Search Results

Search found 19109 results on 765 pages for 'canonical url'.

Page 1/765 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • How to handle canonical url changes like Stack Overflow

    - by lulalala
    Stack Overflow sites all have pretty urls which include the question title. In the HTML it also have canonical url for that page. I just found out that when I change the question title, the url is changed immediately. The canonical url is also updated. Does it mean that as long as the page with the old canonical url redirects to the new canonical url, then search engines will update their records of the canonical url as well? Is there anything else that one can actively do to make the url change even more smoother?

    Read the article

  • When the canonical page itself changes url

    - by lulalala
    This is a continuation of the question: How to handle canonical url changes like Stack Overflow. Say I have the canon url: questions/11/car <---canonically-linked-from--- questions/11/ What will happen if I want to change the canon url to questions/11/car-with-sgx Obviously, questions/11/ will point to the new canon url. But how should the old questions/11/car change to the new one? There are two ways: 301 redirect that to new canon url the old canon url canonically link to the new canon url According to this post: [By using canonical link instead of redirect,] OldPage.html’s rankings will drop over time due to fewer internal links, but the canonical tag won’t make it disappear entirely. It could theoretically remain in their index until one of the following occurs: it is redirected permanently via 301 it returns a 404 for an extended period of time (they will keep checking for a while before dropping a URL) a meta robots “noindex” tag is added If this is true, I really need to use redirect from old canon url to the new canon url, which means I need to keep a log of previous old canon urls of this content, so I know when I can redirect. This is a bit of a hassle to do.

    Read the article

  • mod_rewrite for clean URL doesn't convert the URL to clean URL (but it's accessible) [on hold]

    - by deathlock
    Basically what I want to do is to convert this: http://localhost/jariungu/user_caleg.php?idCaleg2014=3 into this: http://localhost/jariungu/caleg/3 I have managed to make /jariungu/caleg/3 to direct to the original URL (as in, if I open that URL, it directs me to the appropriate page). The problem is, once opened, the URL returns to the original, ugly one in the address bar. This is what I tried. Could someone provide a help? <IfModule mod_rewrite.c> Options +FollowSymlinks RewriteEngine On RewriteBase /jariungu/ RewriteRule ^caleg\/([0-9]+)\/([a-zA-Z]+\s*[0-9]*)/?$ caleg.php?idCaleg2014=$1&namaCaleg=$2 [NC,L] RewriteRule ^caleg\/([0-9]+)/?$ caleg.php?idCaleg2014=$1 [NC,L] </IfModule>

    Read the article

  • Multi language site - use of canonical link and link rel="alternate"

    - by julia
    I keep reading everywhere that if you have a multilanguage site, where the same page appears in, say, French and English, then this is considered as duplicate content by google. It is written that using canonical link is the solution, but I do not understand how to use it in this case. Should I: Choose either French URL or English URL to be the canonical (main) one, and where I will place the canonical link? If so, how do I decide which of the two URLs must be canonical? both languages are important to me and I want the content under both languages to be indexed by google and served to the user, depending on the language in which he searches. OR should I place a canonical link on both French and English URLs? If so, then I do not understand the meaning of using the canonical link? In this case would both URLs be indexed, are both of them considered as "important" by google and not duplicates? Also I read that link rel="alternate" can be used to indicate to google that, for example the French URL is the French-language equivalent of the English page. This makes sense and I understand how to use such links, but how are they combined with canonical links? Should I define both the canonical URL AND specify rel="alternate" in both URLs? Could someone help me to clarify this, cause I'm stuck with this and can't seem to find a good-enough explanation in different sources.

    Read the article

  • URL Parts available to URL Rewrite Rules

    - by OWScott
    URL Rewrite is a powerful URL rewriting tool available for IIS7 and newer.  Your rewriting options are almost unlimited, giving you the ability to optimize URLs for search engine optimization (SEO), support multiple domain names on a single site, hiding complex paths and much more. URL Rewrite allows you to use any Server Variable as conditions, and with URL Rewrite 2.0, you can also update them on the fly.  To see all variables available to your site, see this post. An understanding of the parts of a complete URL are essential to working with URL Rewrite, so I’ll include the basics here.  Ruslan Yakushev’s configuration reference was my authoritative source for this. Take this URL for example: The URL is http://www.bing.com/search?q=IIS+url+rewrite The parts of the URL are: http(s)://<host>:<port>/<path>?<querystring> Part Example Server Variable http(s) http SERVER_PORT_SECURE or HTTPS = on/off <host> www.bing.com HTTP_HOST <port> Default is 80 SERVER_PORT <path> search The rule pattern in URL Rewrite <path> /search PATH_INFO <querystring> q=IIS+url+rewrite QUERY_STRING entire URL path with querystring /search?q=IIS+url+rewrite REQUEST_URI It’s important to note that /, : and ? aren’t included in some of the server variables. Understanding which slashes are included is important to creating successful rules.

    Read the article

  • Canonical url for a home page and trailing slashes

    - by serg
    My home page could be potentially linked as: http://example.com http://example.com/ http://example.com/?ref=1 http://example.com/index.html http://example.com/index.html?ref=2 (the same page is served for all those urls) I am thinking about defining a canonical url to make sure google doesn't consider those urls to be different pages: <link rel="canonical" href="/" /> (relative) <link rel="canonical" href="http://example.com/" /> (trailing slash) <link rel="canonical" href="http://example.com" /> (no trailing slash) Which one should be used? I would just slap / but messing with canonical seems like a scary business so I wanted double check first. Is it a good idea at all for defining a canonical url for a home page?

