Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
How does a search engine bot navigate past a .PDF link?
-
We have a large number of product pages that contain links to a .pdf of the technical specs for that product. These are all set up to open in a new window when the end user clicks.
If these pages are being crawled, and a bot follows the link for the .pdf, is there any way for that bot to continue to crawl the site, or does it get stuck on that dangling page because it doesn't contain any links back to the site (it's a .pdf) and the "back" button doesn't work because the page opened in a new window?
If this situation effectively stops the bot in its tracks and it can't crawl any further, what's the best way to fix this?
1. Add a rel="nofollow" attribute
2. Don't open the link in a new window so the back button remains finctional
3. Both 1 and 2
or
4. Create specs on the page instead of relying on a .pdf
Here's an example page: http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/product/mackie-cfx12-mkii-compact-mixer - The technical spec .pdf is located under the "Downloads" tab [the content is all on one page in the source code - the tabs are just a design element]
Thoughts and suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Dana
-
Thanks very much Christopher. This is an excellent explanation. What do you think of Charlie and EGOL's suggestions regarding making sure that there are links embedded in these PDFs pointing either back to the product page or even to the home page?
In your opinion, is this something worth doing? If so, why?
-
Hi Dana,
" ... you are right, one of the fundamental questions I still have is how does a bot behave when it finds an orphaned page like one of these? Does it just revert back to the sitemap and move one? Does it automatically go back to the last non-dead end page and move on from there? What does it do?"
Bots are not really like a single spider that has to crawl around the web that can get trapped when entering an orphaned page with no back-button. When a bot enters a site, it creates a list of all the internal pages that are linked from the home page. Then it visits each page on that list and keeps adding more linked pages to that list. Each time it adds more pages to the list, it only adds new unique pages and does not add duplicates. It also keeps track of which pages it has already visited. When all the pages have been visited once, and no new pages are discovered that are not already on the list, all of the pages have been crawled.
Best,
Christopher -
Hi Don,
Thanks so much for responding and while the answers I have received so far did give me some direction, you are right, one of the fundamental questions I still have is how does a bot behave when it finds an orphaned page like one of these? Does it just revert back to the sitemap and move one? Does it automatically go back to the last non-dead end page and move on from there? What does it do?
Thanks for chiming in. I'd love it if someone more familiar with how a bot actually crawls links like this on a page would jump in with an answer.
Dana
-
Thanks Charlie. I think this is a good suggestion. I work 9-6 too, and just so happen to be the in-house SEO strategist, so this stuff is what I'm there to do. I don't mind the mundane aspects of SEO because the payoff is usually pretty rewarding! Now I know what I'm doing on Monday (on top of a dozen other things!)
Thanks again!
-
I would spend the time needed to do an assessment of these pages.
** how many of them have external links
** how many of them pull traffic from search or other sites
** how many of them are currently useful (are people looking at them)
I would delete (and redirect the URL) of any page that answers "no" to the three items above. These are "dead weight" on your site.
Also, if these are .pdfs of print ads then they might simply be images in a pdf. (test this by searching for an exact phrase from one of them in quotes and include site:yourdomain.com in the query. Keep in mind that google can read the text in some images embedded in pdfs.
I had a lot of pdfs with images on one of my site and got hit with a panda problem. I think that Google thought that the .pdfs were thin content. So I used rel=canonical to assign them to the most relevant page using .htaccess. The panda problem was solved after a couple of months.
Also, keep in mind that .pdfs can be used for conversions. You can embed "add to cart" buttons and links into them and they will function just as on a web page.
If any of these pdfs are pulling in tons I traffic I would figure out how I can put the pdf to better use or create webpage (and redirect the pdf) to best monetize/convert or whatever you business goals dictate.
-
Can a bot navigate via a back button?
I don't think so. They can follow links but they can't "click".
