homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.243.23.129
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Accredited PayPal World Seller

Home / Forums Index / Marketing and Biz Dev / General Search Engine Marketing Issues
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: mademetop

General Search Engine Marketing Issues Forum

    
Do you include the http://www. in your links?
adamnichols45




msg:3294710
 8:42 pm on Mar 27, 2007 (gmt 0)

From a search engine perspective do you use.

<a href="http://www.widget.com/page2.html">widget</a>

OR

<a href="page2.html">widget</a>

 

pageoneresults




msg:3294723
 8:52 pm on Mar 27, 2007 (gmt 0)

You are referring to absolute vs. relative links.

I use absolute 95% of the time...

http://www.example.com/sub/

Since I trim out fat in other areas, I can afford the additional weight (number of domain characters) added for an absolute URI structure.

adamnichols45




msg:3294762
 9:20 pm on Mar 27, 2007 (gmt 0)

The reason I generally dont is that when viewing locally which I do alot the links of course link of elsewhere.

That could be sorted easily just bad habbits.

PowerUp




msg:3296417
 3:18 pm on Mar 29, 2007 (gmt 0)

This is interesting. Will the experts please give us your thoughts.

I'm thinking... if I have 2000 pages of content, will it make a difference to my homepage pagerank if i link my 2000 pages to my homepage using
1. <a href="http://www.widget.com>
2. <a href="http://www.widget.com/index.html>
3. <a href="index.html>

Reason I'm asking is because I've come across some websites with PR4 and above. These pages has only backlinks from their own content pages. No backlinks from other domains.

caveman




msg:3296537
 5:02 pm on Mar 29, 2007 (gmt 0)

The reason I generally dont is that when viewing locally which I do alot the links of course link of elsewhere.

Best practice is to use the full URI, so there is no chance of the SE's getting it wrong. If your site structure is clean and easy and well maintained and someone is always paying attention to links being properly implemented, then it probably won't matter much.

Personally, I've moved toward full URI's to take uncertainty out of the equation.

Turbulence




msg:3307474
 2:17 pm on Apr 10, 2007 (gmt 0)

Best practice is to use the full URI,

so there is no chance of the SE's getting it wrong. If your site structure is clean and easy and well maintained and someone is always paying attention to links being properly implemented, then it probably won't matter much.

Personally, I've moved toward full URI's to take uncertainty out of the equation.

Definitely - to be absolutely sure you don't get the search engines confused that much, try to use only the full URLs - it helps much. This have been my practice for quite a long time now and I've never had a flaw so far.

Good luck,

Turbulence

kevinpate




msg:3307513
 2:49 pm on Apr 10, 2007 (gmt 0)

I'm probably 99%+ relative and < 1% absolute.
Generally the two sites float around upper half
of page 1 in G and Y, middle 1/3 on M.

These are info sites for a nfp, and not pay the bill sites, but all the same, in light of where they float on pg 1 when I'm not shooting myself in the foot like I used to do when I belonged to the 'wonder whut'll happen if I do X" club, I'm not overly inclined to switch things around these days.

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Marketing and Biz Dev / General Search Engine Marketing Issues
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved