steveb
msg:763829 | 9:12 pm on Mar 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
No. Makes no difference.
|
lammert
msg:763830 | 9:48 pm on Mar 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Yesterday for one of my sites all the supplementals were gone from the index, today they are all back. Also cache for those pages disappears en reappears again depending on the time of day, and weather forecast. Re-check tomorrow, the cache will probably be back. Unfortunately there has been no single post on this board about any real progress in the supplemental issues of Google, except for the temporary glitch where whole sites went supplemental a few weeks ago and GoogleGuy personally interfered.
|
Need More Hits
msg:763831 | 10:42 pm on Mar 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Internally I link to my pages as wiget.htm not [mysite.com...]
Is this considered the canonical problem? Internal linking? Please excuse my ignorance on this issue.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks
Brad
|
tedster
msg:763832 | 11:09 pm on Mar 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
lammert, you may have missed the positive reports in the swarm of other posts, but I have read several. Just recently, see [webmasterworld.com...] mssg #183 from Grinler. Brad (Need More Hits): relative linking does not, in itself, mean you will have a canonical problem. Do a site:example.com query and see if there are any pages listed by more than one url -- with and without index.html, or with and without "www" for instance.
|
lammert
msg:763833 | 11:32 am on Mar 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
tedster, with "except for the temporary glitch where whole sites went supplemental a few weeks ago" I was referring to the BigDaddy supplemental problem where some positive results have been seen. Sorry for being not more precise.
|
|
