I know there is some consensus on at least the "no linkjuice awarded" aspect of the nofollow attribute between all of the major search engines.  However, there are a few differences, apparently, in other implementation details.  I guess I should be impressed that they embraced the same concept at all, and even used the same syntax to denote it.

I've noted the following.  I believe Google was the search engine that first advocated the attribute for the purpose of combating link-spam, and they seem to be the only one that truly follows the jist of the phrase "nofollow."  To Google, in my experience, and according to Danny Sullivan here, nofollow means that Google will not even follow the link.  It's not just that it's not a vote — it just plain doesn't exist.  

That's a somewhat important distinction, as I've seen Yahoo record "nofollow" links to pages on my blog, which is relatively new, here.  I'm not quite sure about MSN.

More info here (Yahoo post), and here (MSN post), but neither seems to raise information regarding that particular implementation detail.  It's just something I noticed.

Tell an amigo:
  • Sphinn
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook

Related posts:
A (not so simple) method to add rel="nofollow" to links I wrote this script so that I can run it...
Why Google is Wrong on Paid Links I think paid links are just dandy!  In every other...
Google Robots.txt Snafu: Part II I decided that I would test what I think is...
Blessed Be MSNHoo! Despite the fact that I dropped my YHOO shares last...
Does Anyone Actually Use Status Code 410 (Gone)? I was reading through the documentation for mod_rewrite, and I...