    Read the article

  • Multisites Network SEO::Can self-referencing canonical tag(rel="canonical") inside article improve google rating?

    - by user5674576
    Hi, Can self-referencing canonical tag(rel="canonical") inside article improve google rating? The Case: Company have 40 sites with original content and 1 main site with some of 40 sites articles. Main site have rel="canonical" in each article Should article in original site have also rel="canonical" for self-referencing? example: inside main network site(reference to other site):<link href="http://site7.com/article25" rel="canonical" /> inside original network site(self-reference):<link href="http://site7.com/article25" rel="canonical"/> Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Canonicalization issue regarding academic URL vs. blog URL

    - by user5395
    I'm sorry if what I am about to write is long-winded. I only wish to be clear. I am an academic in the scientific community. I maintain a web site for my research, teaching, and other professional activities. Until recently, the content for this site was hosted in a directory on my university department's own server. The address is of the typical form (universityname).edu/~(myusername) I decided that I wanted to use WordPress in order to host and manage my page. So I set up a WordPress.com blog and then replaced the index.html file in (universityname).edu/~(myusername) with a new one consisting of a single frame, containing the WordPress.com blog. Now when a user visits (universityname).edu/~(myusername), he or she sees the blog instead. This has been pretty nice because, even when the user clicks on links between pages or posts in the blog, the only thing showing up in the address bar of the browser is www.(universityname).edu/~(myusername), because the blog is constrained to a frame. However, the effect of this change on the search side of things has not been so kind to me. Before, when someone searched for my name in Google, the first result was always (universityname).edu/~(myusername). This is the most desirable outcome, for professional reasons. (Having my academic URL come up first suggests that I am an accredited professional, and not just some crank with a blog!) But now, Google seems to have canonicalized my web presence under the blog's WordPress.com address. It has completely forgotten about my academic URL and considers the WordPress.com address to be the best address representing me on the web. Unfortunately, WordPress.com doesn't support the canonical tag, so I can't tell the blog to advertise itself as my academic URL in the header. (It doesn't seem to help at all that I have used the WordPress.com dashboard to turn on no-indexing of the blog.) One obvious solution would be to use the departmental server to host my content again, and use a local installation of the WordPress platform. For reasons beyond my control, the platform will not be deployed on the departmental server at this time. Another solution would be to use shared hosting with WordPress.org support, because the WordPress.org platform does support the canonical tag (albeit via a plug-in). But this seems to usually require purchasing a domain name and other fees, and there is no guarantee that Google will listen to the canonical tag (it might use whatever domain name I end up with instead). Is there a way I can more cleverly integrate the WordPress.com blog into a page hosted on my department's server? Is there some PHP code I can write to retrieve the blog's contents in a way that Google won't treat as a link / "perceive" the blog? Please note: I am a PHP novice at best. I just feel there should be a simpler solution to all this, within the constraints of what I have described above. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • URL good practice for category sub category?

    - by Seting
    I have developed a application and I need to work for SEO-friendly URL. I have following URL structure: http://localhost:3000/posts/product/testing-with-slug-url-2 and http://localhost:3000/posts/product/testing-with-slug-url-2-4-23 Is this a good practice? If not how can I rewrite it? Ok Ill explain about my applicaiton. My application is based on shopping. if a customer searched for mobiles. it will redirect to url like this http://mydomain.com/cat/mobile-3 3 in the url indicates my database id it is used for further searching After the user reached the mobile page he may need to filter for some brand eg. nokia so my url look lik http://mydomain.com/subcat/nokia-3-2 The integer at the end refers to 3 category id and 2 the brand id My doubt is whether the integer at the end of the url will affect seo ranking.

    Read the article

  • Google indexed the same page under two URLs (despite rel-canonical)

    - by unor
    The Super User question "Playing mp3 in quodlibet displays “GStreamer output pipeline could not be initialized” error" is indexed under two URLs in Google: http://superuser.com/questions/651591/playing-mp3-in-quodlibet-displays-gstreamer-output-pipeline-could-not-be-initia http://superuser.com/questions/651591/playing-mp3-in-quodlibet-displays-gstreamer-output-pipeline-could-not-be-initia/652058 The first one is the canonical one; the corresponding rel-canonical is included in both pages: <link rel="canonical" href="http://superuser.com/questions/651591/playing-mp3-in-quodlibet-displays-gstreamer-output-pipeline-could-not-be-initia" /> Google also indexed http://superuser.com/a/652058, which redirects to the answer: http://superuser.com/questions/651591/playing-mp3-in-quodlibet-displays-gstreamer-output-pipeline-could-not-be-initia/652058#652058 Now, the second URL from above is the same as this one minus the fragment #652058. So Google seems to strip the fragment, which results in exactly the same page under another URL (= containing the answer ID /652058 as suffix), and indexes it, too -- despite rel-canonical and duplicate content. Shouldn’t Google recognize this and only index the canonical variant? And what could be the reason why Stack Exchange includes the answer ID in the URL path, and not only in the fragment (resulting in various URL variants for the same page)?

