Forum Moderators: open
please help.
I dont have trouble presenting the links to the spider.
My question is :
I have 7 main menu and atleast 30 sub menus (about 5 under each main menu). My menu in a text browser (without applying CSS & JS) looks like a sitemap. If the spider sees a bunch of links as soon as it enters the page, will it mistake my website for a scrapper or junk site and penalize it?
- alex
On the other hand, I also know Google identifies the page template for a site, so an algo "might" just these menus off to the side of the calculation somehow, because they are a page element that is always repeated. However, the trouble is there (PR not passing through content links on these pages and so on.)
Also, in the interests of full disclosure -- I have a strong personal dislike for these menu systems. It's there for many reasons, not just search engine issues. My previous post on the topic:
Mouseover Menus - or DHTML Indigestion [webmasterworld.com]
Generally, having 35 links to other pages from any given page is not something I'd worry much about at all. I'm aware of thriving sites with more internal nav links per page than that.
I think it's more important that the nav makes sense for the site and the users.
There are also different ways to approach nav. Flat nav, hierarchical nav etc. Again it depends on the site. I have some sites with fairly flat nav because it makes sense to do it that way. A potential negative of that approach is lack of focus WRT PR and that sort of thing, from a SEO point of view.
Given the choice, I tend to prefer more hierarchical nav, which also has a tentency to limit the number of nav links per page.
[webmasterworld.com...]
it's more important that the nav makes sense for the site and the users
I definitelay agree -- and in the case of a site that is used a regular reference point for many return visitors, the dropdown menu can be a good tool. It helps the regular, repeat visitor go exactly where they want. I'm not completely dogamtic about it ;)
A good case in point is Amazon's implementation -- and they certainly qualify as a site with lots of regular, repeat visitors. If you are using a browser where the dhtml menu works (IE or FF) , then it's a nice navigational shortcut for those who know where they want to go. But the site also offers solid nav for those whose browsers do not show the dhtml menu.
are you talking about your homepage, your subpages or both?
roughly how many pages on your site?
hierarchical nav?
Google identifies the page template for a site, so an algo "might" just these menus off to the side of the calculation somehow, because they are a page element that is always repeated.
the trouble is there (PR not passing through content links on these pages and so on.)
From Ted's other thread :
A menu that allows them to choose a tasty, intuitive path to whatever they need.?
The nav would become section specific as you drop down ... i.e., on a widgets site, homepage would cover all colors of widgets. On the red widgets page, you might see subnav to small red widgets, medium red widgets, large red widgets, etc.
Maybe also nav to other main widget pages, or not, depending upon your notions of what kw's are most important and where you want your site emphasis to be. ;-)
This is a very easy type of hierarchical structure for visitors to grasp, and the sites where I have used it still show some of the sweetest stats for the vistor's click paths -- easily exploring many, many pages. In fact, these are the sites where visitor complements for ease of use seem to be the strongest. I've also tried various accordian-style menus, mouseover pop-up menus and so on, but none of them have performed the way a simple inverted "L" does.
In addition, there has never been a major search engine indexing problem for me on sites using this approach. The spiders seem to find all the pages quite nicely.
Ted, thanks for inverted "L" menu sugession. Inverted "L" wins the election.
I feel combining both ideas will be the solution.
I will be back to trouble you if I need anything else.
