Extensions Vs Non Extensions
-
Hello,
I'm a big fan of clean urls. However i'm curious as to what you guys do, to remove them in a friendly way which doesn't cause confusion.
Standard URLS
http://www.example.com/example1.html
http://www.example.com/example2.html
http://www.example.com/example3.html
http://www.example.com/example4.php
http://www.example.com/example5.phpWhat looks better (in my eyes)
http://www.example.com/example1/
http://www.example.com/example2/
http://www.example.com/example3/
http://www.example.com/example4/
http://www.example.com/example5/Do you keep extensions throughout your website, avoiding any sort of confusion and page duplication;
OR
Put a canonical link pointing to the extension-less version of each page, with the anticipation of this version indexing into Google and other Search Engines.
OR
301 Each page which has an extension to an extension-less version, and remove all linking to ".html" site wide causing errors within software like Dreamweaver, but working properly.
OR
Another way? Please emphasise
I'm sorry if this is a little vague and I appreciate any angles on this, I quite like clean url's but unsure a hassle-less way to create it.
Thanks for any advice in advance
-
Thanks for your answer on this,
I think this will be the right road to go down.
Alex
-
Hi,
Yes, 301s is the best way to get search engine forget about your past URLs.
.html are not good clean urls, so if you can, get rid of them
However, I cannot help you with Dreamweaver issues, I don't use it... Hope someone can help you with it.
Best,
-
Thanks Benoit!
I'm wanting to keep the clean urls, so would you say 301s are the best way to combat this? As well as deleting all of the ".html" references within my website? Even though it would throw up errors within Dreamweaver etc?
-
Hi,
Good point. As I see it, website visitors do not care about the extension ".something", this is just a development issue. So the best way is to avoid it, as people will remember the URL, not the extension.
Best is to use 301 redirection and keep clean URL, there is no need to keep duplicate pages.
Let me know if that helps
Best,
- Benoit.
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
-
Title Length Vs Keywords
Hello all, I've been talking with an SEO expert who convinced me to add more keywords to my titles of a section of our site which is updated with products daily. I can see the logic and I do prefer having these additional keywords. The problem now is in Moz it says we have over 2,000 pages with title elements that are too long, which is true they are all over the 70 character limit. Is this a problem SEO wise? Speaking to our SEO expert they said it's not ideal from a user point of view as you can't see the full title, but are we going to be upsetting Google by having 150+ character titles? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HB171 -
Two websites vs. one for SEO
I recently met with a new potential client who currently has two websites for his business - one that is for the business as a whole and another that is specific to one of his particular services (his main service and what the overall business is known for). My first question was "why do you have two websites?" His response was that he has had a really hard time ranking well organically for his main service. He worked with an SEO company for two years and never was able to establish a solid organic presence for searches related to his main service - so he went ahead and had a site built to focus specifically on that service with the hope that it would help him rank organically for searches related to that service. The new site was built very recently (Dec. 2014) and it hasn't had a lot of optimization work put into it. The original site has a much higher Domain Authority, more incoming links, etc. My typical preference has always been to use one website and drive all traffic to that site, while building out specific content for any products/services on individual pages of the site. For some reason I'm torn as to what to do with this particular situation since his main concern is ranking for his core service, which hasn't happened with the original site. I'm concerned, though, that optimizing and managing two websites will be less effective than driving all of the traffic to one site, and that it could actually be detrimental overall. What are your thoughts? Suggestions? Feel free to let me know if you need any more details.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | garrettkite0 -
Interlinking vs. 'orphaning' mobile page versions in a dynamic serving scenario
Hi there, I'd love to get the Moz community's take on this. We are working on setting up dynamic serving for mobile versions of our pages. During the process of planning the mobile version of a page, we identified a type of navigational links that, while useful enough for desktop visitors, we feel would not be as useful to mobile visitors. We would like to remove these from our mobile version of the page as part of offering a more streamlined mobile page. So we feel that we're making a fine decision with user experience in mind. On any single page, the number of links removed in the mobile version would be relatively few. The question is: is there any danger in “orphaning” the mobile versions of certain pages because links don’t exist pointing to those pages on our mobile pages? Is this a legitimate concern, or is it enough that none of the desktop versions of pages are orphaned? We were not sure whether it’s even possible, in Googlebot’s eyes, to orphan a mobile version of a page if we use dynamic serving and if there are no orphaned desktop versions of our pages. (We also plan to link to "full site" in the footer.) Thank you in advance for your help,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Eric_R
Eric0 -
Webmaster Tools: Total Indexed VS Ever Crawled
Ok, In WMT's under health > index status I have both total indexed and ever crawled ticked - It also looks like the data is broken up weekly. As an example say you have the following: Total Indexed: 1000 Ever Crawled: 5000 What is this say? It found 5000 pages but only indexed 1000 (20%). Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Bondara0 -
Subdomain blog vs. subfolder blog in 2013.