    Read the article

  • Canonical redirection meta tag [duplicate]

    - by sankalp
    This question already has an answer here: How to use rel='canonical' properly 2 answers There are two pages in my website with the same content; only the URL's are different: www.websitename.com and www.websitename.com/default.html. Someone suggested that I should add canonical tags to avoid them being considered as duplicate content. Where should I add canonical tags and why?

    Read the article

  • Best URL for cars related website? [duplicate]

    - by Claudio ??is Mulas
    This question already has an answer here: What is the best stucture of SEO friendly URL? 3 answers If this was your website, what will be the URLs for each car on sale? http://www.autoscout24.eu/Details.aspx?id=247572735&asrc=ha I'm working on a car dealership website. What should be the best URL? Consider also that the company can have more models of the same car. I'm not asking for a url scheme, there are a lot of similar questions. My question is: in a car dealership website what is the best url for a car? What are by you the best variables I've to put on the url. Brand, model, year, location, color, miles/km, etc. This website, that url, this particulary case: what will you choose for urls? (even not in the following list) audi_q5_2009.html audi_q5_2009_used.html audi_q5_2009_used.html audi_q5_2009_used_in_alcobendas.html audi_q5_2009_used/247572735.html

    Read the article

  • Is there a canonical source supporting "all-surrogates"?

    - by user61852
    Background The "all-PK-must-be-surrogates" approach is not present in Codd's Relational Model or any SQL Standard (ANSI, ISO or other). Canonical books seems to elude this restrictions too. Oracle's own data dictionary scheme uses natural keys in some tables and surrogate keys in other tables. I mention this because these people must know a thing or two about RDBMS design. PPDM (Professional Petroleum Data Management Association) recommend the same canonical books do: Use surrogate keys as primary keys when: There are no natural or business keys Natural or business keys are bad ( change often ) The value of natural or business key is not known at the time of inserting record Multicolumn natural keys ( usually several FK ) exceed three columns, which makes joins too verbose. Also I have not found canonical source that says natural keys need to be immutable. All I find is that they need to be very estable, i.e need to be changed only in very rare ocassions, if ever. I mention PPDM because these people must know a thing or two about RDBMS design too. The origins of the "all-surrogates" approach seems to come from recommendations from some ORM frameworks. It's true that the approach allows for rapid database modeling by not having to do much business analysis, but at the expense of maintainability and readability of the SQL code. Much prevision is made for something that may or may not happen in the future ( the natural PK changed so we will have to use the RDBMS cascade update funtionality ) at the expense of day-to-day task like having to join more tables in every query and having to write code for importing data between databases, an otherwise very strightfoward procedure (due to the need to avoid PK colisions and having to create stage/equivalence tables beforehand ). Other argument is that indexes based on integers are faster, but that has to be supported with benchmarks. Obviously, long, varying varchars are not good for PK. But indexes based on short, fix-length varchar are almost as fast as integers. The questions - Is there any canonical source that supports the "all-PK-must-be-surrogates" approach ? - Has Codd's relational model been superceded by a newer relational model ?

    Read the article

  • Support same url in different forms

    - by Vikas Gulati
    I have seen many websites supporting multiple forms of the same URL. For example consider www.example.com/question1/ OR www.example.com/Question1/ OR www.example.com/QUESTION1/ etc. all lead to one page with say <link rel="canonical" href="http://www.example.com/question1/" > or a 301 redirect to www.example.com/question1/. Does this affect the page rank anyhow or its just for seemless user experience or there is some other reason behind this? Infact even stackoverflow/stackexchange does this. No matter what the text after the id of the question in url they redirect you to the correct question!

    Read the article

  • Showing content from pages at different URL's (masking), possibly with .htaccess

    - by zigojacko
    If I have URL's like:- domain.com/category/widgets/filter/blue domain.com/category/widgets/filter/red And it is pretty difficult to reconstruct them to something like:- domain.com/category/blue-widgets domain.com/category/red-widgets Is there any way at all that I can use URL rewrites or anything else with .htaccess or on the server to display the URL's as the domain.com/category/blue-widgets on the domain.com/category/widgets/filter/blue page? I've looked into masking URL's but got nowhere and this has been something bugging me for almost 6 months now. Is there any way to achieve what I want to do? FYI: This is a Magento website and the above process, I am wanting to implement for potentially hundreds of URL's. Edit To respond to @kkugelmann's answer:- I couldn't get your proposed RewriteRule to make a difference at all in the .htaccess file so I started testing a few things in this .htaccess tester:- The proposed RewriteRule didn't work in this tester:- However, the following did:- But adding any of these RewriteRule's into the website's .htaccess file did not rewrite the URL at all... Edit2 By the way, if I add [R=301,L] to the end of the URL rewrite rule, it does actually then rewrite the rule, but of course 301 redirects it as well which is unwanted behaviour. Edit3 I found another question with the same issue... And an accepted answer that solved the problem which seemed to be something to do with using mod_proxy and the [P] tag on the rule (if I try this, the page 404's).

    Read the article

  • Canonical links for huge websites

    - by Florin
    Let's say I have 5 products that are identical but the product code, the product color specifications and the product image. The title, meta and description are identical (by the way the color is in a select form). I made 4 products link canonical to the 1 that is the master based on many factors. If the master becomes inactive or without a stock one product from the other 4 will become the new master and the rest will become canonical to it. The question is if that by becomeing master from canonical will the site suffer a penalty from Google or it will work just fine? What will Google think about this strategy?

    Read the article

  • Avoid SEO loss after URL structure change

    - by Eric Nguyen
    We recently re-wrote our site from Umbraco to WordPress. This has been done by third-party developers. I have been the project manager and it is my mistake that I haven't notice the change of URLs that affect SEO until now. New site was launch last Thursday. The old URL for a "place" (a WordPress custom post type, in case you're WordPress expert and want/ need to point me to another discussion on WP Stackexchange) page is as follows: ourdomain.com/singapore/central/alexandra/an-interesting-place Now it has been changed to ourdomain.com/places/an-interesting-place I have already requested the third-party developers to work rewriting the URLs to emulate the old URL structure. However, it's taking quite a lot of time (we have multiple custom post types e.g. events etc. so it might be complicated; the developers seem quite by blur when I first mentioned rewriting URLs for the custom post types) In the meantime, I wonder if there is a quicker work around for this 1) Use .htaccess to rewrite ourdomain.com/singapore/central/alexandra/an-interesting-place to ourdomain.com/places/an-interesting-place This should avoid 90% loss of the search traffic. I suppose I can learn how to do this quite quickly but no harm mentioning it here 2) Use rel="canonical" to indicate that ourdomain.com/places/an-interesting-place is the exact duplicate of ourdomain.com/singapore/central/alexandra/an-interesting-place I will definitely go for both approaches (and also I'm changing 404 page to cater for this temporary isue) but I wonder if 2) is even feasible and if I have missed anything. Is there anything else you could recommend me in this situation. Let me know if my question is not clear anywhere. Clarifications The old website is on a Windows Server EC2 completely separated from the Linux EC2 instance on which the new site is running. In addition, the same domain "ourdomain.com" is used here (an A record is used to point to an EC2 Elastic IP). Therefore, the old server is completely inaccessible at the moment, unless you we use the IP address to old server (which doesn't help me at all in this case). Even if the old server is accessible, I can't see where one can put the .htaccess or a HTML file to do 301 redirect here. Unless I'm successful with my approach 1) or the developers can rewrite the URLs with coding, 404 page is really a choice for me.

    Read the article

  • Redirect a url to another url in IIS 7.5

    - by Jason White
    I have no idea why this isn't working. I've tried creating map rules and then rewritng and redirecting the url. I've tried just redirecting it with a simple rewrite rule and no matter what, the only time I can get it to work is if I set the match url to match this regex .*. I'm trying to redirect webmail.example.com to mail.example.com. Seemed like it would have taken but a couple seconds; boy was I wrong. I'm thinking I must be doing something wrong with the regex, but I'm not sure what as when I test it it seems to work fine. <rule name="webmail" patternSyntax="ECMAScript" stopProcessing="true"> <match url=".*webmail.*" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="https://mail.example.com:8000" appendQueryString="false" logRewrittenUrl="true" /> </rule> Thanks

    Read the article

  • Redirect a URL to another URL with IIS 7.5

    - by Jason White
    I have no idea why this isn't working. I've tried creating map rules and then rewriting and redirecting the URL. I've tried just redirecting it with a simple rewrite rule and no matter what, the only time I can get it to work is if I set the match URL to match this regex .*. I'm trying to redirect webmail.example.com to mail.example.com. Seemed like it would have taken but a couple seconds; boy was I wrong. I'm thinking I must be doing something wrong with the regex, but I'm not sure what as when I test it it seems to work fine. <rule name="webmail" patternSyntax="ECMAScript" stopProcessing="true"> <match url=".*webmail.*" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="https://mail.example.com:8000" appendQueryString="false" logRewrittenUrl="true" /> </rule>

    Read the article

  • Tip/Trick: Fix Common SEO Problems Using the URL Rewrite Extension

    - by ScottGu
    Search engine optimization (SEO) is important for any publically facing web-site.  A large % of traffic to sites now comes directly from search engines, and improving your site’s search relevancy will lead to more users visiting your site from search engine queries.  This can directly or indirectly increase the money you make through your site. This blog post covers how you can use the free Microsoft URL Rewrite Extension to fix a bunch of common SEO problems that your site might have.  It takes less than 15 minutes (and no code changes) to apply 4 simple URL Rewrite rules to your site, and in doing so cause search engines to drive more visitors and traffic to your site.  The techniques below work equally well with both ASP.NET Web Forms and ASP.NET MVC based sites.  They also works with all versions of ASP.NET (and even work with non-ASP.NET content). [In addition to blogging, I am also now using Twitter for quick updates and to share links. Follow me at: twitter.com/scottgu] Measuring the SEO of your website with the Microsoft SEO Toolkit A few months ago I blogged about the free SEO Toolkit that we’ve shipped.  This useful tool enables you to automatically crawl/scan your site for SEO correctness, and it then flags any SEO issues it finds.  I highly recommend downloading and using the tool against any public site you work on.  It makes it easy to spot SEO issues you might have in your site, and pinpoint ways to optimize it further. Below is a simple example of a report I ran against one of my sites (www.scottgu.com) prior to applying the URL Rewrite rules I’ll cover later in this blog post:   Search Relevancy and URL Splitting Two of the important things that search engines evaluate when assessing your site’s “search relevancy” are: How many other sites link to your content.  Search engines assume that if a lot of people around the web are linking to your content, then it is likely useful and so weight it higher in relevancy. The uniqueness of the content it finds on your site.  If search engines find that the content is duplicated in multiple places around the Internet (or on multiple URLs on your site) then it is likely to drop the relevancy of the content. One of the things you want to be very careful to avoid when building public facing sites is to not allow different URLs to retrieve the same content within your site.  Doing so will hurt with both of the situations above.  In particular, allowing external sites to link to the same content with multiple URLs will cause your link-count and page-ranking to be split up across those different URLs (and so give you a smaller page rank than what it would otherwise be if it was just one URL).  Not allowing external sites to link to you in different ways sounds easy in theory – but you might wonder what exactly this means in practice and how you avoid it. 4 Really Common SEO Problems Your Sites Might Have Below are 4 really common scenarios that can cause your site to inadvertently expose multiple URLs for the same content.  When this happens external sites linking to yours will end up splitting their page links across multiple URLs - and as a result cause you to have a lower page ranking with search engines than you deserve. SEO Problem #1: Default Document IIS (and other web servers) supports the concept of a “default document”.  This allows you to avoid having to explicitly specify the page you want to serve at either the root of the web-site/application, or within a sub-directory.  This is convenient – but means that by default this content is available via two different publically exposed URLs (which is bad).  For example: http://scottgu.com/ http://scottgu.com/default.aspx SEO Problem #2: Different URL Casings Web developers often don’t realize URLs are case sensitive to search engines on the web.  This means that search engines will treat the following links as two completely different URLs: http://scottgu.com/Albums.aspx http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx SEO Problem #3: Trailing Slashes Consider the below two URLs – they might look the same at first, but they are subtly different. The trailing slash creates yet another situation that causes search engines to treat the URLs as different and so split search rankings: http://scottgu.com http://scottgu.com/ SEO Problem #4: Canonical Host Names Sometimes sites support scenarios where they support a web-site with both a leading “www” hostname prefix as well as just the hostname itself.  This causes search engines to treat the URLs as different and split search rankling: http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx/ http://www.scottgu.com/albums.aspx/ How to Easily Fix these SEO Problems in 10 minutes (or less) using IIS Rewrite If you haven’t been careful when coding your sites, chances are you are suffering from one (or more) of the above SEO problems.  Addressing these issues will improve your search engine relevancy ranking and drive more traffic to your site. The “good news” is that fixing the above 4 issues is really easy using the URL Rewrite Extension.  This is a completely free Microsoft extension available for IIS 7.x (on Windows Server 2008, Windows Server 2008 R2, Windows 7 and Windows Vista).  The great thing about using the IIS Rewrite extension is that it allows you to fix the above problems *without* having to change any code within your applications.  You can easily install the URL Rewrite Extension in under 3 minutes using the Microsoft Web Platform Installer (a free tool we ship that automates setting up web servers and development machines).  Just click the green “Install Now” button on the URL Rewrite Spotlight page to install it on your Windows Server 2008, Windows 7 or Windows Vista machine: Once installed you’ll find that a new “URL Rewrite” icon is available within the IIS 7 Admin Tool: Double-clicking the icon will open up the URL Rewrite admin panel – which will display the list of URL Rewrite rules configured for a particular application or site: Notice that our rewrite rule list above is currently empty (which is the default when you first install the extension).  We can click the “Add Rule…” link button in the top-right of the panel to add and enable new URL Rewriting logic for our site.  Scenario 1: Handling Default Document Scenarios One of the SEO problems I discussed earlier in this post was the scenario where the “default document” feature of IIS causes you to inadvertently expose two URLs for the same content on your site.  For example: http://scottgu.com/ http://scottgu.com/default.aspx We can fix this by adding a new IIS Rewrite rule that automatically redirects anyone who navigates to the second URL to instead go to the first one.  We will setup the HTTP redirect to be a “permanent redirect” – which will indicate to search engines that they should follow the redirect and use the new URL they are redirected to as the identifier of the content they retrieve.  Let’s look at how we can create such a rule.  We’ll begin by clicking the “Add Rule” link in the screenshot above.  This will cause the below dialog to display: We’ll select the “Blank Rule” template within the “Inbound rules” section to create a new custom URL Rewriting rule.  This will display an empty pane like below: Don’t worry – setting up the above rule is easy.  The following 4 steps explain how to do so: Step 1: Name the Rule Our first step will be to name the rule we are creating.  Naming it with a descriptive name will make it easier to find and understand later.  Let’s name this rule our “Default Document URL Rewrite” rule: Step 2: Setup the Regular Expression that Matches this Rule Our second step will be to specify a regular expression filter that will cause this rule to execute when an incoming URL matches the regex pattern.   Don’t worry if you aren’t good with regular expressions - I suck at them too. The trick is to know someone who is good at them or copy/paste them from a web-site.  Below we are going to specify the following regular expression as our pattern rule: (.*?)/?Default\.aspx$ This pattern will match any URL string that ends with Default.aspx. The "(.*?)" matches any preceding character zero or more times. The "/?" part says to match the slash symbol zero or one times. The "$" symbol at the end will ensure that the pattern will only match strings that end with Default.aspx.  Combining all these regex elements allows this rule to work not only for the root of your web site (e.g. http://scottgu.com/default.aspx) but also for any application or subdirectory within the site (e.g. http://scottgu.com/photos/default.aspx.  Because the “ignore case” checkbox is selected it will match both “Default.aspx” as well as “default.aspx” within the URL.   One nice feature built-into the rule editor is a “Test pattern” button that you can click to bring up a dialog that allows you to test out a few URLs with the rule you are configuring: Above I've added a “products/default.aspx” URL and clicked the “Test” button.  This will give me immediate feedback on whether the rule will execute for it.  Step 3: Setup a Permanent Redirect Action We’ll then setup an action to occur when our regular expression pattern matches the incoming URL: In the dialog above I’ve changed the “Action Type” drop down to be a “Redirect” action.  The “Redirect Type” will be a HTTP 301 Permanent redirect – which means search engines will follow it. I’ve also set the “Redirect URL” property to be: {R:1}/ This indicates that we want to redirect the web client requesting the original URL to a new URL that has the originally requested URL path - minus the "Default.aspx" in it.  For example, requests for http://scottgu.com/default.aspx will be redirected to http://scottgu.com/, and requests for http://scottgu.com/photos/default.aspx will be redirected to http://scottgu.com/photos/ The "{R:N}" regex construct, where N >= 0, is called a back-reference and N is the back-reference index. In the case of our pattern "(.*?)/?Default\.aspx$", if the input URL is "products/Default.aspx" then {R:0} will contain "products/Default.aspx" and {R:1} will contain "products".  We are going to use this {R:1}/ value to be the URL we redirect users to.  Step 4: Apply and Save the Rule Our final step is to click the “Apply” button in the top right hand of the IIS admin tool – which will cause the tool to persist the URL Rewrite rule into our application’s root web.config file (under a <system.webServer/rewrite> configuration section): <configuration>     <system.webServer>         <rewrite>             <rules>                 <rule name="Default Document" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*?)/?Default\.aspx$" />                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>             </rules>         </rewrite>     </system.webServer> </configuration> Because IIS 7.x and ASP.NET share the same web.config files, you can actually just copy/paste the above code into your web.config files using Visual Studio and skip the need to run the admin tool entirely.  This also makes adding/deploying URL Rewrite rules with your ASP.NET applications really easy. Step 5: Try the Rule Out Now that we’ve saved the rule, let’s try it out on our site.  Try the following two URLs on my site: http://scottgu.com/ http://scottgu.com/default.aspx Notice that the second URL automatically redirects to the first one.  Because it is a permanent redirect, search engines will follow the URL and should update the page ranking of http://scottgu.com to include links to http://scottgu.com/default.aspx as well. Scenario 2: Different URL Casing Another common SEO problem I discussed earlier in this post is that URLs are case sensitive to search engines on the web.  This means that search engines will treat the following links as two completely different URLs: http://scottgu.com/Albums.aspx http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx We can fix this by adding a new IIS Rewrite rule that automatically redirects anyone who navigates to the first URL to instead go to the second (all lower-case) one.  Like before, we will setup the HTTP redirect to be a “permanent redirect” – which will indicate to search engines that they should follow the redirect and use the new URL they are redirected to as the identifier of the content they retrieve. To create such a rule we’ll click the “Add Rule” link in the URL Rewrite admin tool again.  This will cause the “Add Rule” dialog to appear again: Unlike the previous scenario (where we created a “Blank Rule”), with this scenario we can take advantage of a built-in “Enforce lowercase URLs” rule template.  When we click the “ok” button we’ll see the following dialog which asks us if we want to create a rule that enforces the use of lowercase letters in URLs: When we click the “Yes” button we’ll get a pre-written rule that automatically performs a permanent redirect if an incoming URL has upper-case characters in it – and automatically send users to a lower-case version of the URL: We can click the “Apply” button to use this rule “as-is” and have it apply to all incoming URLs to our site.  Because my www.scottgu.com site uses ASP.NET Web Forms, I’m going to make one small change to the rule we generated above – which is to add a condition that will ensure that URLs to ASP.NET’s built-in “WebResource.axd” handler are excluded from our case-sensitivity URL Rewrite logic.  URLs to the WebResource.axd handler will only come from server-controls emitted from my pages – and will never be linked to from external sites.  While my site will continue to function fine if we redirect these URLs to automatically be lower-case – doing so isn’t necessary and will add an extra HTTP redirect to many of my pages.  The good news is that adding a condition that prevents my URL Rewriting rule from happening with certain URLs is easy.  We simply need to expand the “Conditions” section of the form above We can then click the “Add” button to add a condition clause.  This will bring up the “Add Condition” dialog: Above I’ve entered {URL} as the Condition input – and said that this rule should only execute if the URL does not match a regex pattern which contains the string “WebResource.axd”.  This will ensure that WebResource.axd URLs to my site will be allowed to execute just fine without having the URL be re-written to be all lower-case. Note: If you have static resources (like references to .jpg, .css, and .js files) within your site that currently use upper-case characters you’ll probably want to add additional condition filter clauses so that URLs to them also don’t get redirected to be lower-case (just add rules for patterns like .jpg, .gif, .js, etc).  Your site will continue to work fine if these URLs get redirected to be lower case (meaning the site won’t break) – but it will cause an extra HTTP redirect to happen on your site for URLs that don’t need to be redirected for SEO reasons.  So setting up a condition clause makes sense to add. When I click the “ok” button above and apply our lower-case rewriting rule the admin tool will save the following additional rule to our web.config file: <configuration>     <system.webServer>         <rewrite>             <rules>                 <rule name="Default Document" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*?)/?Default\.aspx$" />                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Lower Case URLs" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="[A-Z]" ignoreCase="false" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{URL}" pattern="WebResource.axd" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="{ToLower:{URL}}" />                 </rule>             </rules>         </rewrite>     </system.webServer> </configuration> Try the Rule Out Now that we’ve saved the rule, let’s try it out on our site.  Try the following two URLs on my site: http://scottgu.com/Albums.aspx http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx Notice that the first URL (which has a capital “A”) automatically does a redirect to a lower-case version of the URL.  Scenario 3: Trailing Slashes Another common SEO problem I discussed earlier in this post is the scenario of trailing slashes within URLs.  The trailing slash creates yet another situation that causes search engines to treat the URLs as different and so split search rankings: http://scottgu.com http://scottgu.com/ We can fix this by adding a new IIS Rewrite rule that automatically redirects anyone who navigates to the first URL (that does not have a trailing slash) to instead go to the second one that does.  Like before, we will setup the HTTP redirect to be a “permanent redirect” – which will indicate to search engines that they should follow the redirect and use the new URL they are redirected to as the identifier of the content they retrieve.  To create such a rule we’ll click the “Add Rule” link in the URL Rewrite admin tool again.  This will cause the “Add Rule” dialog to appear again: The URL Rewrite admin tool has a built-in “Append or remove the trailing slash symbol” rule template.  When we select it and click the “ok” button we’ll see the following dialog which asks us if we want to create a rule that automatically redirects users to a URL with a trailing slash if one isn’t present: Like within our previous lower-casing rewrite rule we’ll add one additional condition clause that will exclude WebResource.axd URLs from being processed by this rule.  This will avoid an unnecessary redirect for happening for those URLs. When we click the “OK” button we’ll get a pre-written rule that automatically performs a permanent redirect if the URL doesn’t have a trailing slash – and if the URL is not processed by either a directory or a file.  This will save the following additional rule to our web.config file: <configuration>     <system.webServer>         <rewrite>             <rules>                 <rule name="Default Document" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*?)/?Default\.aspx$" />                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Lower Case URLs" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="[A-Z]" ignoreCase="false" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{URL}" pattern="WebResource.axd" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="{ToLower:{URL}}" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Trailing Slash" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*[^/])$" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{REQUEST_FILENAME}" matchType="IsDirectory" negate="true" />                         <add input="{REQUEST_FILENAME}" matchType="IsFile" negate="true" />                         <add input="{URL}" pattern="WebResource.axd" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>             </rules>         </rewrite>     </system.webServer> </configuration> Try the Rule Out Now that we’ve saved the rule, let’s try it out on our site.  Try the following two URLs on my site: http://scottgu.com http://scottgu.com/ Notice that the first URL (which has no trailing slash) automatically does a redirect to a URL with the trailing slash.  Because it is a permanent redirect, search engines will follow the URL and update the page ranking. Scenario 4: Canonical Host Names The final SEO problem I discussed earlier are scenarios where a site works with both a leading “www” hostname prefix as well as just the hostname itself.  This causes search engines to treat the URLs as different and split search rankling: http://www.scottgu.com/albums.aspx http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx We can fix this by adding a new IIS Rewrite rule that automatically redirects anyone who navigates to the first URL (that has a www prefix) to instead go to the second URL.  Like before, we will setup the HTTP redirect to be a “permanent redirect” – which will indicate to search engines that they should follow the redirect and use the new URL they are redirected to as the identifier of the content they retrieve.  To create such a rule we’ll click the “Add Rule” link in the URL Rewrite admin tool again.  This will cause the “Add Rule” dialog to appear again: The URL Rewrite admin tool has a built-in “Canonical domain name” rule template.  When we select it and click the “ok” button we’ll see the following dialog which asks us if we want to create a redirect rule that automatically redirects users to a primary host name URL: Above I’m entering the primary URL address I want to expose to the web: scottgu.com.  When we click the “OK” button we’ll get a pre-written rule that automatically performs a permanent redirect if the URL has another leading domain name prefix.  This will save the following additional rule to our web.config file: <configuration>     <system.webServer>         <rewrite>             <rules>                 <rule name="Cannonical Hostname">                     <match url="(.*)" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^scottgu\.com$" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="http://scottgu.com/{R:1}" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Default Document" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*?)/?Default\.aspx$" />                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Lower Case URLs" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="[A-Z]" ignoreCase="false" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{URL}" pattern="WebResource.axd" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="{ToLower:{URL}}" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Trailing Slash" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*[^/])$" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{REQUEST_FILENAME}" matchType="IsDirectory" negate="true" />                         <add input="{REQUEST_FILENAME}" matchType="IsFile" negate="true" />                         <add input="{URL}" pattern="WebResource.axd" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>             </rules>         </rewrite>     </system.webServer> </configuration> Try the Rule Out Now that we’ve saved the rule, let’s try it out on our site.  Try the following two URLs on my site: http://www.scottgu.com/albums.aspx http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx Notice that the first URL (which has the “www” prefix) now automatically does a redirect to the second URL which does not have the www prefix.  Because it is a permanent redirect, search engines will follow the URL and update the page ranking. 4 Simple Rules for Improved SEO The above 4 rules are pretty easy to setup and should take less than 15 minutes to configure on existing sites you already have.  The beauty of using a solution like the URL Rewrite Extension is that you can take advantage of it without having to change code within your web-site – and without having to break any existing links already pointing at your site.  Users who follow existing links will be automatically redirected to the new URLs you wish to publish.  And search engines will start to give your site a higher search relevancy ranking – which will list your site higher in search results and drive more traffic to it. Customizing your URL Rewriting rules further is easy to-do either by editing the web.config file directly, or alternatively, just double click the URL Rewrite icon within the IIS 7.x admin tool and it will list all the active rules for your web-site or application: Clicking any of the rules above will open the rules editor back up and allow you to tweak/customize/save them further. Summary Measuring and improving SEO is something every developer building a public-facing web-site needs to think about and focus on.  If you haven’t already, download and use the SEO Toolkit to analyze the SEO of your sites today. New URL Routing features in ASP.NET MVC and ASP.NET Web Forms 4 make it much easier to build applications that have more control over the URLs that are published.  Tools like the URL Rewrite Extension that I’ve talked about in this blog post make it much easier to improve the URLs that are published from sites you already have built today – without requiring you to change a lot of code. The URL Rewrite Extension provides a bunch of additional great capabilities – far beyond just SEO - as well.  I’ll be covering these additional capabilities more in future blog posts. Hope this helps, Scott

