Re: [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better?

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

2008


It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 100857
interpreted = N
texte = There's an easy fix for the Google issue Ken just mentioned, and it also goes back to something I said earlier today about linking back to www.webdna.us with the phrase "powered by webdna" I'm not sure how many of you guys deal with SEO on a daily basis, but I have a person here that knows a lot about it and I'm currently running through a 60+ hour training class. If we developers are going to link back to www.webdna.us the new owners should figure out what exact keywords they want us to use. This afternoon I put this link at the bottom of IJODiamonds.com WebDNA server side scripting language The keywords here are "server side scripting language" But if we want people to find the new file type the link could be ".dna scripting language" If enough of us with G.PR4 and above use a link like that we can correct the Google search within a week or two. While we are on the topic of Google and searching for "WebDNA." Donovan or Christopher, you should see if SMSI would be willing to contact Google and remove all the cached pages that are still floating around. Since the smithmicro.com website is not producing 404 errors, Google will maintain those cached copies for a very long time. If the SMSI guys are clueless, tell them to contact Google through the Google Webmaster Tools and request the pages to be removed. As for the .webdna extension, I think the idea of a 6 character file extension is bad and it will confuse people into thinking the website is a virus or something of the like. Matthew A Perosi | Psi Prime, Inc. | http://www.psiprime.com | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psi_Prime%2C_Inc | 323 Union Blvd. | Totowa, NJ 07512 | P: 973.413.8210 | F: 973.413.8217 | Kenneth Grome wrote: > Since you all seem so interested in this default suffix > issue I'm going to chime in here: > > I just did a Google search for ".dna" only to learn that > there's not a single mention of WebDNA in the first ten > pages -- and my pages are set to display 100 hits at a > time -- which means WebDNA does not appear in the first > 1000 Google hits. > > Isn't the point of using a new default suffix so that people > who do not recognize it will 'get curious' and do a search > for it in Google or some other web search engine? Or am I > missing something here? > > If you're going to bother changing things, why don't you use > the full software name as the suffix? The string "webdna" > is certainly short enough to use in a suffix! > > For the above reasons and more I think the new default > suffix should be ".webdna" ... and that's my two cents! > > :) > > Sincerely, > Ken Grome > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > old archives: http://dev.webdna.us/TalkListArchive/ > > > Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:

    
  1. Re: [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better? (Paul Willis 2008)
  2. Re: [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better? (Chris 2008)
  3. Re: [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better? (Paul Willis 2008)
  4. Re: [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better? (Paul Willis 2008)
  5. Re: [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better? ( 2008)
  6. Re: [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better? (Chris 2008)
  7. Re: [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better? ( 2008)
  8. Re: [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better? (Rob 2008)
  9. Re: [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better? ("Psi Prime, Matthew A Perosi " 2008)
  10. Re: [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better? (Paul Willis 2008)
  11. Re: [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better? (Steve Craig 2008)
  12. Re: [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better? (Chris 2008)
  13. Re: [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better? (Chris 2008)
  14. Re: [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better? ("Psi Prime, Matthew A Perosi " 2008)
  15. [WebDNA] Is a '.webdna' suffix better? (Kenneth Grome 2008)
There's an easy fix for the Google issue Ken just mentioned, and it also goes back to something I said earlier today about linking back to www.webdna.us with the phrase "powered by webdna" I'm not sure how many of you guys deal with SEO on a daily basis, but I have a person here that knows a lot about it and I'm currently running through a 60+ hour training class. If we developers are going to link back to www.webdna.us the new owners should figure out what exact keywords they want us to use. This afternoon I put this link at the bottom of IJODiamonds.com WebDNA server side scripting language The keywords here are "server side scripting language" But if we want people to find the new file type the link could be ".dna scripting language" If enough of us with G.PR4 and above use a link like that we can correct the Google search within a week or two. While we are on the topic of Google and searching for "WebDNA." Donovan or Christopher, you should see if SMSI would be willing to contact Google and remove all the cached pages that are still floating around. Since the smithmicro.com website is not producing 404 errors, Google will maintain those cached copies for a very long time. If the SMSI guys are clueless, tell them to contact Google through the Google Webmaster Tools and request the pages to be removed. As for the .webdna extension, I think the idea of a 6 character file extension is bad and it will confuse people into thinking the website is a virus or something of the like. Matthew A Perosi | Psi Prime, Inc. | http://www.psiprime.com | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psi_Prime%2C_Inc | 323 Union Blvd. | Totowa, NJ 07512 | P: 973.413.8210 | F: 973.413.8217 | Kenneth Grome wrote: > Since you all seem so interested in this default suffix > issue I'm going to chime in here: > > I just did a Google search for ".dna" only to learn that > there's not a single mention of WebDNA in the first ten > pages -- and my pages are set to display 100 hits at a > time -- which means WebDNA does not appear in the first > 1000 Google hits. > > Isn't the point of using a new default suffix so that people > who do not recognize it will 'get curious' and do a search > for it in Google or some other web search engine? Or am I > missing something here? > > If you're going to bother changing things, why don't you use > the full software name as the suffix? The string "webdna" > is certainly short enough to use in a suffix! > > For the above reasons and more I think the new default > suffix should be ".webdna" ... and that's my two cents! > > :) > > Sincerely, > Ken Grome > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > old archives: http://dev.webdna.us/TalkListArchive/ > > > "Psi Prime, Matthew A Perosi "

DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!

Top Articles:

Talk List

The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...

Related Readings:

Search design (1997) Capturing the referring site (1999) List archive status? (1999) Need help with emailer- 2 issues (1997) 2nd WebCatalog2 Feature Request (1996) [WebDNA] Version 7.x: webdna.ini and EmailerPrefs (2012) extending webcatalog (1997) WebDNA permissions? (2002) Multiple Merchant Accounts? (1997) Projects & Contractors (1997) Navigator 4.01 (1997) using showpage and showcart commands (1996) foreign character sets and conversions (1998) problem serving foreign languages text (1997) Emailer file formats (1998) How true is this? (1999) major search problem (1998) Feature Request -COPYRECORD (2005) Problems getting parameters passed into email. (1997) Another question (1997)