What are the issues associated with going extension-less?

[shaunm]

Hello All,

We've been planning to remove the .aspx extensions from our URLs as part of a migration. I know and believe extensions does nothing in terms of SEO benefits but going extension-less from extensions can create a lot of hiccups like internal redirects, crawl wastage and most importantly over a 10-15 percentage lose in link values (hope that's still true with redirects)

What's your personal experience with such redirects, was there major ranking drops or nothing at all? And what are the other issues you think I might be facing apart from the obvious ones I mentioned above?

Thanks so much!

[Andy Langton]

If you do it perfectly, I would expect almost no difference after an initial period of instability. I certainly wouldn't undertake it for its own sake. If you were redeveloping or similar, and unavoidably changing URLs, then I would go ahead. Of course, extensionless URLs remove any tie-in with technology or platform, so if you're taking the plunge, plan for this to be the last URL change you ever do (i.e. make them as ideal as you can possibly make them).

The major pitfalls are:

- Getting it wrong. E.g. missed redirects, chained redirects, redirects to the wrong place, not changing links
- Google deciding that value shouldn't be passed (e.g. URL A is not close enough to URL B as far as Google is concerned, so it's not going to pass credit). Applies particularly if you are also changing content or templates

[shaunm]

Thanks!

I would expect almost no difference after an initial period of instability

How long do you think the instability will prevail for a site with over 9000 pages? I'm just afraid and hope the it's something recoverable.

If you were redeveloping or similar, and unavoidably changing URLs, then I would go ahead

That's exactly the case. Otherwise, no sense in changing a URL structure for no reason.

so if you're taking the plunge, plan for this to be the last URL change you ever do

Why do you say so? Surprisingly, we are moving over to encryption in a couple of months. Even though we wanted to make these changes at the same time with a single push, there are some business constraints that make it go through two different web development process.

Google deciding that value shouldn't be passed (e.g. URL A is not close enough to URL B as far as Google is concerned, so it's not going to pass credit). Applies particularly if you are also changing content or templates

I didn't understand, can you please elaborate? The page example.com/one-page.aspx is removed the extension through a 301 redirect and be live at example.com/one-page. Now, what problem does Google has in passing the link value(other than that little over -10-15%)?

[aakk9999]

I didn't understand, can you please elaborate? The page example.com/one-page.aspx is removed the extension through a 301 redirect and be live at example.com/one-page. Now, what problem does Google has in passing the link value(other than that little over -10-15%)?

For example, google remembers that example.com/one-page.aspx had content about shoes and now it is redirected to example.com/one-page, but this page has content about televisions. In other words, it redirects to a page that does not have the same/similar content as the old page had.

[Andy Langton]

For example, google remembers that example.com/one-page.aspx had content about shoes and now it is redirected to example.com/one-page, but this page has content about televisions. In other words, it redirects to a page that does not have the same/similar content as the old page had.

Exactly! I've also fringe seen cases where even (seemingly) minor changes fail Google's canonicalisation tests (e.g. list of news links in a sidebar changed). It's going to depend on a particular page, however. It's one reason to avoid big content changes if you're changing URLs.

[tangor]

If you are changing platforms this might be an ideal time to go expressionless. If NOT, then all new content added is expressionless and then you can move older parts of the site to expessionless each month in controlled batches so you can track SE responses.

Also depends on the number of pages. Also under consideration is the value/necessity of any page. Might be a good time to do your site inventory and see what can be CUT AWAY and return 410 or CONSOLIDATED to improve the content value. If all pages are essential then you must use all caution to avoid some of the pitfalls listed above. Above all, PROOFREAD all changes!

[shaunm]

Thanks guys. It's just the same pages, no content alternations. In my personal experience, redirects can hinder a page's performance and content alternations too. So, I was just wondering what I'm headed for with going expressionless. It's something I don't want to do and don't have control over.