| SitePoint Sponsor |
Relative vs. Absolute Links
I have several questions regarding absolute and relative links.
A) When I post a newly designed website on my testing server I can't use the links to navigate through it, if they are absolute. What is the best solution(s) for this?
B) What are the pros and cons to having absolute and relative links?
Thanks in advance,
Samuel
The best solution is to have relative links...Originally Posted by samg914
I would always use relative links. It is much less hassle, and it enables you to work locally and on a test server without having to change anything when you go 'live'.B) What are the pros and cons to having absolute and relative links?
On some occasions, I will use links 'relative to the root', such as referencing images or other resources that are stored centrally rather than in the same folder as the document, but mostly I use the simplest form of relative linking possible.
The biggest advantage that absolute linking has (IMO) is that if someone downloads a page from your site onto their computer, on-site links will still work. From that point of view, it may be worthwhile making the "home" link an absolute link so that it will work in any context, but to be honest I don't think it's a big issue these days because people generally bookmark pages and link to them rather than downloading them.
Relative links should be used for all the links within your site - that way the links will work both on your test server and the live one.
Absolute links should be used for all links to other sites.
With that combination your site can be moved anywhere and will still work (as long as the whoole site is moved).
Stephen J Chapman
javascriptexample.net, Book Reviews, follow me on Twitter
HTML Help, CSS Help, JavaScript Help, PHP/mySQL Help, blog
<input name="html5" type="text" required pattern="^$">
So here's a related question: what's the skinny on "root-relative" links:
Craig Grannell's "The Essential Guide to CSS and HTML Web Design" recommends them, but I've read other articles that recommend against them./directory/page.html
o rly?
root relative links are way more flexible
especially when you combine them with the BASE tag
A lot of it depends on how you structure your site.
If you are linking to fixed resources, eg "/scripts/welcome.js", then a root relative link is probably best, rather than trying to remember or compute how many levels up you need to go before heading into the scripts folder. On the other hand, if you're linking to sibling resources, eg you have the images relevant to a page in the same folder as that page or in a child folder, then root relative links add an extra layer of faff and kerfuffle that you don't need to bother with.
There's no reason why you can't have relative and root-relative links mixed within your site, depending on what works best in each case.
I've heard that absolute links are better for SEO.
For example, instead of your home link being "index.php" it ought to be "http://www.mysite.com".
Google "seo company" and take a look at the link structure used by the major companies.
I'll sacrifice the chickens at the dark of the moon and get back to you.
No offense intended, but I just have this visceral hatred of all these SEO rumors. If you create a well-crafted, standards-compliant site with excellent content, there's no need to propitiate the Google gods, your site will be fine without you losing your lunch over your bounce rate and all the other SEO sludge that comes around. You could be right that you might get some miniscule SEO benefit from absolute links, but I doubt those few extra hits are worth the time and effort you'll need to expend on changing the links when you port your site to another domain, or tweak your site structure, or polish up your navigation, or....
Actually, I heard that only the home link needs to be absolute. The internal stuff can remain relative.
I heard this from an Australian guy who had his own SEO business. He seemed to feel it was quite important.
I agree though that most of these SEO rumours are dire.
Absolute nonsense. The only thing I would do differently is that (for SEO purposes at least), the home link should just be "/" with no filename - this is so that search engines don't end up indexing "/" and "/index.php", with the risk that your link juice is split between the two.
All search engines care about is where the link takes them, they really don't care whether it's an absolute or relative link, just so long as it takes them to the right place.
As Max says, dumb rumours like this surround SEO and there are snake oil salesmen galore ... but the truth is, there is no silver bullet.
When you come across a rumour like this, ask yourself "Would it make sense for Google to do this?". Google is in the business of giving people the best websites to match the search query they put in. End of. They are not going to put arbitrary barriers in the way of that, like preferring absolute links. Would giving preference to sites with absolute links give more relevant search results? No. Is Google going to do that? No. Will using absolute linkshelp Google to spider and index your site? No. Is there any SEO benefit from using absolute links? I'll let you answer that, and see if you've spotted the pattern
I agree with r937 here, and if you use server-side languages it will work both locally and hosted when you use the server name in the href. In asp I useWhich I don't have to change when uploadingCode:<base href="http://<%=request.serverVariables("SERVER_NAME")%>">
LiveScript: Putting the "Live" Back into JavaScript
if live output_as_javascript else output_as_html end if
I would always use relative links. It is much less hassle, and it enables you to work locally and on a test server without having to change anything when you go 'live'.
use base tage for the absolute part of the address and than use relative path. relative path is good to use because if you need to change domain or directory you dont need to change the links , but the <base> tag.
The <base> element is only useful if it points to something other than the path to the current file. If it's pointing to the location of the file you're in, it's unnecessary and redundant - then it's safer to leave it out, so you don't have to remember to change it later.
I have a friend/client with a Magento site and because his SEO guy said links had to be absolute, each and every link on his entire site is very, very long. It's sad, because there are so many links (a link to every single product on every single page) that I'm pretty sure it is noticeable by dialup users. Not to mention, dealing with his HTML is extra maintenance.
Must be losing a lot of visitors as a result of that. Perhaps they should consider hiring an SEO expert to fix up their site. Obviously all the absolute links have to go as a first step. The extra time it takes for the domain lookups and the extra length of the page are far bigger SEO penalties than the minute extra benefit gained from the repetition of any keywords in the domain name (and with too many repetitions of the same keywords there's also the keyword spamming penalty to consider).
Stephen J Chapman
javascriptexample.net, Book Reviews, follow me on Twitter
HTML Help, CSS Help, JavaScript Help, PHP/mySQL Help, blog
<input name="html5" type="text" required pattern="^$">
No, that was his mistake. He hired an SEO expert.
No, his mistake was in hiring someone who claimed to be an SEO expert. If he'd hired someone who actually was an SEO expert then they wouldn't have been given such inappropriate and completely wrong advice.
Stephen J Chapman
javascriptexample.net, Book Reviews, follow me on Twitter
HTML Help, CSS Help, JavaScript Help, PHP/mySQL Help, blog
<input name="html5" type="text" required pattern="^$">
Lawlz. Another client of mine went to a marketing and SEO company (formed by one of the former directors of a large telecom) where, on their own website, they have nonexistent tags and Javascript and multiple h1's everywhere.
How's anyone going to know who's an expert and who claims to be an expert? Which is why my client's mistake was getting an SEO expert in the first place. They may exist, somewhere. Nobody who thinks they need one knows where to find one.
I think rule one when it comes to SEO experts is that anyone who claims to be an SEO expert isn't one.
Stephen J Chapman
javascriptexample.net, Book Reviews, follow me on Twitter
HTML Help, CSS Help, JavaScript Help, PHP/mySQL Help, blog
<input name="html5" type="text" required pattern="^$">
I've spent five minutes reading an article on "SEO" ....well I am now qualified as an "SEO" expert.Hurrrah! [That is my impression of pretty much all "SEO" experts.]
Logic, can I hire you as my SEO expert? I need some higher rankings FAST : )
cn i get som bklinks pls kthx, & moar llamas pls too k
SEO blither plus text-talk plus NPD equals gibberishification....
Off Topic:
Oooh ooh yes llamas!
Yeah it's a mangled version of that m0aRcoWbell Java code swirling about... just ordered the Tshirt : )Code:if (!L33tSEO()) { return ((Llama) LlamaFarm.getInstance())++; }
Off Topic:
Llamas AND cowbells! It just doesn't get any better....
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks