Mobile Site Annotations
-
Our company has a complex mobile situation, and I'm trying to figure out the best way to implement bidirectional annotations and a mobile sitemap. Our mobile presence consists of three different "types" of mobile pages:
-
Most of our mobile pages are mobile-specific "m." pages where the URL is completely controlled via dynamic parameter paths, rather than static mobile URLs (because of the mobile template we're using). For example: http://m.example.com/?original_path=/directory/subdirectory. We have created vanity 301 redirects for the majority of these pages, that look like http://m.example.com/product that simply redirect to the previous URL.
-
Six one-off mobile pages that do have a static mobile URL, but are separate from the m. site above. These URLs look like http://www.example.com/product.mobile.html
-
Two responsively designed pages with a single URL for both mobile and desktop.
My questions are as follows:
-
Mobile sitemap: Should I include all three types of mobile pages in my mobile sitemap? Should I include all the individual dynamic parameter m. URLs like http://m.example.com/?original_path=/directory/subdirectory in the sitemap, or is that against Google's recommendations?
-
Bidirectional Annotations: We are unable to add the rel="canonical" tag to the m. URLs mentioned in section #1 above because we cannot add dynamic tags to the header of the mobile template. We can, however, add them to the .mobile.html pages. For the rel="alternate" tags on the desktop versions, though, is it correct to use the dynamic parameter URLs like http://m.example.com/?original_path=/directory/subdirectory as the mobile version target for the rel="alternate" tag? My initial thought is no, since they're dynamic parameter URLs. Is there even any benefit to doing this if we can't add the bidirectional rel="canonical" on those same m. dynamic URLs?
I'd be immensely grateful for any advice! Thank you so much!
-
-
Yup, you've got it!
-
Thanks for the great advice, Kristina! I really appreciate it.
You raise a good point on the vanity vs. parameter URL risks. We primarily use these static 301 vanity URLs for ad campaigns and media buys, so we're not using them in any internal linking. The template we use for our mobile environment, called Kony, doesn't actually have "links" on the back end of the site the same way a desktop site would - they're more like buttons that load a specific set of content without using a unique, canonical URL for that content - this is why all of our mobile pages on this environment are parameter URLs based on the user path, not "real" URLs. Weird, I know!
I think that's an excellent idea to specify in Webmaster Tools that our mobile parameters determine our content, just so Google knows.
So just to confirm your recommendations around the mobile sitemap - we should create a single sitemap that includes the parameter URLs (http://m.example.com/?original_path=/directory/subdirectory) as well as the static .mobile.html pages (http://www.example.com/product.mobile.html)? There is no content overlap between the two environments. I assume we should not include the responsive design URLs, since they're not exclusively mobile URLs?
Thanks again!
-
Hi Critical Mass,
Before I answer your direct questions, I think you're putting yourself in a tricky situation by creating vanity 301 redirects to those dynamic mobile URLs. If someone ever links to the mobile version of your page, they're going to use the URL with parameters, because that's the page they end up on. That means that all inbound links will point Google to your parameter URLs and all internal links will point to the static URLs you've created. Link equity will be split, and all pages will suffer for it.
It's true that Google understands static URLs a bit better than it understands URLs built with parameters, but it does understand that sometimes parameters define content. I recommend getting rid of those static URLs, then using Google Webmaster Tools to explicitly say, "these parameters define content." You can learn more about how to do this here: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/1235687?hl=en
Now, to answer your questions:
-
You should only include the URLs that you want Google to index. If you follow my recommendation above, this is now an easy question to answer.
-
Yes, use the rel="alternate" tag on your desktop pages! Like I said, Google understands that parameters can determine content. You want to connect the two pages as much as possible, even if you can't canonical back.
Hope this helps!
