URLs with "#"

A new link system

[markdidj]

Would it be possible for Google to start showing targets of anchored divisions?

So if Google finds a link like -
<a href="www.example.com/page.asp#widget">
it would be able to index the written content of the object "widget". When someone executes a search, if the keywords are in the object "widget" to show the link like the one above.

This would give an even more accurate index as the link will point directly to the required infomation.

Any thoughts?

[patoruzu]

I use # for some links and Google ignores them. I think it's OK.

[moltar]

I was just coding up a big page with many on page anchors the other day and thought exactly about the same thing. I think it's a very good idea.

[g1smd]

I only realised that I linked to a new page of a site using links like:

/newpage.html#topic1
/newpage.html#topic2
/newpage.html#topic3

about three weeks after it went online. I thought that might have caused a problem.

Google indexed it as /newpage.html just fine.

[WA_Smith]

This post has reminded me of an application i have blocked from robots because i must track the referal page with a high degree of accuracy.

In that regard i have been using links with url?pageID.

Thanks for reminding me that i can use #pageID and not waste all the PR of the links going to that page.

I agree with posts above that url#id does not create a new url within the mind of search engines (nor should it) I do have a number of pages that use that method ... as well as pages using that method specific to link anchor text ongoing algo testing. Googlebot does not seem to care if the link has a # in it, it just treats it like a link to the URL that does not contain the #.

[madmatt69]

Isn't that what google-bombing is? There was lots of talk about that sort of thing last year.

Not sure how well it works these days though.

[Reid]

google-bombing is when you do things to get your competitor massive site-wide backlinks all of a sudden and they get penalised for it.

[markdidj]

I agree with posts above that url#id does not create a new url within the mind of search engines (nor should it)

I know that it doesn't, but why do you think it shouldn't? If someone was looking for info on "blue widgets" and Google knew there was an anchor containing "#blue" which pointed to the division called "blue" on the "widget" page, and this div contained keywords for "blue widget", then I would think if they indexed that link it would give a better result for the searcher, pointing directly to the info on "blue widgets"

[g1smd]

What a lovely way that would be to stitch up your comptitors' PR....

Link to each page with hundreds of different #topic IDs each one seen as being a separate URL by the search engine.

[Wizard]

Thanks for reminding me that i can use #pageID

No, you can't. Everything after # doesn't belong do URL anymore, and isn't even sent from browser to server (check with Mozilla HTTP Live-Headers). So no server-side application would see what's after # mark.

[g1smd]

I just tried WebBug and that does send the URL as /thispage.html#sometopic using both HEAD and GET, both for HTTP 1.0 and HTTP 1.1.

I haven't got access to the log files at the moment to see what might be recorded in the log itself.

[Nikke]

I really doubt that anchors would do you either good or bad. It's a widely used technique, but I have never, ever, seen an achored url in Google's SERPs.

[g1smd]

I already proved that Google strips them off.

See my first post in this thread.

[g1smd]

In another forum, the posters came down on the side of "this is spammy" as by changing from ?id=nnnn to the new #nnnn tags, this would possibly manipulate PR.

What do the readers of WebmasterWorld think? Is this spammy, or a good idea?

[moltar]

I've seen that happen on some forum software. I am not sure if it's spammy tho. Looks good from the user's point of view.

[iProgram]

I use this method in my in house affiliate system,e.g. www.site.com/index.html#affiliate_id

[markdidj]

What a lovely way that would be to stitch up your comptitors' PR....
Link to each page with hundreds of different #topic IDs each one seen as being a separate URL by the search engine.

This is true with the querystring as well, so no difference really. I've recked my own site from an accessibility feature, using links with?size=n that when clicked changes the page with a recalculated css sheet. Changed it now, but I know Google will see these links for ages.

I just thought if a search engine wants to be accurate, then it could be implemented.