Robots.txt is a line of code that publishers can put into a website that, while not legally binding in any way, is supposed to signal to scraper bots that they cannot take that website’s data.
i do understand that robots.txt is a very minor part of the article, but i think that’s a pretty rough explanation of robots.txt
Robots.txt is a document that specifies which parts of a website bots are and are not allowed to visit. While it’s not a legally binding document, it has long been common practice for bots to obey the rules listed in robots.txt.
in that description, i’m trying to keep the accessible tone that they were going for in the article (so i wrote “document” instead of file format/IETF standard), while still trying to focus on the following points:
robots.txt is fundamentally a list of rules, not a single line of code
robots.txt can allow bots to access certain parts of a website, it doesn’t have to ban bots entirely
it’s not legally binding, but it is still customary for bots to follow it
i did also neglect to mention that robots.txt allows you to specify different rules for different bots, but that didn’t seem particularly relevant here.
from the article:
i do understand that robots.txt is a very minor part of the article, but i think that’s a pretty rough explanation of robots.txt
Out of curiosity, how would you word it?
i would probably word it as something like:
in that description, i’m trying to keep the accessible tone that they were going for in the article (so i wrote “document” instead of file format/IETF standard), while still trying to focus on the following points:
i did also neglect to mention that robots.txt allows you to specify different rules for different bots, but that didn’t seem particularly relevant here.
It’s literally a text document it’s not even “a line of code”.