| 7:06 am on Dec 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Use Option 2 for internal linking
Googleguy suggested in his thread
to have absolute linking.
>> I recommend absolute links instead of relative links, because there's less chance for a spider (not just Google, but any spider) to get confused. In the same fashion, I would try to be consistent on your internal linking.
| 2:33 pm on Dec 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Option one if you have any common sense and no www vs non-www issues.
| 4:41 pm on Dec 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I use option 2 but never link directly to the home page file. I guess it would look like...
All incoming links should also point to
or the internal pages.
| 5:11 pm on Dec 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Webdude: I use option 2 but never link directly to the home page file. I guess it would look like...
Why dont you want to link directly back to your home page?
| 5:21 pm on Dec 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Option 1, or you'll go nuts if you ever reorganize your site (which may be necessary to accommodate growth).
Contrary to what some people think GoogleGuy said, he didn't say that absolute URLs were essential--he said that, if you were using relative links and Google was crawling your site OK, there was no need to convert.
| 7:18 pm on Dec 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"Why dont you want to link directly back to your home page?"
2 reasons. One, if you ever have to change the name of the homepage, you can pretty much sit back and wait months for the PR to come back.
Second reason, and I am just funny about this, all of my sites show different PR for the actual page as opposed to the site. For instance, mysite.com/ will show a PR of 5, but mysite.com/index.htm will show a PR of 0. Not really sure if it makes any difference, but I am more comfortable linking to mysite.com/.
I understood perfectly what GG said. I have no problems reorganizing sites. A good editor will globally replace all links in a minute or less. I have just always used that linking style and have never had problems with it. I think more importantly what should be avoided is multiple type links on the same site. Pick one and stick with it. Also, if linking to a directory, always add the trailing /.
| 10:32 pm on Dec 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"or you'll go nuts if you ever reorganize your site"
Nonsense. It isn't even an issue.
Google Guy was very clear, and so is common sense. Absolute links are better if you have a choice.
mazdamx, he just meant he links to www.site.com/ rather than www.site.com/index.htm
| 4:26 am on Dec 4, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Steveb: Oh ok, that makes sense. I was wondering what he was talking about.
| 7:14 am on Dec 4, 2005 (gmt 0)|
That's two of us that weren't getting the absolute link. I thought a relative link was to the http:site.com and the absolute was to the "www.site.com" here it's to the index.htm/l page.
How can I get rid of that /index.html When I go to my site in any fashion I get www.site.com and once I've clicked through my site and hit the home button or the store logo, it returns me to www.site.com/index.html?
I don't know why it happens but I heard it was something to get rid of.
| 7:30 am on Dec 4, 2005 (gmt 0)|
You sound like you probably are using relative links which happen to link to index.html
But that particular problem is not a relative versus absolute one. You probably should go to the commercial exchange forum and hire someone to explain all aspects of this to you.
| 5:24 am on Dec 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Thank you, will do ;)
| 11:12 am on Dec 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
You probably should go to the commercial exchange forum and hire someone to explain all aspects of this to you.
SteveB what is "commercial exchange forum"?
| 12:20 am on Dec 7, 2005 (gmt 0)|