Dynamic vs. static URLs
-
Hello Everyone,
I'm new here on MOZ and just getting back into SEO (a little bit) after not doing anything 'myself' for a couple of years. Currently my individual URLs show as: https://www.example.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=107 (dynamic responsive site).
I can switch it to a static site, so the individual product pages read as:https://www.example.com/catalog/category name/product name-107.html
It's still a long URL, but it would be keyword rich. Some of my current dynamic pages are indexed,and due to an upgrade I had to do several months back, I already have some redirects (301) from my php extensions to the one listed above. This is my long explanation to my following questions:
-
Does having a dynamic or static site matter when ranking in search engines
-
I already have some redirects coming my older site to this dynamic site, so I would have to make more directs from the dynamic site to my static site - is this okay to do?
I'm really at a loss, a couple of years ago, I ranked 1-3 (on Page 1) on Google for all my keywords, (all White Hat work), and now I'm into great abyss of no mans land of the internet (ranked on Page 3+)
Thank you for any and all help from everyone!
~Sandra
-
-
Thank you to everyone for all of your help and suggestions. I guess this will be on the top of my 'to do list' switching from dynamic to static. I already have some 301's in place from my site had a .php extension to the new extension now with ./?... etc. Is it okay to re redirect them? How many redirects are too many?
Thank you so much!
Sandra
-
Thank you to everyone for all of your help and suggestions. I guess this will be on the top of my 'to do list' switching from dynamic to static. I already have some 301's in place from my site had a .php extension to the new extension now with ./?... etc. Is it okay to re redirect them? How many redirects are too many?
Thank you so much!
Sandra
-
Thank you Hutch42. I guess I have alot of work ahead of me with switching to static and making sure I get all the redirects pointed correctly.
-
Sandra, be very careful with the statement you just made. One of the most dangerous things you can start doing is putting yourself in as a stand in for your customers. Google has seen correlation between search relevance and clean URLs, and when looking at web pages a clean url reinforces a persons want to click on it (page trustworthiness), while a large alpha-numeric string looks worse and is viewed as less trustworthy by the average person.
-
Thank you for the article. I just read it. Some great information. I would love an update to it, since it's from 2008, unless an update is not necessary, if it is still relevant.
So is the consensus, switch to static? (so much work - uugh).
-
I look at the URL. I don't know if it is because I am trained to, or because I copy and paste a lot. Using Dynamic URLs means setting parameters in GWT, it means constantly watching for 404 errors. In my opinion it isn't worth the time and effort where a static URL is implemented once, and you move on with the rest of your page.
-
- Yeah, but do visitors really even look at what is in the URL? I personally don't care (from a shopper's point of view) what URLs say. Am I alone on this thought?
-
Yeah, but do visitors really even look at what is in the URL? I personally don't care (from a shopper's point of view) what URLs say. Am I alone on this thought?
-
Hutch has the best answer here, it needs to be readable by the users. To add to what he said, it is also important to know that the dynamic URLs can and will be crawled, This can lead to errors, specifically overly dynamic URLs and 404 errors. It is good if you can keep them clean, but that is difficult. I prefer to use static URLs because I can control them and optimize my pages better.
-
Hi there,
Rand did write an article on this very topic a few years ago. While the content is a bit dated, it is still relevant. Take a look here:
http://moz.com/blog/dynamic-urls-vs-static-urls-the-best-practice-for-seo-is-still-clear
Hope this helps!
-
The question is not dynamic v. static, it should be what is most readable for your visitors. If you can simplify your urls for visitors then you should as it makes the experience better, which in turn is what Google wants websites to do.
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
-
How to fix Submitted URL marked ‘noindex’
Hi I recently discovered Google has stopped crawling/indexing my post.
Technical SEO | | Favplug
So i had to check my Search console then i saw this Coverage issues saying “Submitted URL marked ‘noindex’”. And anytime I tried Requesting Indexing For the affected pages, Its tells me “Indexing request rejected”. Here is my site URL: http://bit.ly/2kfqTEv Here is one of the affected pages http://bit.ly/39aMenJ0 -
Which URL is better?
Hi everyone, Could you please help me with picking out the right URL for my company's website? We are MoonCreate and we make beautiful clothes. Unfortunately, the domain mooncreate.com is not available and I have to choose between mooncreatebrand.com or mooncreatewear.com Which one is better, in your opinion? Look forward to receive your suggestions! Thank you! 🙂
Technical SEO | | kirupa0 -
Changing URLs for SEO
Hi, Currently we have a page, /business, but we have shifted our strategy to optimize for this page for the keyword "enterprise" instead of "business". The page authority of this page is 18 and our domain authority is 35. I've already updated content and title tags to more of an enterprise focus. Would it be wise to move the page to /enterprise and create a 301 redirect from /business to /enterprise? Or is this too risky from an SEO standpoint? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | mikekeeper0 -
Which URL would you choose?
1 – www.company.com/subfolder/subfolder/keyword-keyword-product (I’m able to keyword match with this url) or 2. www.company.com/subfolder/subfolder/product (no url keyword match) What would you choose? A url which is "short" but still relevant, or, a url which is more descriptive allowing “keyword” match? Be great to get your feedback guys. Many thanks Gary
Technical SEO | | GaryVictory0 -
Redirect URLS with 301 twice
Hello, I had asked my client to ask her web developer to move to a more simplified URL structure. There was a folder called "home" after the root which served no purpose. I asked for the URLs to be redirected using 301 to the new URLs which did not have this structure. However, the web developer didn't agree and decided to just rename the "home" folder "p". I don't know why he did this. We argued the case and he then created the URL structure we wanted. Initially he had 301 redirected the old URLS (the one with "Home") to his new version (the one with the "p"). When we asked for the more simplified URL after arguing, he just redirected all the "p" URLS to the PAGE NOT FOUND. However, remember, all the original URLs are now being redirected to the PAGE NOT FOUND as a result. The problems I see are these unless he redirects again: The new simplified URLS have to start from scratch to rank 2)We have duplicated content - two URLs with the same content Customers clicking products in the SERPs will currently find that they are being redirect to the 404 page. I understand that redirection has to occur but my questions are these: Is it ok to redirect twice with 301 - so old URL to the "p" version then to final simplified version. Will link juice be lost doing this twice? If he redirects from the original URLS to the final version missing out the "p" version, what should happen to the "p" version - they are currently indexed. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks
Technical SEO | | AL123al0 -
What directory should a site go in (url structure)?
Hi All, The is the first actual SEO campaign i've worked on and I had a few question about where the site should live on the server and url structure. The site is in WP and we're using Yoast SEO. Anyway the site lives in a a folder called Coastal, which is a child of the WWW folder. So the permalink of the homepage is mcoastalwindows.com/coastal/. The URL is mycoastalwindows.com. The thing is I can still get to the homepage or any of the pages on the site by typing in the /coastal/. Another example is permalink mycoastalwndows.com/coastal/siding/ and url mycoastalwindows.com/siding/. The urls always display without the /coastal/, so I'm not too worried about people linking to them, but Yoast puts a canonical element to the permalink and always includes the /coastal/. Also I'm seeing that Google displays a lot of the urls with the /coastal/, which is an issue seeing as we don't link to the pages that way. My original thought was to solve this at the source and just move everything out of the coastal directory, but the developer swears that it's more secure being in another folder especially with WP. What would you all do and what is best practice? Would you move everything out of the coastal folder, 301 re-direct, do something with. htaccess, or another solution? Appreciate the input thanks!
Technical SEO | | Mario.Souza0 -
Mobile URLs in the desktop SERPs
Our real estate website URL is listed on desktop search as well as the mobile URL. I've read several blogposts on this subject but I still don't understand the fix for this. I've read to use rel=canonical tags. But does that stop Google from listing it in the desktop SERP? Is there a way to stop this without blocking the mobile site which is what our programmer wants to do? Or is this something we have to live with until Google fixes this issue?
Technical SEO | | MassMedia0 -
Canonical URL Issue
Hi Everyone, I'm fairly new here and I've been browsing around for a good answer for an issue that is driving me nuts here. I tried to put the canonical url for my website and on the first 5 or 6 pages I added the following script SEOMoz reported that there was a problem with it. I spoke to another friend and he said that it looks like it's right and there is nothing wrong but still I get the same error. For the URL http://www.cacaniqueis.com.br/video-caca-niqueis.html I used the following: <link rel="<a class="attribute-value">canonical</a>" href="http://www.cacaniqueis.com.br/video-caca-niqueis.html" /> Is there anything wrong with it? Many thanks in advance for the attention to my question.. 🙂 Alex
Technical SEO | | influxmedia0