suffix other than .asp or .html problem

will .az, .ak, .ga, .fl, .ma etc cause a problem?

[abezgauz]

I have a site that is data driven. Every city in the US has a page based on a database. The URL has a state= and a city= parameter attached to the end after the .asp such as

www....com/town.asp?city=boston&state=ma

These have all been indexed by Google. Now my marketing guy wants to change all the names to something like this...

www.....com/boston.ma

Does anyone know if this format will cause a problem with Google? My concerns are that there will now be at least 50 different prefixes on the site. Will Google see this as an attempt to fool them?

Any thoughts?

Thanks

[ciml]

This used to be a problem with Google, but nowadays thay use HTTP headers rather than URL substrings. I would expect your .ma URL to be fine.

[GoogleGuy]

I think this should be fine (we allow most extensions these days). I'd test it with one url like .ma, and if that works then you should be good to go.

[SyntheticUpper]

Great news! I'll rename all my pages .org :)

[Chndru]

ROFLMAO @ SyntheticUpper.

[ciml]

Thanks for that, I withdraw my HTTP comment.

'unknown' extensions have been OK for a while (Usenet veterans will remember Rob), but if the "filetype:" searches are anything to go by then Google are using URL or content analysis instead.

[abezgauz]

Guess the marketing guy wins. Thanks.

[johannamck]

I'm not sure if marketing guys should get to choose file extensions.

Why not just use "boston-ma" without any file extension?

If someone saves the "boston.ma" web page to their desktop and tries to open it later, Windows won't recognize it as a HTML page. (AFAIK.) If by chance some other program is installed that uses the .ma extension, it might even throw an error.

Also, some people (like me) are hesitant in the first place, to click on any link that doesn't have a recognizable file extension (.html, .asp, .php, .aspx etc), because of security reasons. (Viruses etc.)

[Chndru]

well-said, johannamck. I would be highly suspicious of these weird extensions. city-state sounds good to me.

[GoogleGuy]

Yeah, I'm just saying that it's technically possible. I'd still recommend pick what you think works best for your users. Any extension like .ma is a little weird and may puzzle some users and make other users nervous (some extensions, like .pif, get a bad name because they can spread virus-y type stuff).

[rogerdp]

Viruses don't care about file extensions, or hasn't everyone seen the rampant something/something.jpg spawn a VB script? Using them to determine security on your own system is worse than stupid, it's an accident waiting to happen.

If you insist on using a buggy browser, make sure you have a virus scanner. The ones out now even check VB and JS in the page.

As for names, I'd say MA/Boston, but most visitors aren't used to MSF. "Boston-MA", "Boston,MA" (remember, comma is just fine), "BostonMA" are fine too. If you're expecting them to type it in, pick common punctuation and try to guess typos too.

[DoppyNL]

I would go with:

/ma/boston/

as that seems more logical: the further `down` you go in the path, the more specific the information becomes.

Then you can place a list or global information in /ma/

Not sure if crawlers can pick up that logic on your site?!? GG?

[offtopic - just a little]
I also never understood the logic in the order www-domain-tld/path/, would be more logic to use tld-domain-www/path/
the further to the right, the more specific it gets! (allthough that would be different for arabic people ;-)
[/offtopic]