Dedicated landing pages vs responsive web design
-
I've been doing some research into web design and page layout as my company is considering a re-design. However, we have come to an argument around responsive webdesign vs SEO.
The argument is around me (SEO specialist) arguing that I want dedicated pages for all my content as it's good for SEO since it focuses keywords and content properly, and it still adheres to good user journeys (providing it's done correctly), and my web designer arguing that mobile traffic is on the rise (which it is I know) so we should have more content under 1 URL and use responsive web design so that users can just scroll through content instead of having to keep be direct to different pages.
What do I do...
I can't find any blogs, questions, or whiteboards that really touches on this topic, so can anyone advise me on whether I should:
- Create dedicated landing pages for each bit of content which is good for SEO and taking users on a journey around my site
OR
- All content that is relative to a landing page, put all under that one URL (e.g. "About us" may have info on the company, our team, our history, careers) and allow people to scroll down what could be a very long page on any device, but may effect SEO as I can't focus keywords/content under one URL properly, so it may effect rankings.
Any advice SEO and user experience whizzes out there?
-
My agency's website is ranked #1 on Google for small business marketing in a major US city. We get a lot of search traffic, primarily on our home page and contact page. The home page features a couple paragraphs about our agency and a video. Of course there is some information in the footer. With that being said, our website and company has been very successful generating business without lengthy pages. Although I enjoy building long, informative home pages, I don't necessarily know that it guarantees better SEO results (as our company has been ranked #1 for a while with a very minimalistic setup).
This is just my own personal opinion, but I think it is generally better to give the user important (quality) information up front and try to reel them in from there. If they want to browse around your site and learn more then you've done your job. If you're really good then maybe they skip straight to the contact page and shoot you an email or call you.
I've ranked multiple websites #1 on Google for fairly competitive keywords in large cities. Very few of them were infinite scroll. With that being said I don't think there is anything wrong with that style of design (I make a lot of websites like that, too).
I think you should do what ever you think is more visually appealing and works with your content. I think depending on the situation either could work well. Best of luck!
-
Hi Viriginia. Here's a blog post discussing this as well and arguing for the design choice of combining the elements into one page: http://moz.com/blog/the-first-link-counts-rule-and-the-hash-sign. Note the result to her test, "The results were the same and now Google is showing the page for 3 different anchor texts. It means there's another exception of the "first link counts" rule and you can put multiple links on document A to document B and Google will count all of their anchor texts." So I'd be a little less worried about having multiple pages per content piece and instead focus on the page style that delivers the best user experience, conversion rate, and content grouping.
Another thing you can look at to help you decide would be your current / past analytics. How many pages does your average visitor view per session? How much time do they spend on site? If they're not visiting very many pages, going beyond that number might limit the exposure of those pages. If you split test the multi-page design versus the single-page design you might find even better answers. Cheers!
-
Yes. I see exactly what you mean. I think that you can do it the way that you want and still have the responsive design. I think that accordion style menus would help the user experience. That is how I shrunk the fly out menus on this site.
The content and the responsive design are very important parts of SEO. I don't think you have to change your content at all to make a responsive design work. I wouldn't change your content, I would just play around with the menu styles so that you can find the one that works best for your content on a mobile device.
-
Yeah, the way you've done it with each bit of content under different URLs for the About us section e.g. /meet-the-team, /roof-chicago, /testimonials/ is my argument. You've done it the way I want to do it - creating dedicated landing pages for each bit about you, not just shoving it under one /about-us URL.
Here's our current About Us landing page, you'll see what I mean http://www.seriousideas.com/about-us/ - we have it broken down into lots of little bits which you can jump to if you didn't want to scroll --> Meet the team, our history, sectors, clients. I'm arguing that I wouldn't have all of those one URL, I would split them up like this:
/meet-the-team
/our-history
/sectors
/our-clients
But still use responsive web design on the site so that it is an easier experience for the user.
Do you see what I mean?
-
I see what you are saying about duplicate content. What I was suggesting is keeping the pages the length you want them, while having a responsive design. There is no reason why you couldn't have multiple pages with shorter content on a responsive design. Maybe I am just not seeing the full picture.
This is a responsive design I created for a service site a few years ago. The content on the pages was designed to target key terms of course, but there are many pages for about us, the team, and what we do. Is this what you are looking to do?
-
Aww I think I unfairly represented my web designers argument, I think he was more playing devils advocate than saying my way is wrong. But yes, your second comment RE: better UX was his point.
I see what you're saying, but I wouldn't do both... that could potentially lead to duplicate content and rubbish user journey if some pages are maahoosive and some point people to different areas of the site.
We don't sell products, we're a service based company (marketing agency). So all our content is around what services we offer, as well as having a blog and some research papers. But ultimately we're trying to promote our marketing services to help businesses connect with their audience better.
-
After reading this again, I think i have to argue your designers point. I think what he is trying to say is that having more content on one page will optimally offer a better UX. This is because they won't have to click so many times to find exactly what they are looking for.
I see that point. What kind of site do you have? Is it strictly content or is it an Ecommerce site?
-
I would say do them both. There is no reason to limit your landing pages in a responsive design. The purpose of a responsive design is to give the user the same experience on a mobile device and a desktop. It prevents losing functionality and information.
You might have to use some accordion function to hide some of the content in order to view products. If you have no products, then you will want as many pages as you can. The size of your site is important.
I am not sure why your designer is telling you that you can't have as many pages as you want and still have responsive design. Maybe it is time to get a new designer?
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
-
Organization name as text vs. as a picture with alt text + Schema.org markup
I'm looking for some feedback to implement best practice for the markup of our header/navigation at the top of our site. Our organization name and a tag line is at the top of every page on the left, then our logo, then our navigation to items like "Topics" "FAQs" "About us" etc is to the right along the top. Our organization name includes the most frequently searched keyword for what we want to rank on, and our organization name is our domain name. A couple other background items: we're a non-profit startup and no code is public yet -- hence, I'll be explaining what we're going for. We're coding in straight html/css, not using Wordpress or anything like that. When we originally DIY coded our draft homepage and a few landing pages, we put the organization name and tag line into the markup as text, to look like this: Organization name | Pretty | Navigation items over here
Web Design | | scienceisrad
Explanatory fun tag line | Cool |
--------------------------------------- | Logo | --------------------------------------------------------- Then we outsourced the markup of two more landing pages to a company that does on-demand orders for responsive markup, based on png's we sent of the designs. The company's code renders a fabulous looking version of our design, and important for usability, it is responsive. The company also did something else I'm not so sure of. They made one big image out of our organization name, tag line and logo ... because? The indenting and different font sizes of the Organization name and tag line was too hard to code in? Or is it just best practice for html standards, SEO, etc. to make it one big logo?? Now, as part of an overall effort I'm working on to reconcile our different code ... I'm mulling right now specifically on reconciling the different approaches we each took and incorporating new best practices for the header ... based on what I'm reading online about headers, including debates about whether to use h1 for your company name, whether using an image for the name is fine, advice about including Schema.org markup for logos, etc. Given all this, which of these two options look better to you? Do they seem equally good to you? What would you change about the one that looks better to you? What do I have wrong in them? Or would you code this entirely differently to hit all best practices? What do you think about using h1 for organization name vs. is there a better tag to use for the organization name to code it in as text? (Note: we have other h1's on our pages for the actual article/content titles of each page, which maybe we should, maybe we shouldn't be having those as h1's?) Option 1 -- using text for our name and tag line: <header id="top" class="brandfont brandcolor">
[# Organization name Explanatory fun tag line](/) Organization name logo {navigation code here}
</header> Option 2 -- name, tag line and logo all as one big png image: <header id="header" class="container"> Organization name tag line {navigation code here}
</header>1 -
Wordpress: Pages vs Posts vs Portfolio
Hi All, I'm looking to put pen to paper and design my main structual template for my website. I will be creating the new site in Wordpress. My understanding of Wordpress is broken into the Static Pages, Posts and Portfolio. Static PAGE
Web Design | | Mark_Ch
Static one off content.
