Comments on: Custom meta tags in search results and full stops /2006/05/04/custom-meta-tags-in-search-results-and-full-stops/ Google Search Appliance and Google Mini development Fri, 14 Mar 2014 15:00:46 +0000 hourly 1 By: Eric /2006/05/04/custom-meta-tags-in-search-results-and-full-stops/comment-page-1/#comment-20461 Mon, 02 May 2011 23:51:06 +0000 /2006/05/04/custom-meta-tags-in-search-results-and-full-stops/#comment-20461 Paul,

was wondering, do you know if you can specify an inmeta search… something like so:


and also specify that all pages that are missing the organization meta tag be included in the search?


By: Nate Baxley /2006/05/04/custom-meta-tags-in-search-results-and-full-stops/comment-page-1/#comment-40 Fri, 19 May 2006 20:35:50 +0000 /2006/05/04/custom-meta-tags-in-search-results-and-full-stops/#comment-40 Paul,
Since you mention using the meta tags with filtering, I’m wondering if you have found a way to link meta tags to non-HTML pages. I have a situation where I’ve loaded documents into a content management system and would like to have the GM search the content of those documents, but still be able to limit the search results based on the meta informaiton that is collected when the documents where uploaded. Any ideas?

Nate Baxley

By: Paul /2006/05/04/custom-meta-tags-in-search-results-and-full-stops/comment-page-1/#comment-38 Sat, 06 May 2006 14:23:52 +0000 /2006/05/04/custom-meta-tags-in-search-results-and-full-stops/#comment-38 Thanks Dave, that’s very useful to know. I couldn’t find a way of URL encoding them at all, I obviously wasn’t persistant enough!

By: Dave Lemen /2006/05/04/custom-meta-tags-in-search-results-and-full-stops/comment-page-1/#comment-37 Sat, 06 May 2006 14:01:42 +0000 /2006/05/04/custom-meta-tags-in-search-results-and-full-stops/#comment-37 Excellent advice! Unfortunately, one of my customers had previously specified a whole list of meta tags, all prefixed with the period (.). The appliance requires you to *double* URL encode the field names when constructing your query which further aggravates the problem. In the Dublin Core DC.Publisher example, it becomes DC%252EPublisher.