Altering Breadcrumbs based on User Path to Product URL
-
Hi,
Our products are listed in multiple categories, and as the URLs are path dependent (example.com/fruit/apples/granny-smith/, example.com/fruit/green-fruit/granny-smith/ and so forth) we canonicalise to the 'default' URL (in this case example.com/fruit/apples/granny-smith/).
For mainly crawling bandwidth issues I'm looking to change all product URL's to path neutral so there is only ever one URL per product (example.com/granny-smith/), but still list the product in multiple categories.
If a user comes directly to example.com/granny-smith/ then the breadcrumbs will use the default path "Fruit > Apples", however if the user navigated to the product via another category then I'd like the breadcrumbs to reflect this. I'm not worried about cloaking as it's not based on user-agent and it's very logical why it's being done so I don't expect a penalty.
My question is - how do you recommend this is achieved from a technical standpoint? Many sites use path neutral product URL's (Ikea, PCWorld etc) but none alter the breadcrumbs depending upon path.
Our site is mostly behind a CDN so it has to be a client side solution. I currently view the options as:
- Store Path to product in a cookie and/or browsers local-cache
- Attach the Path details after a # in the URL and use Javascript to alter breadcrumbs onload with JQuery
- When a user clicks to a product from a listing page, use AJAX to pull in the product info but leave the rest of the page (including the breadcrumbs) as-is, updating the URL accordingly
Do you think any of these wouldn't work? Do you have a preference on which one is best? Is there another method you'd recommend?
We also have "Next/Previous" functionality (links to the previous and next product URLs) on the page so I suspect we'd need to attach the path after a # and make another round trip to the server onload to update the previous and next links.
Finally, does anyone know of any sites that do update the breadcrumbs depending upon path?
Thanks in advance for your time
FashionLux
-
Further update to this. Ran into a problem with option 3... this solution works really well when navigating the site internally, however a user landing on one of these URL's directly (bookmark, social share etc) would have a slow loading page as (for non-default product variations) the page will load after the 1st request, then a 2nd request to the server is needed to pull in the image via AJAX.
Loading the other images, stock information, prices, copy etc into an array and doing the work on the client side wasn't an option as the page would get too heavy. So option 3 ruled out.
Ultimately the goal was to reduce duplicate content of product pages and none of the 3 options above do this whilst not affecting page loading times. I did look to fall back on using canonical tags however I've just now found that Facebook are using this tag, so if a user wanted to share a 'red apple' when the canonical is 'green apple' - Facebook would show an image of the 'green apple'.... so at the moment that is ruled out also.
I'll start a new thread on product page duplicates and the best solution - but if anyone has any ideas then please do let me know.
Thanks
Dean
-
Thanks for the response Dana. Option 3 did feel like the best option and that is the one I'm choosing to go with.
Point 2 (with the hash) provides the desired result of Search Engines only seeing the clean URL as the parameters behind the hash will never be seen, but the browser will use them to power the breadcrumbs. In the end it was a toss-up between 2 & 3 but 3 is the most maintainable and quickest for users.
Thanks again
Dean
-
Dean,
This is a great, great question and I am eager to find out what my fellow technical SEOs think because I have faced very similar situations on one of my sites. Thanks for asking this question.
My gut instinct is to select #3 of your options. But not really being a developer, it's hard for me to articulate as to why I think this is the best option. I am really only thinking of it from a user-end standpoint in that I want to know where, in the hierarchy of the site this page lives so that if I need to find it again, I can.
I disagree with your option #2 from an SEO standpoint because anything after a "#" or hashtag in a URL is ignored by search engines....so putting it there isn't going to benefit your SEO in any way.
Interested to hear what others think,
Dana
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
-
URL indexed but not submitted in sitemap, however the URL is in the sitemap
Dear Community, I have the following problem and would be super helpful if you guys would be able to help. Cheers Symptoms : On the search console, Google says that some of our old URLs are indexed but not submitted in sitemap However, those URLs are in the sitemap Also the sitemap as been successfully submitted. No error message Potential explanation : We have an automatic cache clearing process within the company once a day. In the sitemap, we use this as last modification date. Let's imagine url www.example.com/hello was modified last time in 2017. But because the cache is cleared daily, in the sitemap we will have last modified : yesterday, even if the content of the page did not changed since 2017. We have a Z after sitemap time, can it be that the bot does not understands the time format ? We have in the sitemap only http URL. And our HTTPS URLs are not in the sitemap What do you think?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ZozoMe0 -
Why is a canonicalized URL still in index?
Hi Mozers, We recently canonicalized a few thousand URLs but when I search for these pages using the site: operator I can see that they are all still in Google's index. Why is that? Is it reasonable to expect that they would be taken out of the index? Or should we only expect that they won't rank as high as the canonical URLs? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | yaelslater0 -
Breadcrumbs and internal links
Hello, I use to move up my site structure with links in content. I have now installed breadcrumbs, is it is useful to still keep the links in content or isn't there a need to duplicate those links ? and are the breadcrumbs links enough. Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics1 -
Changing URLS: from a short well optimised URL to a longer one – What's the traffic risk
I'm working with a client who has a website that is relatively well optimised, thought it has a pretty flat structure and a lot of top level pages. They've invested in their content over the years and managed to rank well for key search terms. They're currently in the process of changing CMS and as a result of new folder structuring in the CMS the URLs for some pages look to have significantly changed. E.g Existing URL is: website.com/grampians-luxury-accommodation which ranked quite well for luxury accommodation grampians New URL when site is launched on new CMS would be website.com/destinations/victoria/grampians My feeling is that the client is going to lose out on a bit of traffic as a result of this. I'm looking for information or ways or case studies to demonstrate the degree of risk, and to help make a recommendation to mitigate risk.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | moge0 -
Does linking to a div pass value to the base url?
hi, because of how my site is laid out, in many cases, it makes sense from a user experience standpoint to link to a specific id rather than to the base url (and the top of the page). for internal links on my site, will linking to http://domain.com/page/#div pass the same link value as linking to http://domain.com/page/ ? or am i shooting myself in the foot with this approach? thanks, Moz buddies!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RGS_Energy0 -
Relative paths vs absolute paths for links - is there a difference?
Is it better to use links like: some link VS some link is there a difference for the search engine algorithms? Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cdolek1 -
Changing my url name? Should I do it?
Hi, I am targeting a brand called Creative Recreation, who are a trainers brand. We currently rank ok-ish for certain terms for Creative Recreation Trainers, Footwear and Creative Recreation [INSERT STYLE NAME HERE]. Our main search term I think we would like to improve on is "creative recreation trainers" as we are 6th for this. Our domain name points to the brands page as designerboutique-online.com/all-clothing/creative-recreation/ Now what I want to know is, would it be worthwhile or would it affect my current rank/index if I changed the end of that url to read /creative-recreation-trainers/ thus getting the keyword phrase in the url? Creative-Recreation is a hard one to crack as you have a lot of competition from the brands site etc.. Any ideas on this? Cheers Will
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | YNWA0 -
How to 301 redirect ASP.net URLS
I have a situation where a site that was ASP.net has been replaced with a WordPress site. I've performed a Open Site Explorer analysis and found that most of the old pages, ie www.i3bus.com/ProductCategorySummary.aspx?ProductCategoryId=63 are returning a HTTP Status = NO DATA ... when followed ends up at the 404 catch-all page. Can I code the standard 301 Redirects in the .htaccess file for these ASP URLs? If not, I'm open to suggestions.... Thanks Bill
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Marvo0