Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hey team, Just wondering if there's anyone out there that may have dabbled with YouTube closed captions and if having them has any effect at all on search results. My theory (unfounded) is that perhaps these files can be crawled (or viewed) by crawlers and/or given priority in search due to having indexible content which defines the content within the clip - which otherwise wouldn't have been known. Now, I have no evidence that this may be the case but wondering if anyone out there may have seen or read something about it. Seems like kind of a cool thing for SE's to do to help promote accessibility across teh web. Thanks guys.

Hey all, Rarely, but sometimes we require to take down our site for server maintenance, upgrades or various other system/network reasons. More often than not these downtimes are avoidable and we can redirect or eliminate the client side downtime. We have a 'down for maintenance - be back soon' page that is client facing. ANd outages are often no more than an hour tops. My question is, if the site is crawled by Bing/Google at the time of site being down, what is the best way of ensuring the indexed links are not refreshed with this maintenance content? (ie: this is what the pages look like now, so this is what the SE will index). I was thinking that add a no crawl to the robots.txt for the period of downtime and remove it once back up, but will this potentially affect results as well?

We are looking at implementing an XML and JavaScript driven UI where a user can toggle certain filters to display the matching products. This functionality is going to replace an existing catalogue page which contains static HTML content with dynamically generated content. The new JavaScript driven UI will contain the same links, eg ‘Buy’, ‘More Info’ and well as some additional content, for each product, but is not rendered on the page by the server. If we implement the previous static ‘catalogue’ by placing it within the <noscript>tag, but have the new functionality in the <script> tag:</span></p> <p class="x_MsoListParagraph"><span><span>1)<span>      </span></span></span><span>Which will take precedence in Google’s crawl</span></p> <p class="x_MsoListParagraph"><span><span>2)<span>      </span></span></span><span>Is this acceptable / best practice</span></p> <p class="x_MsoListParagraph"><span>Any help you could provide would be great.</span></p></noscript>

Hey all, I understand the functionality of PDF files being indexed and how to remove them if required so in this post I'm not requiring any advice on 'how to' as such, but i just wanted to get a general opinion/consensus of if you deliberately allow PDF files to be crawled/indexed.
Whether or not you guys optimise the files for search.
If you do disallow them from being crawled and indexed, why?
Generally the pro's and con's you may have found about have searchable PDF files as part of your indexed content.

So I was wondering if there was a general consensis regarding the amount of outbound links you have coming from your domain to other domains and if there is a correlation between the more you have going out, the more (for want of a better word) damage you can do to your domain. EG: is a site with good domain authority better to keep the short leash on handing out links to external sites? Does this make the link juice from the site more valuable?