On Thursday, March 29, 2012, Peter Eisentraut <
peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
> On ons, 2012-03-28 at 21:14 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> You can add the dropdown fairly easily in the website code. However,
>> that assumes that no pages have *changed filenames* between versions.
>> Which is not true. That would either drop those versions from the
>> list, or generate a 404. I'm not sure how to create some sort of
>> mapping between versions that would actually work without being
>> actively maintained (and if it has to be actively maintained, it will
>> go out of date).
>
> Not that those cross-version links wouldn't be useful (in fact, I often
> would like to have them when starting at the latest version going
> backwards), but they don't really solve the underlying problem. I don't
> really believe that it is a general search engine behavior to always
> prefer the oldest resource among alternatives. For example, if I search
> for something like "presidential elections", I surely don't get links to
> the oldest presidential election on record.
>
> A related problem: At least a search on Google will usually find the
> documentation of some old version. A search on Bing, however, doesn't
> find the documentation at all. That indicates to me that there is
> something seriously wrong in how the web site is constructed.
Works for me. Aside from the version issue, I get very relevant results for a few test searches on Bing.
--
Dave Page
Blog:
http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake
EnterpriseDB UK:
http://www.enterprisedb.comThe Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