No tags, categories or archived Posts
content entries, which is listed in reverse chronological order.
Update post entry to maintain overall freshness of your website.
tags, categories & archived Portfolio
????? Question What are the benefits of a portfolio page over Static Pages & Posts When creating feature rich articles should i use static pages, posts or portfolio. Thanks Mark0 -
Too Many Links on One Page - What to Do?!
Hello Geniuses, Prodigies, and Experts of the Field, My website pages for www.1099pro.com have too many links on one page, something like 150-175, and I understand that each page should ideally be under 100. Most of these links, approx 105, come from dropdown navigation options in the header toolbar or the footer links. It is my take that these links make our site easier to navigate but I'm sure that they are hurting my pagerank / SERPs. Is there a best way to handle a situation like this? I'd really prefer not to alter the header/footer layout of the entire site by removing 50-75 navigational links. The only other idea I have is below but I have no idea if it would work. For any link that I do not care to pass pagerank, institute a "nofollow" parameter. This would be my favorite option if it is viable.
Web Design | | Stew2220 -
Mobile tab for page speed insight
I am getting mobile error occurred problem.Can somebody help me about this issue? https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?hl=en&utm_source=wmx&utm_campaign=wmx_otherlinks&url=www.printez.com&tab=mobile Morris
Web Design | | PrintEZ0 -
Pages vs. Posts for SEO
Hi, I would like your thoughts about pages vs. posts for SEO. I understand the difference in terms of WP structure and have read the SEOmoz blog post about setting up your site for SEO success (http://www.seomoz.org/blog/setup-wordpress-for-seo-success). However, if you're trying to rank for a particular keyword, it seems that either one could work, from an on-page SEO perspective, as far as title tag, URL, meta description, etc. So how do you decide whether to set up a page vs. a post? What are the pros and cons, from an SEO perspective, about using one vs. the other? Thanks in advance! Carolina
Web Design | | csmm0 -
Keywords in the page url for best SEO
Hello all, I am working in the keywors structure of a web and I have the following doubt: If I want to target these keywords: great food madrid and my website is: http://www.madridlive.com I do not know if I should keep either: OPTION 1: page url: www.madridlive.com/great-food-madrid or OPTION 2: page url www.madridlive.com/great-food I do not know if the search engines "understands" madrid in "madridlive", therefore I can avoid the "madrid" keyword, dicarding option 1 and going for option 2. Additionally I avoid duplication of the madrid keyword that can be seen as redundancy and also have a shorter page url. Thank you very much and sorry for such a question but I am new in this SEO field...just the excellent SEOMOZ's SEO Guide for beginners! Best regards, Antonio
Web Design | | aalcocer20030 -
How can we improve our e-commerce site architecture to help best preserve Page Authority?
Today I installed the SEOMoz toolbar for Firefox (very cool, highly recommended). I was comparing our site http://www.ccisolutions.com to this competitor: http://www.uniquesquared.com For the most part, the deeper I go in our site the more the page authority drops. We have a few exceptions where the page authority of a subcategory page is actually better than the cat. page one level up. In comparison, when I was looking at http://www.uniquesquared.com I noticed that their page authority stays at "21" on every single category page I visit. Are you seeing what I'm seeing? Is this potentially a problem with the tool bar or, is there something significantly different about their site architecture that allows them to maintain that PA across all category and sub category pages? Is there something fundamentally wrong with our (http://www.ccisolutions.com) site architecture? I understand that we have longer URLs, but this is an old store with a lot of SKUs, so we have decided not to remove the /category/ and /product/ from the URLs because the 301 redirects that would result wouldn't pass all of the authority they've built up over the years. Interested to know viewpoints on the site architecture and how it might be improved. Thanks!
Web Design | | danatanseo0 -
Combining web pages and it's affects on SEO?
We are looking into amending a website we are working on to try and combine 2 or 3 current pages onto one page. This site is similar to an estate agents site and currently has images, map, floor plan sub pages etc. Can anyone tell me, if we were to combine these pages and include the above details on one page, how that would affect the current search engine rankings?
Web Design | | SoundinTheory0