Re: [WebDNA] To be or not to be friendly (URLs)
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2011
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 106162
interpreted = N
texte = Good point. -Dan -------------------------------------------------- From: "Brian Fries"
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 12:22 PM To: Subject: Re: [WebDNA] To be or not to be friendly (URLs) > 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: >> >> http://webdna.us/75_function.dna >> http://webdna.us/75_ufnction.dna >> http://webdna.us/75_frogs-on-the-moon.dna >> >> All same content. Chances of this happening are probably slim, I'll >> admit, but the possibility remains nonetheless, no? >> -Dan >> >> -------------------------------------------------- >> From: "Brian Fries" >> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 12:00 PM >> To: >> Subject: Re: [WebDNA] To be or not to be friendly (URLs) >> >>> 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: >>> >>> http://webdna.us/75_function.dna >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> Brian Fries >>> BrainScan Software >>> >>> >>> On Jan 24, 2011, at 11:47 AM, William DeVaul wrote: >>> >>>> 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? >>>> >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> Bill >>>> >>>> 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. >>>>> >>>>> 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. >>>>> >>>>> 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? >>>>> >>>>> Specifically, on the webdna.us site, the links are now like this: >>>>> http://webdna.us?page.dna?numero=152 >>>>> >>>>> I'd prefer they were like this, but it's beginning to look like a >>>>> time-sink: >>>>> http://webdna.us/introduction.dna >>>>> >>>>> 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=152&topic=introduction >>>>> >>>>> Where "topic" is an unused variable with no purpose other than to put >>>>> descriptive words in the URL >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> -Dan >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------- 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 >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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 > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > 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 >
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
Good point. -Dan -------------------------------------------------- From: "Brian Fries" Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 12:22 PM To: Subject: Re: [WebDNA] To be or not to be friendly (URLs) > 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: >> >> http://webdna.us/75_function.dna >> http://webdna.us/75_ufnction.dna >> http://webdna.us/75_frogs-on-the-moon.dna >> >> All same content. Chances of this happening are probably slim, I'll >> admit, but the possibility remains nonetheless, no? >> -Dan >> >> -------------------------------------------------- >> From: "Brian Fries" >> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 12:00 PM >> To: >> Subject: Re: [WebDNA] To be or not to be friendly (URLs) >> >>> 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: >>> >>> http://webdna.us/75_function.dna >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> Brian Fries >>> BrainScan Software >>> >>> >>> On Jan 24, 2011, at 11:47 AM, William DeVaul wrote: >>> >>>> 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? >>>> >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> Bill >>>> >>>> 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. >>>>> >>>>> 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. >>>>> >>>>> 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? >>>>> >>>>> Specifically, on the webdna.us site, the links are now like this: >>>>> http://webdna.us?page.dna?numero=152 >>>>> >>>>> I'd prefer they were like this, but it's beginning to look like a >>>>> time-sink: >>>>> http://webdna.us/introduction.dna >>>>> >>>>> 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=152&topic=introduction >>>>> >>>>> Where "topic" is an unused variable with no purpose other than to put >>>>> descriptive words in the URL >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> -Dan >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------- 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 >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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 > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > 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 >
"Dan Strong"
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:
OT - New Ti Books (2002)
I think WebDNA-Talk died ... :( (1997)
NY taxRates.db? (1997)
WebCatalog 4.0.1 has been released! (2000)
WC2/Mac -- Forms not submitting correctly with Mac browsers (1997)
Contest (1999)
New public beta available (1997)
WebCat2b15MacPlugin - showing [math] (1997)
WCf2 and nested tags (1997)
Roundup function? (1997)
[BULK] [WebDNA] test (2011)
[WebDNA] High-profile WebDNA sites? (2008)
[Announce]: Web server security and password protection (1997)
Date in IF ELSE Comparison (2004)
[protect admin] (1997)
RE: Explorer oddities (1997)
Template transformed itself into a database? (1998)
BadSuffix with 2.1b3 cgi (1997)
UCE: SetHeader not Working (2006)
Webcat no longer supported? (2006)