Alternative Markup Challenge. Can anyone help?
-
I have a challenge around alternative markup. We currently operate a single domain with geo-targeted folders and alternative markup implemented. We are now now looking to expand this out to non-English content.
Current Implementation;
- All generic English language content hosted on the main domain, with x5 English language content variations (locales) available under a folder structure (.com/en-us/ etc.).
- Alternative markup is in place for all locales within the HTML, implemented automatically by developers via the CMS.
- Locale folders geo-targeted via GWT and Bing WT.
Planned Launch;
- Introduction of 5 new non-English locale folders (e.g. /de-de/ etc.), targeted to their respective country and language.
- Content language will be mixed, with around 1/10 of pages translated and the other 9/10 of pages (business listings) having their body content remain in English, with headers / footers translated.
- Locale folders will be geo-targeted via GWT and Bing WT.
- Folder and markup usage TBC.
Options;
-
Folders;
-
Implement folder structure /de/, attempting to indicate country but not language (issue; usually a single identifier indicates language, not country?).
-
Implement /de-de/ folder structure to match the English locales and maintain correct country targeting (issue; some content is not in language).
-
Alternative markup;
-
Do not make use of markup at all.
-
Implement CMS based automated markup on all English and non-English content throughout the locale (e.g. /de-de/), but exclude English language versions (e.g. /en-gb/).
-
Attempt manually implementing markup to bridge the English and non-English locales, potentially creating future issues with new content going live and content being removed. A heavy risk.
Current approach is webmaster tools targeting, a /de-de/ folder structure and automated implementation of markup. This means English language URLs will have markup and non-English language URLs will have markup, but they will not match up (e.g. English pages will never have markup for non-English language content).
If you minds haven't melted, what's your thoughts?
Any help is much appreciated.
-
Hi!
Did you solve the issue you asked about in your question, so to consider this Q&A closed?
Or you are still wondering about an answer?
In this last case, please, give us more details answering to the clarifications I asked you one month ago :).
Ciao
-
When you talk about mark up, what do you mean? Hreflang or other kind of mark-up?
Please, be specific on this, because - depending from your clarification, the answer can be one or another.
p.s.: naming the subfolders /de/ or /de-de/ does not have such an impact in geo-targeting, so I would not stress myself too much of details like that one.
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
-
Canonical and Alternate Advice
At the moment for most of our sites, we have both a desktop and mobile version of our sites. They both show the same content and use the same URL structure as each other. The server determines whether if you're visiting from either device and displays the relevant version of the site. We are in a predicament of how to properly use the canonical and alternate rel tags. Currently we have a canonical on mobile and alternate on desktop, both of which have the same URL because both mobile and desktop use the same as explained in the first paragraph. Would the way of us doing it at the moment be correct?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JH_OffLimits3 -
Can we compete for both videos and text results?
Hi, We have a ecommerce website that performs very well for our brand pages on the text results including the reviews snippet. Our brand pages also include embedded videos. Until now we have always ranked poorly on video results. Our videos are hosted over youtube. In order to boost our video result we have recently submitted a video sitemap to help crawlers find out our videos. The result is the following : our brand pages are now only competing in the video results space. Instead of showing as a text result with our reviews snippet, it shows as a video in a carrousel widget. Within the video tab we are ranking top. We have experienced a drop in CTR since then. Moz have reported a drop on all our brand keywords for text search although the video widget shows our brand there. Is there a way to compete for both videos results and text results, making the choice to keey the review snippet widget? Is the video sitemap useful only to compete within the video space? Cheers
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mattam1 -
Use hreflang on links without rel alternative?
Does it do any good to use hreflang on links without rel="alternative" ? We have on each page a possibility to go to another language, but the languages root page and not an alternative version of that specific article.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Preen0 -
Can Press Releases Be Beneficial for SEO?
Can it hurt your website if there are thousands of links to your website from multiple websites with identical content? Is there a right way to use PR for SEO?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sbrault740 -
Certain Pages Not Being Indexed - Please Help
We are having trouble getting a bulk of our pages indexed in google. Any help would be greatly appreciated! The Following Page types are being indexed through escaped fragment: http://www.cbuy.tv/#! http://www.cbuy.tv/celebrity#!65-Ashley-Tisdale/fashion/4097-Casadei-BLADE-PUMP/Product/175199 <cite>www.cbuy.tv/celebrity/155-Sophia-Bush#!</cite> However, all our pages that look like this, are not being indexed: http://www.cbuy.tv/#!Type=Photo&id=b1d18759-5e52-4a1c-9491-6fb3cb9d4b95&Katie-Holmes-Hot-Pink-Pants-Isabel-Marant-DAVID-DOUBLE-BREASTED-Wool-COAT-Maison-Pumps-Black-Bag
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CBuy0 -
What reports should I run, what else can i improve?
Hi, I ran a full Ranking analysis report for "empresa diseño web" for Google Mexico. From what I could see, my site has better metrics in most items than many of the top 10 sites for those keywords. What other reports should I run in order to gain some insights on how to improve on my site and improve my position? Thanks and regards, Rosario
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | prointernacional0 -
Nobody Can Answer This? What Can Google Tell About Videos?
I uploaded a video to youtube one time and then went to upload it again, but saved differently with different tags. Youtube rejected the second upload as being the same as the first. Really, it was the same... just a different file with different tags. Now, I was thinking about making and uploading some similar but not identical videos for embedding on some web pages. Was thinking I'd make the voice overs different, but the images mostly the same montage. Do you think Youtube/Google will see it as the same video? I kind of assume that it didn't fly when I first tried it some time ago because youtube was looking at the audio in the way it can make a transcription. Do you think if the audi,o, file name, tags were different, it wouldn't matter if the video was the same? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Panda Update - Challenge!
I met with a new client last week. They were very negatively impacted by the Panda update. Initially I thought the reason was pretty straight-forward and had to do with duplicate content. After my meeting with the developer, I'm stumped and I'd appreciate any ideas. Here are a few details to give you some background. The site is a very nice looking (2.0) website with good content. Basically they sell fonts. That's why I thought there could be some duplicate content issues. The developer assured me that the product detail pages are unique and he has the rel=canonical tag properly in place. I don't see any issues with the code, the content is good (not shallow), there's no advertising on the site, XML sitemap is up to date, Google webmaster indicates that the site is getting crawled with no issues. The only thing I can come up with is that it is either: Something off-page related to links or Related to the font descriptions - maybe they are getting copied and pasted from other sites...and they don't look like unique content to Google. If anyone has ideas or would like more info to help please send me a message. I greatly appreciate any feedback. Thank you, friends! LHC
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lhc670