5 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
5 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Relative or Absolute URLS

by Dr los3
4 replies
  • SEO
    • |
It is common practice to use Absolute urls when interlinking, but this time around i am going to use relative path instead. Id like to hear some arguments before i launch though.

There may not be any benefit that i know of, but since i am crafting my website to be in good silo'd form, i think using relative url paths would be a good idea. Since all of those links within that silo will only be going back to the silo, i feel as though it might enhance the overall effectiveness of a silo'd website.

Thoughts?
#absolute #relative #silo #urls
  • Profile picture of the author akshayhallur
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9318350].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Banned
      Originally Posted by akshayhallur View Post

      No, you should'nt use relative links for internal linking.

      Top 3 Reasons not to use relative URLs:
      1. This is a URL that leaves of the http:// or https:// bit.
      2. Most of the times relative URLs cause Spider traps.
      3. Most of the times it causes massive duplicate content issue.
      That doesn't make any sense.

      How are you going to get duplicate content from a URL? How is it a spider trap? Any bot that's worthwhile is built to follow the entire URL (root).

      BTW, Wikipedia has mostly relative links, no problems going on there.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9318454].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dr los3
        Yeah yukon you're right.

        Also bruce clay uses relative urls on his website as well.

        Many others I creep on use them as well, and the ones that don't usually have a bad website architecture, although i am not bashing the using absolute.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9318565].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author paulgl
        It can only cause a problem if your website settings are not done right, or
        if you don't do them right. Probably why I see most people doing
        full links. There are strange things that could happen. I shy away from
        them myself. Yeah, I'll admit, makes me feel better. And what happens
        if you move stuff around on your website? That is, sharing code from
        one directory that most certainly will not work.

        Duplicate content issues? Having google think that domain.com or
        www .domain.com are two different places is a moot point in 2014.

        What would be a good question, is if google could "possibly" get mixed
        up with "link association," for lack of a better word. I can't believe that
        could happen, actually, but people are timid about maybes or what ifs.

        Paul
        Signature

        If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9318577].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nettiapina
      Originally Posted by akshayhallur View Post

      If you are using WordPress it is easy,
      It's not "easy", but the default behaviour of the CMS. It's not really an argument for or against relative URLs.

      I tend to use relative links in content, and let the system do whatever it wishes as long as it works. But it's not worth a single thought to ponder between them. If I'm moving a site to a new address the migration tool is taking care of all the URLs.
      Signature
      Links in signature will not help your SEO. Not on this site, and not on any other forum.
      Who told me this? An ex Google web spam engineer.

      What's your excuse?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9318896].message }}

Trending Topics