-
Hi Dana
I think your question has been dodged a tad. I ways lead to understand that a .pdf or any page that opens in a new tab and does not link back to the original site, (dangling page) is not a problem. The reason being is that crawlers don't really care how a page is opened. Because the crawler will fork at every link and crawls each new page/link from each fork, when it finds a orphan or dangling page it just stops. This of course is not an issue since if the crawler has forked at each link.
So the question is how a SE treats .pdf's rather how does it treat orphan page. Maybe somebody who works with crawlers can confirm or educate us both on they work.
Don
-
Many thanks to both you and EGOL for excellent answers!
-
Thanks EGOL. Yes, many of these .pdfs could be and are referenced by other sites. Given that there's no link from the .pdf back to our site, we really are missing out on a huge opportunity. I thought this might be the case as I pondered the whole concept of "dangling links" that was discussed in a SEOMoz blog post this week.
I agree about the last point regarding opening in a new window being more of a usability issue than a problem for SEO. I agree with you completely that opening in the same window is way better for the end user.
Can a bot navigate via a back button?
Thanks very much to both you and Charlie for your excellent answers!
-
lol, thank heaven's they aren't spammy. However, they aren't particularly helfpul either. You see, about 3,000 of them are old .pdf versions of print advertising campaigns, going back as far as 2005. They contain obsolete pricing, products, etc. Unfortunately, instead of archiving them off the server, they've been continuously archived in a sub-directory of our main website.
Nearly all of it is indexed. It seems to me the best thing to do for these is to include a statement that the content is an old advertisement and include a llnk to our current "special offers" page.
What do you think of that as a strategy for at least giving engines and humans a means to navigate to someplace current on the site?
-
I see 6000 pdfs as an amazing opportunity. Get links on those pages and it will funnel a lot of power through your site.
If that was my site, we would be on that job immediately. Could be a huge gain for some easy work.
-
Go back and rework our .pdfs so they at least contain a link back to the homepage?
Yes! Absolutely! And, link them to other relevant pages. If these are reference documents they could be pulling in a lot of links and traffic from other sites.
In addition toAs well as configure the hyperlinks so they open in the same window instead of a new one?
In my opinion, this is not an SEO issue. This is a usability issue. I would have them open in the same window so the back button is available.
-
Thank you Charlie. In our case, our .pdfs contain no links in them at all. There is nothing for a bot (or a human) that will navigate them out of the .pdf....not even the back button.
Considering that, and EGOL's response below, would the best course of action be to include, at the very least, an active link back to our homepage from all of our .pdf files?
We have as many as 6,000 .pdfs.
Thanks,
Dana
-
Thanks EGOL,
Yes, I understand well that .pdf documents can be indexed. That's not my concern. My concern is that a bot that navigates to one of our many .pdf tech specs documents, which, incidentally, contains no outbound links to anything, would then become trapped and not be able to continue crawling the site. This is particularly true because we have them set up to open in a new window. In the example above, sure, there's a text reference back to the site "www.kingdom.com" - but it isn't a link in the .pdf. There are no links, in any of our .pdfs.
So, what is the best way to deal with this? Go back and rework our .pdfs so they at least contain a link back to the homepage? In addition toAs well as configure the hyperlinks so they open in the same window instead of a new one?
-
.pdf documents are crawled by bots and they accumulate pagerank just like .html pages.
You can include links in them to other documents on the web and bots will crawl those links and pagerank will flow through them.
.pdf documents can be given a "title tag" equivalent by opening their properties and giving the document a title. This title will display in the SERPs. .pfd documents can be hard to beat in the SERPs if they are optimized and have links from a competitive number of other web documents.
Lots of document formats behave this way. Excel, PowerPoint, Word for example.
In my opinion, .pdf documents can trigger a Panda problem for your site if you have a lot of them with trivial or duplicate content (as in print versions of web documents). They can be given rel=canonical through .htaccess to solve the Panda problem but Google often takes a long long time (sometimes months) to recognize the canonical and use that instruction.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Broken canonical link errors
Hello, Several tools I'm using are returning errors due to "broken canonical links". However, I'm not too sure why is that. Eg.
Technical SEO | | GhillC
Page URL: domain.com/page.html?xxxx
Canonical link URL: domain.com/page.html
Returns an error. Any idea why? Am I doing it wrong? Thanks,
G1 -
Does an Apostrophe affect searches?
Does Google differentiate between keyphrase structures such as Mens Sunglasses & Men**'**s Sunglasses? I.e. does the inclusion/exclusion of an apostrophe make any difference when optimising your main keyword/phrase for a page? Keyword explorer appears to give different results..... I.e. no data for Men's Sunglasses, but data appears for Mens sunglasses. So if I optimise my page to include the apostrophe, will it screw the potential success for that page? Thanks 🙂 Bob
Technical SEO | | SushiUK1 -
Abnormally high internal link reported in Google Search Console not matching Moz reports
If I'm looking at our internal link count and structure on Google Search Console, some pages are listed as having over a thousand internal links within our site. I've read that having too many internal links on a page devalues that page's PageRank, because the value is divided amongst the pages it links out to. Likewise, I've heard having too many internal links is just bad in general for SEO. Is that true? The problem I'm facing is determining how Google is "discovering" these internal links. If I'm just looking at one single page reported with, say, 1,350 links and I'm just looking at the code, it may only have 80 or 90 actual links. Moz will confirm this, as well. So why would Google Search Console report different? Should I be concerned about this?
Technical SEO | | Closetstogo0 -
Image Search
Hello Community, I have been reading and researching about image search and trying to find patterns within the results but unfortunately I could not get to a conclusion on 2 matters. Hopefully this community would have the answers I am searching for. 1) Watermarked Images (To remove or not to remove watermark from photos) I see a lot of confusion on this subject and am pretty much confused myself. Although it might be true that watermarked photos do not cause a punishment, it sure does not seem to help. At least in my industry and on a bunch of different random queries I have made, watermarked images are hard to come by on Google's images results. Usually the first results do not have any watermarks. I have read online that Google takes into account user behavior and most users prefer images with no watermark. But again, it is something "I have read online" so I don't have any proof. I would love to have further clarification and, if possible, a definite guide on how to improve my image results. 2) Multiple nested folders (Folder depth) Due to speed concerns our tech guys are using 1 image per folder and created a convoluted folder structure where the photos are actually 9 levels deep. Most of our competition and many small Wordpress blogs outrank us on Google images and on ALL INSTANCES I have checked, their photos are 3, 4 or 5 levels deep. Never inside 9 nested folders.
Technical SEO | | Koki.Mourao
So... A) Should I consider removing the watermark - which is not that intrusive but is visible?
B) Should I try to simplify the folder structure for my photos? Thank you0 -
Tool to search relative vs absolute internal links
I'm preparing for a site migration from a .co.uk to a .com and I want to ensure all internal links are updated to point to the new primary domain. What tool can I use to check internal links as some are relative and others are absolute so I need to update them all to relative.
Technical SEO | | Lindsay_D0 -
International Site Links In Footer
We have several international sites and we have them linked in the footer of our main .com site . Should we add "nofollow" to these links? Our concern is that Google could see these sites as a network?
Technical SEO | | EwanFisher0 -
Does Google Bot accept Cookies
I am working with a per page results refinement that stores a cookie on the users computer and then keeps that same per page as the user goes around the site. I was just wondering if that was true for Google bot or Bing bot as well. Will they keep the cookie or would they not be able to accept it. I just want to know as I dont want different urls created if they can keep the cookie. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Gordian0 -
Do search engines still index/crawl private content?
If you have a membership site, which requires a payment to access specific content/images/videos, do search engines still use that content as a ranking/domain authority factor? Is it worth optimizing these "private" pages for SEO?
Technical SEO | | christinarule1