Kristina
-
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
-
Should m-dot sites be indexed at all
I have a client with a site with a m-dot mobile version. They will move it to a responsive site sometime next year but in meanwhile I have a massive doubt. This m-dot site has some 30k indexed pages in Google. Each of this page is bidirectionally linked to the www. version (rel="alternate on the www, rel canonical on the m-dot) There is no noindex on the m-dot site, so I understand that Google might decide to index the m-dot pages regardless of the canonical to the www site. But my doubts stays: is it a bad thing that both the version are indexed? Is this having a negative impact on the crawling budget? Or risking some other bad consequence? and how is the mobile-first going to impact on this? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | newbiebird0 -
Meta refresh for news site?
We have a news site that uses a meta refresh (<meta < span="">http-equiv="refresh" content="600" /> across all content. I understand the reasoning on the homepage and am trying to decide of the cons of using this (slows page, is it treated differently and loses pagerank/link ..) Does anyone have experience with meta refresh being a negative thing or does it no longer matter?</meta <>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KristieWahlquist0 -
Support docs on a separate site?
Hello, A client has a large ecommerce site (www.mydomain.com) for technical products that require a number of technical documents. Most of these are PDFs, some 3D PDFs drawings and renderings - all good for indexing. We are considering 2 possibilities for these: 1 - a separate site (www.mydomain2.com or docs.mydomain.com), catalog style (probably wordpress) to store the files, with links from product pages at (www.mydomain.com) to the relevant PDFs. This will be much easier to maintain than the second possibility. 2 - storing the files at www.mydomain.com (in /docs/ folder, for example) with links from the product pages to the relevant PDFs. Is there an advantage one way or the other? Thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | tlw0 -
Site Structured Navigated by Cookies
Is it advisable to have a site structure that is navigated via URLs rather than cookies? In a website that has several location based pages - each with their own functions and information? Is this a SEO priority? Will it help to combat duplicate content? Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | J_Sinclair0 -
SEO for bigcommerce site
I have a site on bigcommerce platform .from Where do i need start SEO for these types of ecommerce sites.Looking for Experts ideas . Thank you.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | innofidelity0 -
Is it possible to Spoof Analytics to give false Unique Visitor Data for Site A to Site B
Hi, We are working as a middle man between our client (website A) and another website (website B) where, website B is going to host a section around websites A products etc. The deal is that Website A (our client) will pay Website B based on the number of unique visitors they send them. As the middle man we are in charge of monitoring the number of Unique visitors sent though and are going to do this by monitoring Website A's analytics account and checking the number of Unique visitors sent. The deal is worth quite a lot of money, and as the middle man we are responsible for making sure that no funny business goes on (IE false visitors etc). So to make sure we have things covered - What I would like to know is 1/. Is it actually possible to fool analytics into reporting falsely high unique visitors from Webpage A to Site B (And if so how could they do it). 2/. What could we do to spot any potential abuse (IE is there an easy way to spot that these are spoofed visitors). Many thanks in advance
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | James770 -
Does a mobile site count as duplicate content?
Are there any specific guidelines that should be followed for setting up a mobile site to ensure it isn't counted as duplicate content?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline0 -
Key page of site not ranking at all
Our site has the largest selection of dog clothes on the Internet. We're been (every so slowly) creeping up in the rankings for the "dog clothes" term, but for some reason only rank for our home page. Even though the home page (and every page on the domain) has links pointing to our specific Dog Clothes page, that page doesn't even rank anywhere when searching Google with "dog clothes site:baxterboo.com". http://www.google.com/webhp?source=hp&q=dog+clothes+site:baxterboo.com&#sclient=psy&hl=en&site=webhp&source=hp&q=dog+clothes+site:baxterboo.com&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=dog+clothes+site:baxterboo.com&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=f4efcaa1b8c328f Pages 2+ of product results from that page rank, but not the base page. It's not excluded in robots.txt, All on site links to that page use the same URL. That page is loaded with more text that includes the keywords. I don't believe there's duplicated content. What am I missing? Has the page somehow been penalized?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BBPets0