Re Google - problem is not solved.

[N. J. A. Sloane]

Apparently I was wrong!  Jaap Spies writes to say that:

>From j.spies at hccnet.nl  Wed Jan  5 18:22:50 2005
>Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 00:22:14 +0100
>From: Jaap Spies <j.spies at hccnet.nl>
>To: njas at research.att.com, joshua.zucker at stanfordalumni.org
>Subject: Re: Google's indexing of the OEIS
>
>N. J. A. Sloane wrote:
>> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this discussion.
>
>> So I think Google is working fine!
>> 
>
>I do not think so. For example: search for A024558, Google gives a link to part 12
>among 5 of 7 shown hits. Now look at the bottom of Part 12 . We see A090078.
>Searching for A090078 we get 13 hits, but none is in part 12 of the database.
>What we see is a sequence in context and one in a formula.
>And we are lucky to get these 2 hits!
>
>Thanks to Joshua Zucker, who wrote:
>> Yeah, google doesn't advertise this ...
>> but there are outside web sites that report it.
>> Or you can see for yourself: search for a sequence at Google,
>> it'll tell you that the database file is 101k, and if you download
>> the file it'll be around 900k, and indeed Google's cached copy
>> cuts off in the middle of a sentence about 100k into the big file.
>> 
>> --Joshua
>
>Regards,
>
>Jaap
>


So it seems the problem is not solved. 

I'm not worried: it just means people should use the OEIS web site 
to look up sequences, not Google.

Nothing wrong with that!

NJAS