Hot answers tagged

29

There are several reasons to remove extensions from URLs: To make the URLs look cleaner To make URLs easier to type To make URLs easier to remember To make URLs more SEO keyword friendly To be able to change technologies -- if you ever want to move your site from one technology to the other, its easiest to do so without users even knowing if there are no ...


10

The first one is preferred. This is because it is interpreted as document, whereas the second one is interpreted as document up to product, and as query arguments later on. So search-engine wise, there is no difference between http://www.example.com/product?123/subpage/456 and http://www.example.com/product?p1=123&p3=456&p2=subpage it is only ...


10

According to Kurt himself, it was basically just cuz. And I'd personally question whether search engines consider URLs' file extensions as "words" for search purposes, though I'm not sure I've run across definitive evidence either way on that.


6

All web servers have one or more "default files". It's the file that will be displayed whenever a visitor goes to a URL that ends in a slash /, i.e. a folder. If the default file name on your web server is index.php and a visitor goes to www.example.com/pagename/, they are actually accessing www.example.com/pagename/index.php. If there is no trailing /, ...


6

Is it better to not have ':' or ',' in the URL for SEO? Although colons and commas are reserved characters, they shouldn't impact SEO directly since they'll be URL encoded by browsers and bots. The second URL would be much more familiar and easier to read for search engine users though, as apparent in links and search engine snippets, so would increase ...


5

You need to add the following line into your .htaccess file(s): Options +MultiViews The effect of MultiViews is as follows: if the server receives a request for /some/dir/foo, if /some/dir has MultiViews enabled, and /some/dir/foo does not exist, then the server reads the directory looking for files named foo.*, and effectively fakes up a ...


5

Slightly off-topic but I try anyhow: When I encounter URLs like http://www.example.com/product/123/subpage/456.html I always think that this is an attempt on creating meaningful hierarchical URLs which, however, is not entirely hierarchical. What I mean is, you should be able to slice off one level at a time. In the above, the URL has two violations on this ...


5

Putting the ID near the beginning of a URL is better than putting it near the end. URLs often get truncated in emails or by CMS systems that show them to users. When the ID is at the end the truncation will often lop it off and cause 404 errors on your site. When it is near the beginning, your site can still redirect to the full URL. When Googlebot ...


5

From the SEO prospective, i bet there might be a difference: In you first example, the ID is separated from the title, making it clear to the crawler it is a different resource (as the / character does it naturally). In your second example, the ID is mixed with the title. It requires more brains from the crawler to determine the meaning of it. Imagine ...


4

Setting up a URL shortener isn't really that hard if it is for your use only. In order to integrate with with Twitter and WordPress you will have to develop you own API and plugins and that is the difficult or at least time consuming part. I think the basic steps would be. Buy a short URL and get hosting for it. Create a redirection engine in the ...


4

A page has to have 25 fans/likes before they can select a vanity URL. If a page doesn't have enough fans/likes or doesn't choose a vanity URL they will use the default one assigned to them by Facebook.


4

Sure it will work, You can consider any of the one link as canonical parent (Means original). and other one as duplicate. If the url is different in parameter or its order is not an issue. You can just point one url as its original, SEO Crawlers will identify that. something like <link href="http://shoes.com/compare/adidas/vs/nike/" rel="canonical" /&...


4

This is the type of “cool” URI scheme that I aim for on my own personal website. Personally, the reason that I started to do so (and probably many more web designer/developers too!) was after reading the article “Cool URIs don't change” – this document was written by the World Wide Web's founding father, Tim Berners-Lee. In Tim Berners-Lee's famous article,...


4

Search engines see both dashes and slashes as word separators, so they will be able to parse either of your URLs. Traditionally slashes in URL paths represent directory structures. Because of this, some users may expect that if you use /blue/suede-shoes/ they should be able to find a page at /blue/ with information about all your blue products. I would ...


