Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.166.5.230

Forum Moderators: incrediBILL

Message Too Old, No Replies

urls without .html or .htm pages on the end

     
5:39 am on Nov 27, 2010 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

5+ Year Member

joined:Sept 1, 2010
posts:95
votes: 0


When I build web pages, I use the popular historical process of calling the home page index.htm and lets say I have products.htm and services.htm on the site too.

So within index.htm I have links that look like:
<a href="http://website.com/products.htm">products</a>

Recently I have noticed some developers putting their pages in separate folders each with an index.htm, so their links to the same kind of content as above would like like:

<a href="http://website.com/products/">products</a>

Can anyone explain the reasons/benefits of the latter?
5:48 am on Nov 27, 2010 (gmt 0)

New User

5+ Year Member

joined:Nov 25, 2010
posts: 22
votes: 0


If you ever change your programming language, from html to php, asp, etc you can just place the appropriate index.(php|asp|?) file under that folder and delete the index.htm as opposed to making an .htaccess file to rewrite the request.

better than having all your links go to
domain.com/page2.html when your new page is
domain.com/page3.php

much easier to just go to
domain.com/page2

Either way .com/page2.html or domain.com/page2 both are easy to rewrite with an .htaccess file when it really boils down to it..

personally I like placing the documents in independent folders and named index.php because I hate seeing extensions..
7:20 am on Nov 27, 2010 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

5+ Year Member

joined:Sept 1, 2010
posts:95
votes: 0


Thanks cmnetworx. I ran a test and this process do work in html too.

You've explained re-write reasons, fair enough, but it is the last sentence there that I'm interested in. Is it simply a matter of visual preference or are there seo implications too perhaps relating to canonical url best practices?
7:43 am on Nov 27, 2010 (gmt 0)

New User

5+ Year Member

joined:Nov 25, 2010
posts:22
votes: 0


To me its just visual, As far as I know there are no seo downsides to url's with extensions (index.html).

it is easier to tell a user to go to
www.website.com/blah
than website.com/blah.html, or .shtml, etc.

but then again 80% of the time you tell a user to enter the url in their address bar they end up googling it anyways.. This wouldn't suck so bad if they didn't get confused by sponsored links..
10:25 am on Nov 30, 2010 (gmt 0)

Full Member

5+ Year Member

joined:Dec 30, 2009
posts: 249
votes: 0


Yes, it looks better, I think for me it's probably a small factor in choosing what search engine result to click on.
4:55 pm on Nov 30, 2010 (gmt 0)

New User

5+ Year Member

joined:Nov 25, 2010
posts:22
votes: 0


when I am going down through the list of search results on google or something I don't care either way if it has a file extension or not.. It's just on my domains. I think its because typing .htm takes so much more effort, lol.. Actually in my scenario I try to not make it completely obvious that I am using php this way some noob won't try to mess with my pages/forms or sql injections.. because if they think I am running something else (anything else) at least their attempts would be a waste of time..
9:16 am on Dec 1, 2010 (gmt 0)

Full Member

5+ Year Member

joined:Dec 30, 2009
posts: 249
votes: 0


Usually I wouldn't pay any attention to it, but results with a filetype URL are in my experience more likely to be spam with certain areas of queries.
 

Join The Conversation

Moderators and Top Contributors

Hot Threads This Week

Featured Threads

Free SEO Tools

Hire Expert Members