SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    79
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    best format for friendly url ?

    Hi
    I am just fine tuning my SE friendly links
    and would like to ask what you guys think about these options.

    I am new to this so any feedback would be very helpful.

    My real link is events_detail.php?a=$ad_ref&b=$section

    which will be something like: events_detail.php?a=436&b=events

    First, is it best to always give the full URL from www. ?

    Second, is a couple of targetted words better than one ?

    eg events-activities/Clubbing-436.html

    or would this be better:

    events/activities/Clubbing-436.html

    or: events/activities/Clubbing/dance-436.html

    Your opinions much appreciated.

  2. #2
    Non-Member thetafferboy83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,330
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    events/activities/Clubbing/dance-436.html

    out of those is best.

  3. #3
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    79
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    As these are internal links should I just leave them as relative urls
    or is it better to write out the whole thing eg:

    http://www.mysite.com/events/activit...dance-436.html

    Anyone else have some thoughts on this subject ?

    Thanks

  4. #4
    He's No Good To Me Dead silver trophybronze trophy stymiee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Slave I
    Posts
    23,424
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Google recommends full URLs to prevent errors but in practice both will work just fine.

  5. #5
    Twitter - @CarlBeckel busy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Richmond, VA, USA
    Posts
    819
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I would like to know if there is any reason to include the "www" anymore. I know it's best to do things in less clicks, so it seems like we should do things in less keystrokes too. Removing "www." from everything means 4 less keystrokes so it seems like a good idea, but is there any reason it SHOULD be used?

    I'm don't think many of us need it for the SE, although it is interesting to google for "www" and see some of the strong SE performers.

  6. #6
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy bigalreturns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i don't think presence or absence of www. would make any difference to the SEs, as long as your consistent with it, ie. don't link to both or they'll be seen as different sites. Ideally, redirect one to the other.
    "The proper function of man is to live - not to exist."
    Get a Free TomTom


  7. #7
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy linkin99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,456
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Question Forward the PR

    Quote Originally Posted by bigalreturns
    i don't think presence or absence of www. would make any difference to the SEs, as long as your consistent with it, ie. don't link to both or they'll be seen as different sites. Ideally, redirect one to the other.
    Anyone know if PR is passed from the www.example.com to example.com when using 301 redirects? I've done it with some of ours, but haven't noticed any change. (I know, PR updates takes time. I just wanted to ask if anyone actually found that it helped improve their PR for one or the other format since this topic came up here.)

  8. #8
    Galactic Overlord gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy
    HAWK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    12,586
    Mentioned
    980 Post(s)
    Tagged
    14 Thread(s)
    I don't think 301 redirects pass PR.

  9. #9
    He's No Good To Me Dead silver trophybronze trophy stymiee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Slave I
    Posts
    23,424
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by HAWK
    I don't think 301 redirects pass PR.
    They do.

  10. #10
    Galactic Overlord gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy
    HAWK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    12,586
    Mentioned
    980 Post(s)
    Tagged
    14 Thread(s)
    OK, from now on I'll change my thinking!

  11. #11
    SitePoint Zealot photoshop250's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    108
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I would include up to 4 keywords in your URL but any more than that and you risk triggering a spam flag
    Discover Hidden Photoshop Secrets

  12. #12
    Necromancer
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    386
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by busy
    I would like to know if there is any reason to include the "www" anymore.
    I use it mostly out of habit. It's certainly best to have one convention and stick to it so I'm with www.

    I find the real advantage is in non-Internet promotion, e.g. business cards, sign-writing, etc. The www is more familiar and obvious as a URL IMO.

    On the other hand it takes up more space, so I guess I don't know which is best


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •