Experience with 307 HTTP status code
-
Hello,
is there anybody how has got some experience with 307 HTTP status code?
We would like to use 307 HTTP status code (temp redirect) for disabling temporary some of our shop-categories where all products are out of stock.
Generally a few days or hours later products are back in stock and category page is also back. Is it a good idea to use 307 beccause link sould be disabled temorary or should we use 301 instead?
Best regards
Steffen
-
Hello,
It is definately a bad idea. It is simply because google can not detect that your page is not present due to your supply shortage, it yust sees that page is present sometimes and sometimes it is gone. Now ask yourslef: would you refer somebody to your friend who sometimes does the work that he is asked to do and sometimes he just quites in the middle. I think you should rather refer one who is always there and can be trusted. The same with webpages. No matter how good your page is is it unavailable for shorter and longer periods on a regular basis than it is not trustworthy. You should rather simply wite to the product that it is out of stock. Not to mention that it is much easier to solve this in your cms.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
HTTP URL hangover after move to HTTPS
A clients site was moved to https recently. It's a small site with only 6 pages. One of the pages is to advertise an emergency service. HTTPS move worked fine. Submitted https to webmaster tools, submitted sitemap. 301 redirects. Rankings preserved. However, a few weeks later doing the site:example.com there are two pages for the emergency service. One says https the other is http. But the http one says the correct SEO title and the https one says an old SEO title. This wasn't expected. When you click the HTTP URL link it 301 redirects to the HTTPS url and the correct SEO title is displayed in the browser tab. When you click the HTTPS url link it returns a 200 and the correct SEO title is shown as expected in the browser tab. Anyone have any idea what is going on? And how to fix? Need to get rid of the HTTP URL but in the site search it contains the correct title. Plus- why is it there anyway?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AL123al0 -
Browser Cacheing - HTTPS redirects to HTTP
Howdy lovely Moz people. A webmaster redirected https protocol links to http a number of years ago in order to try and capture as many links as possible on a site we now manage. We have recently tried to implement https and realised that because of this existing redirect rule, they are now causing infinite loops when trying to test an http redirect. http redirecting to https redirecting back to http, etc. The https version works by itself weirdly enough. We believe that this is due to the permanent browser caching. So unless users clear their cache, they will get this infinite loop. Does anyone have any advice on how we can get round this? a) index both sites and specify in GSC that the https is the canonical version of the site and hope that Google sees that and removes the http version for the https version b) stick with http as infinite loops will kill the site c) ??????????? Thanks all.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HenryFrance0 -
I have 6 URL errors in GSC showing a 500 error code. How do I fix?
I am not sure how to fix some errors that are popping up in Google Search Console. The response codes showing are all: 500 error code I need some advice as to how to fix these. What are my options?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | pmull0 -
Canonical code set up correctly?
Please let me know if this makes sense. I have a very limited knowledge of technical SEO but I am almost positive that my web developer did something wrong. I have a wordpress blog and he did add canonical code to some of the pages. However he directs the site to the same URL! Does this mean that the canonical code is setup incorrectly and actually harming my SEO performance. Also if I have one webpage with just the first paragraph of a blog post I wrote and a completely seperate page for the blog post itself, could this be considered duplicate content? Thanks!!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DR700950 -
After Ranking Drop Continue SEO or Focus on Improving User Experience Instead?
Six months after starting a marketing campaign and spending a lot of money on SEO audits, link removals, wire frames, copywriting and coding my web site (www.nyc-officespace-leader.com) traffic dropped significantly after I launched a new version of my site in early June. Traffic is down about 27%, but most of the traffic from competitive terms is gone and the number of leads (phone calls, form completions) is off by about 70%. On june 6th an upgraded version of the site with mostly cosmetic changes (narrower header without social media buttons, streamlined conversion forms, new right rail was launched. No URLs were changed, and the text remained mostly the same. But somehow my developers botched up either canonical tags or Robot Text and 175 URLs with very little/no content were indexed by Google. At that point my ranking and traffic. A few days ago a request to remove those pages was made via Google WebmasterTools and now the number of pages indexed is down to 675 rather than the incorrect 850 from before. But ranking, traffic and lead generation have not yet recovered. After spending almost $25,000 over nine months this is rather frustrating. I might add the site has very few links from incoming domains and those links are not high quality. An SEO audit was performed in February and in April a link removal campaign occurred with about 30 domains agreeing to remove links and a disavow file being submitted for another 70-80 domains that would not agree to remove links. My SEO believes that we should focus on improving visitor engagement rather that on more esoteric SEO like trying to build incoming links. They think that improving useability will improve conversions and would generate results faster than traditional SEO. Also, they think that improving click through rates, reducing bounce rates will improve ranking by signaling to Google that the site is providing value to visitors. Does this sound like a reasonable approach? On one hand I don't see how my site with a MOZ domain authority could possibly compete against sites with a high number of quality incoming links and that maybe building a better link profile would yield faster results. On the other hand, it seems logical that Google would reward a site that creates a better user experience. Any thoughts from the MOZ community???? Does it sound like the recent loss of traffic is due to the indexing of the 175 pages? If so, when should my traffic and ranking return? Incidentally, these are the steps taken since last November to improve SEO: SEO Traffic & Ranking Drop Analysis and Recommendations (included in-depth SEO technical audit and recommendations). Unnatural Link Removal Program Content Optimization (Audit & Strategy with 20 page keyword matrix) CORE (also provided wireframe for /visitor-details pages at no-charge) SEO Copywriting for 10 pages New wire frames implemented on site on June 6th Jump in indexed pages by 175 on June 10th. Google Webmaster Tools removal request made for those low quality pages on June 23rd. Thanks, Alan
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan11 -
HTTP Status Bad Request - 404, but also, add a 400 HTTP Status in certain circumstances?
We currently have a custom 404 page set up for our clients, but the developer has it returning a HTTP 200 for the status code. Big no, no. I'm having that fixed right now. My question is, currently, the custom 404 page is only returned for urls with the extension .aspx: For example : ilovepizza.com/pepperni.aspx would return a 404 page because the correct page is ilovepizza.com/pepperoni.aspx Any other format of URL without the extension (example ilovepizza.com/thumbtack) does not trigger the custom 404 page we've created, but it does trigger a server error with a 404 HTTP status page. I want to change this so this type of error also triggers the custom 404 page because it's more user-friendly and would return them to the website. My question: Is there any benefit to making the /thumbtack errors return the custom 404 page but with a 400 Bad Request HTTP Status? Kind of a novice here in those aspects, but does the 400 Bad Request status indicate that it was a user mistake and not a mistake created on the website? Other suggestions?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EEE30 -
I had most of my sites down for a month for technical problems, how do I recover my SEO status ?
I had most of my sites down for a month for technical problems, how do I recover my SEO status ? I did everything possible to not get offline, but I did, some months before my domais were extremely slow, leading to failures over failures. I got them down and moved to another host. What should I do in SEO know that the mess is done ?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | aamato0 -
Experiences with event rich snippets?
We've recently (in the past 6 months) implemented rich snippets into one of our websites, which lists events around the USA. We've run our code through Google's testing tools and all looks good. When we search for terms which we compete for, many of our competitors display the event sub-links in the SERPs but we still do not. Does anyone have any experience with rich snippets with regards to whether site reputation or (we're a new website) others factors will impact if/when google will display our rich snippets in search results? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BTeubner0