<![CDATA[ James Grimmelman has an in depth look a ACAP, the new „standard“ for website access control that we discussed last Friday. I put „standard“ in scare quotes because, as Grimmelman points out, the specs clearly weren't written by people with any experience in writing technical standards. While a well-written standard will very precisely specify which behaviors are required, which are prohibited, and under what circumstances, the ACAP spec is full of vague directives and confusing terminology. Some parts of the standard are apparently designed to „only be interpreted by prior arrangement.“ Also, despite the „1.0“ branding, the latest version of the specification has several sections that are labeled „not yet fully ready for implementation.“ It is, in short, a big mess.

Of course, this shouldn't surprise us, because it's not really a technical standard at all. Robots.txt works just fine for almost everyone, and search engines aren't clamoring to replace it. Rather, some publishers are using the trappings of a technical standard to try to micromanage the uses to which search engines put their content, and they're laying the groundwork for lawsuits if search engines fail to heed the demands embedded in ACAP files. Not only are the rules vague and confused, but the „standard“ also helpfully notes that the rules „may change or be withdrawn without notice.“ In other words, a search engine that committed to complying with ACAP directives would be setting itself up to have their search engine's functi­onality micro-managed by the publishers who control the ACAP specifications.

Luckily, as Mike pointed out on Friday, search engines have the upper hand here. So here's my suggestion for search engines: instead of trying to comply with every nitpicky detail of the ACAP standard, just announce that every line of an ACAP file will be interpreted as the equivalent of a „Disallow“ line in a robots.txt file. Websites would discover pretty quickly that posting ACAP directives on their sites just caused their content to disappear from search engines. As much as they might bluster about other search engines „stealing“ their content, the reality is that they can't afford to give up the traffic that search engines send their way. If search engines simply refused to include ACAP-restricted pages in their index, publishers would quickly realize that those old robots.txt files aren't so bad after all.

Tim Lee is an expert at the Techdirt Insight Community. To get insight and analysis from Tim Lee and other experts on challenges your company faces, click here.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story ]]>