Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 184.108.40.206
We are in the process of building a new site and are attempting to organize the files into logical locations within the www folder.
What are your comments on structuring things like this:
or is it better to go:
I want to organize the files and optimize for better rankings, but don't want to go overboard in the process. Has anyone experienced a better naming convention that provides optimization and easy/logical organization of files?
Note: We have approx 500 pages, consisting of 2 main product groups and then styles within these groups.
Thanks - appreciate any feedback you all have to offer!
joined:Dec 9, 2001
I think we'll stick to something short.
This seems logical and natural. No over doing it as thats the last thing we want to do. I am just trying to organize the files, and help with the theme of the site.
Or you think this is still over doing things?
I can't see how G can penalize you for using a logical structure, albeit keywordy. If that's what your site is about, how can it be wrong to use those words!? I would only use 1 repeat keyword maximum in any address though (excluding domain name)
I believe Google, in order to eliminate scrapers, as of the Bourbon update, is penalizing keyword heavy directory structures with lots of repetitions of multiple keywords.
Of course this is a killer to product sites and I have one where pages seem to be "URL only" for no apparent reason. But only product pages which used the same multi-keyword directory path repeatedly. This is still just supposition at this point.
Also in my opinion Bourbon seemed to mandate absolute links to all pages. Links can get cumbersome with extensive keywords, but of course they are very discriptive, which can really help a visitor.
---- or is this better ----
The second is more logical in my case and I wouldn't change it because helps organization but just wondering if it's hurting me in the long run?
Would you mind sending a sticky for the URL of the mystery PR6 site. I just looked into another PR 6 and it was interesting.
Certainly Google uses the linking structure of your site to distribute page rank. I maintain a traditional sitemap.htm page with absolute links to most of my pages. Without this sitemap.htm many of my pages seemed to go URL only after Bourbon. I pulled and reinstated this sitemap twice, each time when the absolute links were gone more pages were URL only. The user navigation linkage is "relative" and would have a much deeper struture without the sitemap.htm. The pages that were "deep" were the ones disappearing. The sitemap makes the structure almost flat.