Unfortunately, robots.txt cannot express rate limits, so it would be an overly blunt instrument for things like GP describes. HTTP 429 would be a better fit.
Crawl-delay is just that, a simple directive to add to robots.txt to set the maximum crawl frequency. It used to be widely followed by all but the worst crawlers …
I was responding to their question if scraping the site is considered harmful. I would say as long as they are not ignoring robots they shouldn’t be contributing significant amounts of traffic if they’re really only pulling data once a day.
Unfortunately, robots.txt cannot express rate limits, so it would be an overly blunt instrument for things like GP describes. HTTP 429 would be a better fit.
Crawl-delayis just that, a simple directive to add to robots.txt to set the maximum crawl frequency. It used to be widely followed by all but the worst crawlers …It’s a nonstandard extension without consistent semantics or wide support, but I suppose it’s good to know about anyway. Thanks for mentioning it.
I was responding to their question if scraping the site is considered harmful. I would say as long as they are not ignoring robots they shouldn’t be contributing significant amounts of traffic if they’re really only pulling data once a day.