Having read this ( http://www.seomoz.org/q/blog-on-a-subdomain-vs-subfolder ) & countless of blog posts on never to put your blog on a domain because a subdomain is treated as a different site & your blog traffic won't help with your main sites authority. I've always pushed for subfolder blogs. However I've been seeing a lot of blogs now and days saying that Google is now treating subdomains as the same site as your main site. http://www.brafton.com/news/subdomains-vs-subdirectories-for-seo-no-serp-benefits-for-subdomains-anymore http://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/34173/subdomains-vs-subdirectory-status-as-of-2012/34366#34366 ETC... What does everyone think? Is it acceptable to have a blog in a subdomain in 2013? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DCochrane0 -
Help - .ie vs .co.uk in google uk
We have a website that for years has attracted a high level of organic searches and had a very high level of links. It has the .ie extension (Ireland) and did very well when competing in the niche market it is in on google.co.uk. We have the same domain name but in .co.uk format and basically redirected traffic to it when people typed in .co.uk instead. Since the latest panda update, we have noticed that the number of visits organically has dropped to a quarter of what it was and this is continuing to go down. We have also noticed that the .ie version is no longer listed in google and has been replaced by .co.uk. As we've never exchanged or submitted links for the .co.uk domain this means there are only links indexed in google. Is there any way I can get google to re-index the site using the .ie domain rather than the .co.uk domain? I am hemorrhaging sales now and becoming a much more withdrawn person by the day!!! PS - the .co.uk domain is set up as a domain alias in plesk with both .ie and .co.uk domain dns pointing to the the same IP address. Kind Regards
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rufo
Steve0 -
Sitewide Vs HomePage Links For Network of Sites
I wanted to site wide link a few sites together as they are sort of in the same network of ownership and wanted some advice. 1X PR1
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | upick-162391
2X PR2
2x PR3 Would it be best to just get home page links before the footer, the links will be within a paragraph of text OR Just site wide link them in the footer with a heading of "Our Shopping Network"0 -
Link Architecture - Xenu Link Sleuth Vs Manual Observation Confusion
Hi, I have been asked to complete some SEO contracting work for an e-commerce store. The Navigation looked a bit unclean so I decided to investigate it first. a) Manual Observation Within the catalogue view, I loaded up the page source and hit Ctrl-F and searched "href", turns out there's 750 odd links on this page, and most of the other sub catalogue and product pages also have about 750 links. Ouch! My SEO knowledge is telling me this is non-optimal. b) Link Sleuth I crawled the site with Xenu Link Sleuth and found 10,000+ pages. I exported into Open Calc and ran a pivot table to 'count' the number of pages per 'site level'. The results looked like this - Level Pages 0 1 1 42 2 860 3 3268 Now this looks more like a pyramid. I think is is because Link Sleuth can only read 1 'layer' of the Nav bar at a time - it doesnt 'hover' and read the rest of the nav bar (like what can be found by searching for "href" on the page source). Question: How are search spiders going to read the site? Like in (1) or in (2). Thankyou!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DigitalLeaf0