Re: [WebDNA] To be or not to be friendly (URLs)
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2011
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 106161
interpreted = N
texte = If that concerns you, you can always add validation code to the = not-found catcher to make sure the label portion of the url matches the = expected value for your content, and redirect to the correct label if = there is a mismatch. So, a page name of "75_function.dna" would be rendered in place, but a = page name of "75_frogs.dna" would be redirected to "75_function.dna" Brian Fries BrainScan Software On Jan 24, 2011, at 12:13 PM, Dan Strong wrote: > The only downside I see with that is if by chance an "alternate" URL = for your page got indexed somehow, then you'd have duplicate content and = could be penalized: >=20 > http://webdna.us/75_function.dna > http://webdna.us/75_ufnction.dna > http://webdna.us/75_frogs-on-the-moon.dna >=20 > All same content. Chances of this happening are probably slim, I'll = admit, but the possibility remains nonetheless, no? > -Dan >=20 > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Brian Fries"
> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 12:00 PM > To: > Subject: Re: [WebDNA] To be or not to be friendly (URLs) >=20 >> For your consideration, one thing I've done in the past for = dynamically generated pages is to include the reference number as part = of the virtual page name, so you would get: >>=20 >> http://webdna.us/75_function.dna >>=20 >> Then my not-found trapping code knew to nab the "75" from the = beginning of the page name to look up the content, ignoring the rest of = the page name. This way the url has a human-readable name with = appropriate keywords in it, and there is no need to redirect. As a side = effect, "75_function.dna", "75_frogs_on_the_moon.dna", or any other page = name beginning with "75_" would get you to the same content, which = results in fewer broken links if you decide to change the label of the = page from "function" to "function_tag", or if some fat-fingered typist = accidentally typed "ufnction" in their link. >>=20 >> Brian Fries >> BrainScan Software >>=20 >>=20 >> On Jan 24, 2011, at 11:47 AM, William DeVaul wrote: >>=20 >>> I tend to think it is more of a user experience issue. When a list = of >>> search results is viewed, does the URL help someone select the right >>> link? >>>=20 >>> For example, search Google for "WebDNA function" without the quotes. >>> The titles you've used are pretty good, so for me, I know to select >>> the second item in the result. The URL is just one more factor to >>> confirm my selection. >>>=20 >>> Note that the list did not return the first result I would have >>> expected based on the optimization of title and URL so other factors >>> were more important in this search. It gets hard to outsmart Google >>> so time is usually better spent making great content and getting >>> high-quality links. >>>=20 >>> Bill >>>=20 >>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Dan Strong = wrote: >>>> I consider myself to be fairly SEO savvy, so I'm not asking this = out of >>>> ignorance nor am I looking for an exhaustive lesson on SEO, but I = would like >>>> to get some opinions from the SEO experts on the list. >>>>=20 >>>> Personally, I prefer friendly URLs, mostly for cosmetic reasons, = but back >>>> around 2005, when I first started using them, the consensus was = that having >>>> keywords in the URL was good for SEO and for my sites, it did seem = to be the >>>> case. >>>>=20 >>>> My impression these days is that, like always, relevant original >>>> human-readable content is the key, and a google sitemap is a very = good idea, >>>> but beyond that the typical SEO best practices (validated html/css, >>>> descriptive title attributes in links, backlinks from authority = sites, >>>> etc.) while they don't hurt, don't necessarily help either. Is that = a fair >>>> statement? >>>>=20 >>>> Specifically, on the webdna.us site, the links are now like this: >>>> http://webdna.us?page.dna?numero=3D152 >>>>=20 >>>> I'd prefer they were like this, but it's beginning to look like a = time-sink: >>>> http://webdna.us/introduction.dna >>>>=20 >>>> So, with everything above in mind, what are your opinions about = URLs like >>>> this as they relate to SEO: >>>> http://webdna.us/page.dna?numero=3D152&topic=3Dintroduction >>>>=20 >>>> Where "topic" is an unused variable with no purpose other than to = put >>>> descriptive words in the URL >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks, >>>> -Dan >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> --------------------------------------------------------- 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 Bug >>>> Reporting: support@webdna.us >>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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 >>> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us >>=20 >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 >> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us > --------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us Brian Fries BrainScan Software
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
If that concerns you, you can always add validation code to the = not-found catcher to make sure the label portion of the url matches the = expected value for your content, and redirect to the correct label if = there is a mismatch. So, a page name of "75_function.dna" would be rendered in place, but a = page name of "75_frogs.dna" would be redirected to "75_function.dna" Brian Fries BrainScan Software On Jan 24, 2011, at 12:13 PM, Dan Strong wrote: > The only downside I see with that is if by chance an "alternate" URL = for your page got indexed somehow, then you'd have duplicate content and = could be penalized: >=20 > http://webdna.us/75_function.dna > http://webdna.us/75_ufnction.dna > http://webdna.us/75_frogs-on-the-moon.dna >=20 > All same content. Chances of this happening are probably slim, I'll = admit, but the possibility remains nonetheless, no? > -Dan >=20 > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Brian Fries" > Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 12:00 PM > To: > Subject: Re: [WebDNA] To be or not to be friendly (URLs) >=20 >> For your consideration, one thing I've done in the past for = dynamically generated pages is to include the reference number as part = of the virtual page name, so you would get: >>=20 >> http://webdna.us/75_function.dna >>=20 >> Then my not-found trapping code knew to nab the "75" from the = beginning of the page name to look up the content, ignoring the rest of = the page name. This way the url has a human-readable name with = appropriate keywords in it, and there is no need to redirect. As a side = effect, "75_function.dna", "75_frogs_on_the_moon.dna", or any other page = name beginning with "75_" would get you to the same content, which = results in fewer broken links if you decide to change the label of the = page from "function" to "function_tag", or if some fat-fingered typist = accidentally typed "ufnction" in their link. >>=20 >> Brian Fries >> BrainScan Software >>=20 >>=20 >> On Jan 24, 2011, at 11:47 AM, William DeVaul wrote: >>=20 >>> I tend to think it is more of a user experience issue. When a list = of >>> search results is viewed, does the URL help someone select the right >>> link? >>>=20 >>> For example, search Google for "WebDNA function" without the quotes. >>> The titles you've used are pretty good, so for me, I know to select >>> the second item in the result. The URL is just one more factor to >>> confirm my selection. >>>=20 >>> Note that the list did not return the first result I would have >>> expected based on the optimization of title and URL so other factors >>> were more important in this search. It gets hard to outsmart Google >>> so time is usually better spent making great content and getting >>> high-quality links. >>>=20 >>> Bill >>>=20 >>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Dan Strong = wrote: >>>> I consider myself to be fairly SEO savvy, so I'm not asking this = out of >>>> ignorance nor am I looking for an exhaustive lesson on SEO, but I = would like >>>> to get some opinions from the SEO experts on the list. >>>>=20 >>>> Personally, I prefer friendly URLs, mostly for cosmetic reasons, = but back >>>> around 2005, when I first started using them, the consensus was = that having >>>> keywords in the URL was good for SEO and for my sites, it did seem = to be the >>>> case. >>>>=20 >>>> My impression these days is that, like always, relevant original >>>> human-readable content is the key, and a google sitemap is a very = good idea, >>>> but beyond that the typical SEO best practices (validated html/css, >>>> descriptive title attributes in links, backlinks from authority = sites, >>>> etc.) while they don't hurt, don't necessarily help either. Is that = a fair >>>> statement? >>>>=20 >>>> Specifically, on the webdna.us site, the links are now like this: >>>> http://webdna.us?page.dna?numero=3D152 >>>>=20 >>>> I'd prefer they were like this, but it's beginning to look like a = time-sink: >>>> http://webdna.us/introduction.dna >>>>=20 >>>> So, with everything above in mind, what are your opinions about = URLs like >>>> this as they relate to SEO: >>>> http://webdna.us/page.dna?numero=3D152&topic=3Dintroduction >>>>=20 >>>> Where "topic" is an unused variable with no purpose other than to = put >>>> descriptive words in the URL >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks, >>>> -Dan >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> --------------------------------------------------------- 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 Bug >>>> Reporting: support@webdna.us >>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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 >>> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us >>=20 >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 >> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us > --------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us Brian Fries BrainScan Software
Brian Fries
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:
Re:2nd WebCatalog2 Feature Request (1996)
Nested vs conditional (1997)
Cookies? (1997)
taxrate - off by 1 cent (1997)
WebCat2 Append problem (B14Macacgi) (1997)
WebDNA for Dummies (2007)
REPOST: Upgrage pricing... The future of WebCatalog is comingwith 4.0... (2000)
Text Area - Line Breaks (1998)
Bug Report, maybe (1997)
Can I invoke an ssi plugin from within a webcat page (1997)
Can't access [OrderFile] OSXS WC4 (2000)
.htm file tags not showing up (2000)
Major Security Hole (1998)
[append] problems v2 (2003)
Separate SSL Server (1997)
Shell on MacOSX (2004)
Semi-OT: Update forms not working remotely (2002)
transferring values (1998)
Time math (2002)
HELP WITH DATES (1997)