4

SOLVED! Thanks to you guys. Solution: # Turn Rewrite Engine On RewriteEngine on # Set the base to /games/ so we need not include it in the rules RewriteBase /games/ #Rewrite for achilles.php?games_path=xxxxxxxxxx.yyy&category_id=zzz RewriteRule ^([0-9a-zA-Z_-]+)/([0-9]+) $1.php?games_path=$1.swf&category_id=$2 [NC,L] http://funkygames.co/...


3

You don't want to replace a slash with an underscore. Google views slashes as word separators but underscores are parts of words. See http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/dashes-vs-underscores/ When slashes represent physical directories on the webserver, many slashes in a URL indicate that the file is stored many folders deep on the server. This often means ...


3

See Webmaster Tools: Updates to Search queries, Parameter handling and Messages at the Google Webmaster Central blog for instructions to suppress the PHPSESSID parameter in search results. On the server-side, you should look into a way to prevent every hit from creating a session - session management is expensive server-side and it is generally undesirable ...


3

It looks like your current URL paths are of the form /category/redundant-descriptive-title/id, where only the category and id parts are actually needed to identify the content. (For example, I can link to http://www.soundplaza.co.uk/speakers/blah-blah-who-reads-this-anyway/10 and see the exact same content as on the page you linked in your question.) I ...


3

Have you tried using rel="canonical"? This link should help explain, http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=139394.


3

Should I care about those non-user friendly links already in the index and hope that Google will correct itself soon? This depends on what you want search engine users to see in your search results: the clean URLs: example.com/1234 or URLs with parameters: example.com/page.php?id=1234 Clean URLs are generally more understandable and recognizable to ...


3

For SEO, I would say an id doesn't permit to easy remember the URL for users. Therefore, no matter on which URL you choose; an id in the middle or at the end of an URL doesn't change anything regarding SEO. However, an id in an URL can be very useful in case of you would have two pages with the same URL. This is the case for StackOverflow because the URL is ...


3

Google cares not one whit. Really. All non-alphanumeric characters are essentially ignored. From a programmers point of view, the URI is parsed and indexed using word boundaries and anything that is not a word, is ignored. It is that simple. If you asked which one I personally prefer using, I would say - over +. I think it is more human friendly and the ...


3

For the most part, Google doesn't really care how you structure your URLs (as long as they're reasonably stable & crawlable; with the exception of country-targeting). Think about what you'd want out of your URL structure instead: need to do country-targeting? Use subdomains or high-level folders, e.g., uk.domain.com/... , domain.com/uk/... (this is the ...


3

Two pages should use the same canonical URL only if the contents of the pages are substantially the same. In your case, it doesn't sound like any of your proposed pages will have the same content. venues for Boston vs Boston-region. There will be some overlap, but won't the region page have many more on it? If users care enough about the distinction, ...


2

as John said you need at least 25 likes of that page to be able to customize the url. Once you get 25 likes/fans go to facebook.com/username and you can customize it there.


2

One more thing to think about is something like bit.ly Pro. You can have your own domain, but with all the speed and analytics from bit.ly. I know that it's still relying on someone else's service, but bit.ly is probably the biggest provider on the web so if they went down, a hell of a lot of people's links would break


2

I would change it so that the final part of the path is tannoy-revolution-signature-dc4t-10 This way if Google is breaking down the parts of the path in your URL the final part has the most relevant keywords and isn't just the number


2

It is OK. Consider two things: use the all+active filters as defaults. that way you can omit them. use breadcrumbs rich snippet so in search engines results pages (SERPs) the URL will be structured to represent the actual hierarchy.


2

Page depth has less to do with site hierarchy, and more to do with how many clicks it takes the user to get to their desired destination. If it takes 1 click to go from yoursite.com to yoursite.com/this/that/everything/else/ then technically that's only 1 page deep. I wouldn't tinker with the small stuff like this, as it will likely return little if any ...


2

I completely agree to all the answers put above. Just adding that one of the reasons why extensions are hidden in URL is to security. Putting it simply, if you don't expose the extension in the URL, it is little hard to figure out the technology on which the application has been built. So lets say a page in made in PHP and the extension is not hidden, then a ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible