script name vs path

by 9 replies
11
I am wondering about the relevance of what Google sees as the actual filename in a link. For example, on a scripted site the url structure might be:

Code:
/path/subpath/scriptname?querystr
Consider for a moment that although the path is completely unique for each link, the scriptname is the same. That is to say one script is handling the bulk of the traffic. The querystr tells the script what to do. The path indicates site structure.

Code:
For example: www.domain.com/products/mywebsite.php?querystr

or

www.domain.com/search/mywebsite.php?querystr

or 

www.domain.com/contact/mywebsite.php?querystr
I am thinking this may be disadvantageous and that in some cases the scriptname should be where the keywords are.

For example, consider the following two urls:

Code:
/products/dresses/green/getproducts.php?querystr

or

/products/green-dresses.php?querystr

or even maybe

/products/clothing/dresses/green-dresses.php?querystr
Wouldn't google prefer the scriptname that contains the keywords? If one scriptname is used for the bulk of the load on a dynamic site doesn't that muddle the issue somewhat?

Is it worth restructuring the script(s) to reflect a name that suits the content?
#search engine optimization #path #script
  • Seems you are talking about silo structuring in a general way.

    You are, of course, free to use any structure you want.
    You can always use .htaccess to reformat the url.
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • Actually I was being specific. What is the weight of the actual script/program name compared to the path and is there a demotion for a file/script that is nested deeper in sub-directory path?

      In other words does Google/Bing think a file has less importance based on it's depth in the site hierarchy/structure?

      (htaccess is not applicable in this deployment.)
      • [1] reply
  • I need to construct a sitemap for a very large dynamically scripted site with a ridiculous number of pages. I've been reading what I can find and so far it's been a little confusing.

    I'm not interested in using a program to generate a map, for a host of reasons. For one the site is too large to crawl (millions of links to follow). For another, I have my own ideas about page relevance factors.

    I am familiar with XML and will write a program to generate my own set of sitemaps on a regular basis. I need to understand how to:

    use multiple maps together

    decide which pages to include/exclude

    automate periodic submission of updated and/or added pages

    I'm looking for any input, especially from anyone who has constructed such an animal on their own (no third party programs). I don't need help with coding, but i would like to see some working examples of the XML involved (excerpts would be fine).

    Thanks.
    • [1] reply
    • You are straight up crazy you know that right? LOL As stated before... on a smaller level... I do custom XML for my Silo sites. As much as possible.. well to the point of anal, I want to keep context in relation to context at any and every level I can. By letting a "plugin" do this it is going to create the XML in relation to date of entry or what ever, and that basically puts a wrench in the whole thing.

      In regard to how to use multiple maps together, I actually link based on structure. I will have a primary file, that will consist of the top layer linking.. and then each of these link down to their specific silos. Again an anal attempt at maintaining that autonomous separation that is "Silo Structure".

      I do have dynamic built pages, but no where in the realm that you do. I am currently developing my XML files by hand as it were. - you mention writing something to pull that and that is without question something I need to look into ( kinda one of those AH HA moments ) I know MY structure will be easy to deal with...

      Now I am starting to grasp the above question a bit better? You are thinking the URL will give you benefit, but more importantly you are looking ahead to this step? if that is the case I would say YES develop the link structure you are thinking above and make your life easier! LOL

  • [DELETED]
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
Join the discussion

Next Topics on Trending Feed

  • 11

    script name vs path

    I am wondering about the relevance of what Google sees as the actual filename in a link. For example, on a scripted site the url structure might be: Code: /path/subpath/scriptname?querystr Consider for a moment that although the path is completely unique for each link, the scriptname is the same. That is to say one script is handling the bulk of the traffic. The querystr tells the script what to do. The path indicates site structure.