Ajax Module Crawability vs. WMT Fetch & Render
-
Recently a module was built into the homepage to pull in content from an outside source via Ajax and I'm curious about the overall crawability of the content.
In WMT, if I fetch & render the content it displays correctly, but if I view source all I am seeing is the empty container. Should I take additional steps so that the actual AJAX content displays in my source code, or am I "good" since the content does display correctly when I fetch & render?
-
Hey Scott,
You're good. If you see it in the fetch and render, you're seeing it as Googlebot sees it.
Google has had capabilities to crawl Ajax content for some time now. And while you don't see the content when you view source, that's not a big a problem. As long as the content is on the page at load Google should not have a problem indexing it. So after load, you should look in the Inspect Element section, that's how Google will see the content.
Where there may be crawlability issues is in content that requires user action to display. Google is inconsistent with how many actions they will attempt in order to index content.
-Mike
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
-
Can Google bypass an AJAX link?
On my company's events calendar page when you click an event, it populates and overlay using AJAX, and then the link that is populated in that overlay then takes you to the actual events page. I see this as a problem with Google because it can't follow the AJAX link to the true event page, so right now nothing on those pages is getting indexed and we can't utilize our schema to get events to populate in the Google rich snippets or the knowledge graph. Possible solutions I considered: 1. Remove the AJAX overlay and allow the link from the events calendar to go directly to the individual event. 2. Leave the AJAX overlay and try to get the individual event pages directly indexed in Google. Thoughts and suggestions are greatly appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MJTrevens0 -
URL Parameters Settings in WMT/Search Console
On an large ecommerce site the main navigation links to URLs that include a legacy parameter. The parameter doesn’t actually seem to do anything to change content - it doesn’t narrow or specify content, nor does it currently track sessions. We’ve set the canonical for these URLs to be without the parameter. (We did this when we started seeing that Google was stripping out the parameter in the majority of SERP results themselves.) We’re trying to best strategize on how to set the parameters in WMT (search console). Our options are to set to: 1. No: Doesn’t affect page content’ - and then the Crawl field in WMT is auto-set to ‘Representative URL’. (Note, that it's unclear what ‘Representative URL’ is defined as. Google’s documentation suggests that a representative URL is a canonical URL, and we've specifically set canonicals to be without the parameter so does this contradict? ) OR 2. ‘Yes: Changes, reorders, or narrows page content’ And then it’s a question of how to instruct Googlebot to crawl these pages: 'Let Googlebot decide' OR 'No URLs'. The fundamental issue is whether the parameter settings are an index signal or crawl signal. Google documents them as crawl signals, but if we instruct Google not to crawl our navigation how will it find and pass equity to the canonical URLs? Thoughts? Posted by Susan Schwartz, Kahena Digital staff member
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AriNahmani0 -
Proper Form for Title & Description Tags
Greetings MOZ Community: I operate a real estate web site in New York (www.nyc-officespace-leader.com) that I suspect has been hit by Panda 4.0. I believe a problem is thin content on product pages, which in my case are 350 listing pages. However I am also looking at how title and description tags are formatted for these 350 pages to ensure this is not a factor in the ranking drop. The title descriptions are written like this: <title></span><span class="webkit-html-tag">Flatiron loft for rent | West 21st Street | 1441SF $6604/month</span><span class="webkit-html-tag"></title> Is this sufficiently diverse? Will constantly repeating various street names, square footages and prices work against me? Will Google in a sense consider this thin or repetitive content? It does provide the visitor with key information. The descriptions meta tags are written along these lines: description" content="One of the most desirable full floor sublets in Midtown South. Recent build out, pristine condition, panoramic views, tech chic, spectacular. Top location." /><meta< span=""></meta<> From an SEO perspective are these critical tags written the way they should be? Thanks everyone!! Alan
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan10 -
New-york-city vs. broadway as a URL parameter
We're a content publisher that writes news and reviews about the theater community, both in New York City (broadway mainly) and beyond. Presently, we display the term 'new-york-city' in news articles about Broadway / New York City theater (see http://screencast.com/t/XlifMdT9QP). Would it be better for us to replace that term with simply 'Broadway' to improve its searchability? I was doing some google trends keyword research and it looks like the search term "Broadway" in various permutations is substantially more popular than "New York City Theater."
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TheaterMania0 -
Duplicate Content www vs. non-www and best practices
I have a customer who had prior help on his website and I noticed a 301 redirect in his .htaccess Rule for duplicate content removal : www.domain.com vs domain.com RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com [NC]
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EnvoyWeb
RewriteRule (.*) http://www.MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com/$1 [R=301,L,NC] The result of this rule is that i type MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com in the browser and it redirects to www.MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com I wonder if this is causing issues in SERPS. If I have some inbound links pointing to www.MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com and some pointing to MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com, I would think that this rewrite isn't necessary as it would seem that Googlebot is smart enough to know that these aren't two sites. -----Can you comment on whether this is a best practice for all domains?
-----I've run a report for backlinks. If my thought is true that there are some pointing to www.www.MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com and some to the www.MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com, is there any value in addressing this?0 -
Technical Automated Content - Indexing & Value
One of my clients provides some Financial Analysis tools, which generate automated content on a daily basis for a set of financial derivatives. Basically they try to estimate through technical means weather a particular share price is going up or down, during the day as well as their support and resistance levels. These tools are fairly popular with the visitors, however I'm not sure on the 'quality' of the content from a Google Perspective. They keep an archive of these tools which tally up to nearly a 100 thousand pages, what bothers me particularly is that the content in between each of these varies only slightly. Textually there are maybe up to 10-20 different phrases which describe the move for the day, however the page structure is otherwise similar, except for the Values which are thought to be reached on a daily basis. They believe that it could be useful for users to be able to access back-dated information to be able to see what happened in the past. The main issue is however that there is currently no back-links at all to any of these pages and I assume Google could deem these to be 'shallow' provide little content which as time passes become irrelevant. And I'm not sure if this could cause a duplicate content issue; however they already add a Date in the Title Tags, and in the content to differentiate. I am not sure how I should handle these pages; is it possible to have Google prioritize the 'daily' published one. Say If I published one today; if I had to search "Derivative Analysis" I would see the one which is dated today rather then the 'list-view' or any other older analysis.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jonmifsud0 -
TLD Conflicts in WMT
Hi I'm running into some top level domain conflicts in Google's webmaster tools. I hope you can help me out. Thanks in advance. Website example.com has sub folders for each language. There's no content at the root example.com. The root 301 redirects to English at example.com/en/. In Google Webmaster Tools the root site is added because the web developer can't find a Joomla plugin to put the sitemap and robots file in each sub folder. It's all mixed in the root. So only 1 sitemap and robots exists for all the sub folder languages in the root of the site. As a results Google shows the root site in search results where it should show the appropriate sub folder (in this case Dutch). I see these conflicts occur everywhere. Soon Chinese, Romanian and other languages will be added. I'm afraid this problem will only get worse. What can I do to make sure Google treats every sub folder as a distinctive site and doesn't treat the root as a site?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jacobe0 -
How to redirect www vs. non-www in IIS
I have been wanting to set our site up to redirect non-www to www for the SEO benefits so often described here on SeoMoz. I see a lot on Apache but not so much for IIS. Is there any developers here that can point me to a how tutorial for people with little IIS experiences?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KJ-Rodgers0