If you are inserting content into a page using iframes, where the iframe contains a different page. could this be classed as cloaking. the page that I wish to enbed used the "no index" + "no follow" tags could this be seen as hidding words in an attempt to increase keyword density?
korkus2000
7:01 pm on Oct 4, 2002 (gmt 0)
I would think that since it is basically a frame that the source document will have no effect on the calling pages keyword density. I think the iframe source is seen as a completely independent document.
zechariah
2:11 am on Oct 5, 2002 (gmt 0)
In regards with Mack's question, are you talking about inline frames? I came across a site that used inline frames & compared google's cache with that of the site shown in the browser - it shows different. The one captured by google from what I can see is used to fool the SE robots & all text & images with the SEO Co's image there. Must say it's really spammy. So is this the cheapest way of cloaking, remember reading it here long time ago. When disabling inline frames, you see the REAL site intented. Also I think they load accordingly to the Browser identification.
So my question is, will they be caught & banned?
Air
3:47 am on Oct 5, 2002 (gmt 0)
I would think of iframes as you would any other framed site. Remember what happened when people started abusing "noframes", they suddendly found their sites dropped or penalized. IMO it isn't so much will they consider iframes cloaking (I don't think they will), but rather, when you are reported by your competitor(s) will the search engine rep find it reasonably easy to tell that the iframe is an integral part of the site and not an attempt to spam?
mack
5:43 pm on Oct 5, 2002 (gmt 0)
"So my question is, will they be caught & banned?"
Think I will avoid it, just on the off chance. A lot of risk for a shortcut.
tigger
6:03 pm on Oct 5, 2002 (gmt 0)
I've been using iframes to display banners for sometime & so far I've not had any problems
zechariah
2:05 am on Oct 7, 2002 (gmt 0)
Well, from what I can see, they use a frame over an iframe. & with both disabled you see the actual site, & that's what google seeing also. Should the SE crawlers solve this problem? It's reall tricky here. Understanding that most people want their site with all those flashy designs, this is one those ways to combat or get a good listing for the main index site. with all the sub urls named after the product in which some google grabs & other doesn't. Hmm, what you guys say, some use this as a method for claoking while others use this for design purpose. It's real debatable, but it's up to the individual to decide for good or evil. So let me decide wheter to report this guy to google - oh btw, which email should I send to for google. Still pondering over it, their raw design really makes me sick. Coming to the point of iframes, is it considered a poor man's cloaking?
