Angonasec - 12:57 am on Aug 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

Fotiman: Actually, no, that's not an absolute ref. It is actually a relative link that is relative to the root. Yes, thanks for the correction, I do have a habit of referring to root relative links as being absolute. The point of my comment, however, was that root relative links don't pay any attention to the value of the BASE element, which the original poster was implying did. No need for the BASE element in this case.

I agree the terminology is confusing, I think it is better to refer to the 'full url' rather than the 'absolute url' to avoid confusion.

So, in my case, you think the use of the base href is redundant?

I added it after reading here about hijacking, and prefer belt and braces.

If it really is redundant, is it likely to confuse any bots?
(All my pages validate strict at W3C.)

thebear: I honestly believe each of the big 3 SEs are perfectly capable of counting markup in keyword density, either in error or purposely. It could explain why a lot of clean sites are suffering a drop in their listings.