How do robots handle CSS embedded links? Does it save bandwidth?

i.e. background-image: url();

[Christopher C]

Just noticed with brett's webpagesize checker that it doesn't pick up these elements when calculating sizes. A friend just had a problem with a DOS attack on his server and wants to cut down the total size of his index page. I'm guessing the answer is no because google caches pages with the css backgrounds but can css be used to hide images from bots?

[bill]

...sure if you have a CSS image background that won't get picked up by most robots...

[Christopher C]

Hm, how do you insure that a css background doesn't get picked up by most robots? To me this kind of control would be very appealing above and beyond any DOS concerns.

Is it as simple as using absolute divs and image-backgrounds?

[bill]

Most SE robots aren't concerned with CSS at all. They're there to index page content...the text on the page. I have no idea what these DoS robots are doing...if they're robots at all...maybe you could provide some more details.

[Christopher C]

Here's the original thread:
[webmasterworld.com...]

Basic problem is that due to an ecom site being very successful, a competitor resorted to dirty tactics. Namely, circulating a virus that's attacking the host's server. One of the options was to cut the index page size down substantially to save on bandwidth costs. If css could be used to hide the images then that would be a great advantage.

Technical specifics about bots & so forth are beyond the scope of my knowledge so I won't comment. Generally speaking, i'm very intrigued none-the-less about how css can be of advantage.

To start, maybe why does google have a cache of an background-image? Is this because they have cached the stylesheet or the image itself?

[dcrombie]

Google just caches the codes of the HTML page - if it includes a style-sheet and images then the cached version includes them in the same way the live page does