obviously familiar with, ask him for some sample code. If he can't produce any sample code of how to do this, then tell him you don't know any more than he does... There's nothing wrong with admitting you don't know how to do something. No developer knows everything and since it is the consultants plan, surely he can show you some sample code.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
Thanks Todd. The consultant is not familiar with .Net technology, so a combination of yours and .netmans answers should give us a enough to make it a non-issue. Ben