    Read the article

  • Do url shortening services shorten the id or directly the url?

    - by Tatu Meriläinen
    Assuming the urls are saved to a database where they each have id and the url saved. For example a url www.example.com (let's say with id 1000) would possibly be shortened to www.url.com/c1hd5 etc. Is the url www.example.com shortened to c1hd5 with base64 or similar or are the ids shortened? The 566 id could be shortened like this: 1 = 1, 2 = 2, ... 9 = 9, 10 = a. The 1000 id would be fE if we used every possible letter from a-Z and - _. Is it good idea to use ids from database to shorten urls?

    Read the article

  • Job Search Engine Url Structure Issue [closed]

    - by Justin
    Possible Duplicate: What is the best stucture of SEO friendly URL? I am working on a job board, and i'm trying to figure out a good design for URL structure. Some things that I have found through research: 100 - 150 Chars long is ideal 3-5 words in your url, according to Matt Cutts Use .htaccess to force clean urls Do not duplicate data (important) Clean and precise, describing the content Use hyphens On the homepage, I try to detect the users location based on IP, but this isn't always accurate, and not always reliable. So until they put in their city/location, I can't always use this structure but this is potentially work-able. For Searching, a form post to a results page: domain.com/jobs/[city]/[search] ie: domain.com/jobs/toronto/sales manager/ OR domain.com/search/jobs/toronto/sales manager/ or do I remove the word JOBS and just use Search. I trying to keep good search terms in the URL, but also keep it clean and concise. Can someone give me some feedback and thoughts to 'why'...

    Read the article

  • Using subdomains or directories for main categories?

    - by Matthieu
    I have a website which references places to travel to in the world. Those places are (of course) grouped by countries. Here is an example of an actual URL of my website: http://awespot.org/country/105/iceland I am wondering if it would be better, in terms of SEO, to have the countries separated in subdomains: http://iceland.awespot.org/ I know subdomains are considered by Google as different websites, so I am considering the 2 options: separating would mean also separating the pagerank and benefits of links to the website but separating would enable me to create a "web" or related websites (all related to travel and all) that link and benefit to each other I am only asking about SEO here, I know there are other questions raised by this possibility (user experience, administration... even password completion by web browsers)

    Read the article

  • URL SEO : Using directories or exact keyword phrase in the URL [duplicate]

    - by rahul14gt
    This question already has an answer here: What is the best stucture of SEO friendly URL? 3 answers I am trying to understand how to best optimise a url for a page to rank high for specific keywords. Example: a top keyword search is "rental properties in new york". Question is does this keyword need to appear as this exact phrase in the url or should it be broken up into different directories for a better structure e.g.: www.abc.com/en/properties/new-york/rental OR www.abc.com/en/rental-properties-in-new-york Which will help the page rank higher (given all other things on the page are exactly the same)? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Using rel=canonical and noindex in a 1-n partners enviroment

    - by Telemako Mako
    We sell a whole site (domain, etc) to partners that create content that is shown together at the main site. What we want to achieve is that the main site copy is the original, but the one that is indexed is the partners copy. We want to do it this way so the search results point to the partner sites but never to the main site while the main site gets all the credit for the links. We are trying setting the main site article with a noindex, follow and a link to the partner article, and in the partner article we have a rel=canonical pointing to the main site article. Are we correct or the noindex at the main site will break the canonical reference?

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >