Yes or No for Ampersand "&" in SEO URLs
-
Hi Mozzers
I would like to know how crawlers see the ampersand (& or &) in your URLs and if Google frown upon this or not? As far as I know they purely recognise this as "and" is this correct and is there any best practice for implementing this, as I know a lot of people complained before about & in links and that it is better to use it as &, but this is not on links, this is on URLs.
Reason for this is that we looking to move onto an ASP.Net MVC framework (any suggestions for a different framework are welcome, we still just planning out future development) and in order to make use of the filter options we have on our site we need a parameter to indicate the difference on a routing level (routing sends to controller, controller sends to model, model sends to controller and controller sends to view < this is pattern of a request that comes in on the framework we will be using).
I already have -'s and /'s in the URLs (which is for my SEO structuring) so these syntax can't be used for identifying filters the user clicks or uses to define their search as it will create a complete mess in the system. Now we looking at & to say; OK, when a user lands on /accommodation and they selects De Kelders (which is a destination in our area) the page will be /accommodation/de-kelders on this page they can define their search further to say they are looking for 5 star accommodation and it should be close to the beach, this is where the routing needs some guidance and we looking to have it as follow: /accommodation/de-kelders/5-star&close-to-the-beach. Now, does the "&" get identified by search engines on a URL level as "and" and does this cause any issues with crawling or indexation or would it be best to look at another solution?
Thanks,
Chris Captivate
-
Yes James you're referencing HTML that's incorrect
-
So basically what you're saying is that Web Design Group, which is a trusted resource on internet coding since 1999 is wrong. Here's more detail about entities:
http://www.htmlhelp.com/reference/html40/entities/
The ampersand is the first character in an entity. Entities are well respected and widely used, at least as long as I've been coding web pages (since about 1997).
-
The & character is also used in Google Analytics parameters. I believe that if there were any problems they wouldn't use. I use this character only to inform the start and finish parameters.
A good example is the UTM parameters used by Google: http://www.domainname.com.br/?utm_source=yourdomain&utm_medium=algo&utm_campaign=yourcampaign&utm_content=something
If you need to include special characters as the information is interesting escape the text before sending to the server.
http://someserver.com/?param1=someinfo¶m2=another¶m3=some text using special characters such & % and more
The url can be correctly corrected using the javascript
escape()
function to convert special characters like:var param3 = 'some text using special characters such & % and more';
escape(param3);// will result some%20text%20using%20special%20characters%20such%20%26%20%25%20and%20more
So your URL will be:
..And will be corrected.
-
Never...
As James correctly pointed out the & (or ampersand) is not a good idea. However his explanation is a little incorrect.
You see URLs can only be sent over the Internet using the ASCII character-set. URLs often contain characters outside the ASCII set, therefore the URL has to be converted into a valid ASCII format.
When using unsafe ASCII characters you have to replace them with a "%" followed by two hexadecimal digits.
Therefore an "&" is %26 and not & which is the standard HTML character set.
Personally I would look at a way to exclude the & and just have /5-star-hotel-near-beach/ for example
-
Ampersand is used as a delimiter for an entity in standard HTML, so inserting it could lead to a validation error and failure to load the page. If you absolutely must use it in your URL, use the code: & which won't mess anything up. It's just text, so there's no reason for Google to penalize it. Under the concept of topic modeling, Google will recognize & as "and" but usually doesn't pay attention to connectors like that, so it's a non issue.
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
-
Moving servers which means moving ip address but using the same URL. Would it harm the website's SEO?
Hello everyone, The server (in-house) which we use to host our website is a bit old. We are using CDN77 for our static content. What if I move all our website to the CDN service? meaning I use their storage capability and just have our url point to the IP address they provide. Would that hurt our rankings?
Web Design | | Edgar-Cerecerez0 -
Does meta "Expires" tag affect website cacheing or indexing?
One of our client has a meta expire tag across all pages of their website. Does that tag affect the website overall caching or indexing? Their website pages including home page is crawled every 10 days, however the website is popular high traffic websites, receiving 240,000 visits/month. Please advise what impact this tag will have on the website indexing and caching? Thanks Atomic Team
Web Design | | JamesDixon700 -
New more "helpful" internal linking causing SERP & traffic drop?
Still dealing with the weird traffic drop on my website. I have removed a bunch of old links from a defunct blog, 301 thin pages, added text to remaining pages. I'm still stumped. So awhile ago I freshened up my website and thought I was "helping people" by making sure they could CONTACT the studio more easily... I added more links to the "contact page" I thought this would help conversions...This changed the number of links to my entire site....Would this be the problem with my ranking/traffic drop? http://bayareaboudoir.com/babinternal1.pdf
Web Design | | Squee1 -
Adobe "Muse" on SEO?
Anyone ever had any experience with this tool? Any feedback on how adobe muse does with SEO and markup is appreciated! update 1: Really? nobody has any comment on this?
Web Design | | Raydon0 -
White Text / Black Background & SEO Impact
Does anyone know of any testing / studies with evidence that Google prefers dark text on a light background vs. light text on a dark background? I have a website that currently has light text on a black background, and really like the way it looks, but am concerned that the style may be hurting SEO. Moreover, redesigning something inverse with the same quality would be a large project and fairly costly, so I'd like to make sure the benefit will really be worth the cost before moving forward.
Web Design | | Bromtec0 -
Duplicate Content & Canonicals
I am a bit confused about canonicals and whether they are "working" properly on my site. In Webmaster Tools, I'm showing about 13,000 pages flagged for duplicate content, but nearly all of them are showing two pages, one URL as the root and a second with parameters. Case in point, these two are showing as duplicate content: http://www.gallerydirect.com/art/product/vincent-van-gogh/starry-night http://www.gallerydirect.com/art/product/vincent-van-gogh/starry-night?substrate_id=3&product_style_id=8&frame_id=63&size=25x20 We have a canonical tag on each of the pages pointing to the one without the parameters. Pages with other parameters don't show as duplicates, just one root and one dupe per listing, So, am I not using the canonical tag properly? It is clearly listed as:Is the tag perhaps not formatted properly (I saw someone somewhere state that there needs to be a /> after the URL, but that seems rather picky for Google)?Suggestions?
Web Design | | sbaylor0 -
Bizarre PDF URL string
Hey folks, I'm getting literally hundreds of Duplicate Title and Duplicate Content errors for a site, and most of them are a result of the same issue. The site uses javascript container pages a lot, but each gets their own URL. Unfortunately, it seems like each page is also loading all the content for all the other pages, or something. For instance, I have a section of the site under /for-institutions/, and then there are 5 container pages under that. Each container page has it's own URL, so when you select it, you get the URL /for-institutions/products/ or /for-institutions/services/ etc. However, the institutions container page doesn't change, just the content within. In my SEO results, I'm getting the following: /for-institutions/$%7Bpdf%7D/ /for-institutions/$%7Bpdf%7D/$%7Bpdf%7D/ etc, each as a duplicate title and content page. How can I eliminate this? Is there a regular expression that rewrites URL segments beginning with $ ? For your reference: The page is set up so that any URL that doesn't exist just refers to the subdirectory. /for-institutions/$%7Bpdf%7D/ displays /for-institutions/, but does not rewrite the URL. So too if I were to enter /for-institutions/dog.
Web Design | | SpokeHQ0 -
What do web designers consider to be SEO
I'm putting together an article about Web Designers and SEO. The basic crux is that most designers will at most (if you are lucky) add in title tags, maybe pretty URL's and HTML links and call it SEO friendly. (lot's who don't probably but also lot's who are even worse) Of course I want it to be a bit controversial so please feel free to let rip. My argument is clients who have previously had site's that have had "SEO on them", know think that all SEO is a waste of time as their previous experience didn't produce the traffic and sales they were expecting. I don't know many designers who independently consider a site marketing strategy and how a site is going to generate links in the long term. I'm sure most of us have read this post on SEO responsiblities but becasue the first port of call for most business owners are the web designers, our offering is undermined by their misunderstandings and in some cases mis-sellings. So under the working title, "Why Web Designers Are Bad For SEO", any care to share some imput.
Web Design | | FDC1