Q. About SE Page Extension Preferences

.htm .html .php .asp .cfm .php?c=1&p=5

[Daemon]

I can't seem to find much information so I might as well ask.

Do search engines, namely Google, care about the page extension of a page? .htm .html .php .asp .phtml .cfm?

What about dynamic queried pages? eg: index.php?c=1&p=5

It seems Google care about directory depth though or perhaps it's the big popular sites using dynamic pages that makes me think so.

Anyone have ANY clues at all?

Thanks!

[Daemon]

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention, can SE or any script detect if a page is real or if it's just something magically put up by mod rewrite?

Thanks!

[premasagar]

I'd also be interested to know if it makes any difference to SE's if mod_rewrite is used to internally serve, say, a .php page when the requested filename extension is something else, say, .fish?

?

[DaveAtIFG]

Do search engines, namely Google, care about the page extension of a page? .htm .html .php .asp .phtml .cfm?

In a word, no. Years ago they did. As the web has grown and new technologies have evolved, the SEs have kept pace, primarily to remain competitive with each other. An unrecognized "mime type" extension such as .fish will be a problem.

What about dynamic queried pages? eg: index.php?c=1&p=5

There are threads from 18-24 months ago where GoogleGuy recommends limiting, avoiding, or rewriting dynamic query strings to insure spidering. (He also suggested avoiding session ids during that same period if memory serves.)

can SE or any script detect if a page is real or if it's just something magically put up by mod rewrite?

Yes, and no... :) Mod_rewrite does it's magic on the server and delivers a "completed page" to a visitor with no indication that it has been massaged on the server.

I suppose an aggressive script could read and analyze an .htaccess file and determine whether rewrites are being used. But rewrites can be (and often are) done in a site's configuration file so evaluating .htaccess would be inconclusive. And .htaccess files are frequently blocked, not delivered in reponse to HTTP requests.

[premasagar]

A thought: The BBC News website uses its own file extension for its web pages (.stm). I don't know why. They seem to be cloaking the extension on their ASP pages. If you take any URL on their site and change the extension from .stm to .asp, you will get the same page, but the extension will be re-written again to .stm.

Their pages most certainly do appear in SE's, but as far as I know .stm is not a standard extension or mime type.

Any thoughts?

[DaveAtIFG]

.stm seems to be a standard mime type, [w3schools.com...]

Another site indicates it's a standard IIS extension for SSIs and it's installed with IIS by default.

Lot's more here [google.com].

[premasagar]

.stm seems to be a standard mime type, [w3schools.com...]

Another site indicates it's a standard IIS extension for SSIs and it's installed with IIS by default.

Lot's more here.

Ah, well there you go then! Thanks for that information.