How to handle Friendly URLs together with internal filters search?
-
I've been trying to handle URLs from a unfrendly folder format to a semantic one, the thing is by doing so I end up with a longer URL and therefore a longer Title.
Right now the format of my classified site for job seeking looks like this (folders):
format: Filter/Content where at the end q is the query people are writting
My suggestion is the following: Mixing Jobs with location, mixing category and level, and puting the rest of the filters at the end adding "--" between them. And adding 2 parameters, query (q) and pagination (pag)
Any thoughts on how to handle URLs over 100 chararcters and titles that go over 65?, or maybe is ok to have "friendly" long URLs and long titles when it comes to classified ad sites since they are based on internal filters to help people find what they are looking for.
Sidenote: Is itok to have 2 parameters in the URL (Query and Pagination)
Thanks a lot.
-
Not too big a problem to have slightly longer title. Just be aware that how they display in SERPs can affect CTR, which can affect rankings. You can use https://moz.com/blog/new-title-tag-guidelines-preview-tool to get a good view of that.
-
Hi Rand,
I'll send the format to the IT team, and start working with the redirections.
However, my only concern I have left is titles, as more filters are used the title will eventually go over the 65 mark, but I guess is something I have to live with it.
Thanks again Rand.
-
Hi JoaoCJ - In cases like these, I don't usually sweat the URL length too much. It is OK to go over a bit -- our recommendations come from correlation analysis and testing. Observing Google's rankings, it tends to be the case that pages with fewer parameters (like 0) tend to outperform pages with more, and that shorter URLs tend to outperform longer ones. That said, it's not a hard and fast rule, more a sloping line.
As far as the filters go, I might consider using rel=canonical unless you're sure you want those pages separately indexed. If that's the case (you DO want them indexed), perhaps consider using static URLS -- even something like a number in the URL could work, e.g. /123/. For the pagination, Google's also got the rel=prev/next tags that I'd suggest employing.
Wish you all the best!
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
-
Urls Too Long - Should I shorten?
On the crawl of our website we have had a warning that 157 have urls that are too long. When I look at the urls they are generally from 2016 or earlier. Should I just leave them as they are or shorten the urls and redirect to new url? Thanks
Technical SEO | | DaleZon4 -
URL or sitemap submit to search engines?
Hello, I have just updated content at some URL site links, and I also added new URL content. Should I submit URL or re-create a sitemap then submit it to search engines? And please advise me some tools for submit them?
Technical SEO | | JohnHuynh0 -
Why is an error page showing when searching our website using Google "site:" search function?
When I search our company website using the Google site search function "site:jwsuretybonds.com", a 400 Bad Request page is at the top of the listed pages. I had someone else at our company do the same site search and the 400 Bad Request did not appear. Is there a reason this is happening, and are there any ramifications to it?
Technical SEO | | TheDude0 -
Internal search : rel=canonical vs noindex vs robots.txt
Hi everyone, I have a website with a lot of internal search results pages indexed. I'm not asking if they should be indexed or not, I know they should not according to Google's guidelines. And they make a bunch of duplicated pages so I want to solve this problem. The thing is, if I noindex them, the site is gonna lose a non-negligible chunk of traffic : nearly 13% according to google analytics !!! I thought of blocking them in robots.txt. This solution would not keep them out of the index. But the pages appearing in GG SERPS would then look empty (no title, no description), thus their CTR would plummet and I would lose a bit of traffic too... The last idea I had was to use a rel=canonical tag pointing to the original search page (that is empty, without results), but it would probably have the same effect as noindexing them, wouldn't it ? (never tried so I'm not sure of this) Of course I did some research on the subject, but each of my finding recommanded one of the 3 methods only ! One even recommanded noindex+robots.txt block which is stupid because the noindex would then be useless... Is there somebody who can tell me which option is the best to keep this traffic ? Thanks a million
Technical SEO | | JohannCR0 -
Dynamic Parameters in URL
I have received lots of warnings because of long urls. Most of them are because my website has many Attributes to FILTER out products. And each time the user clicks on one, its added to the URL. pls see my site here: www.theprinterdepo.com The warning is here: Although search engines can crawl dynamic URLs, search engine representatives have warned against using over 2 parameters in any given URL. The question to the community is: -What should I do? These attributes really help the user to find easier the products. I could remove some of the attributes, I am not sure if my ecommerce solution (MAGENTO), allows to change the behavior of this so that this does not use querystring parameters.
Technical SEO | | levalencia10 -
Is Disqus SEO friendly?
I like the look of Disqus for handling comments but I'm not sure if it is really SEO friendly. Any other more SEO friendly alternatives out there (other than blogging software)?
Technical SEO | | andywozhere0 -
Trailing Slashes In Url use Canonical Url or 301 Redirect?
I was thinking of using 301 redirects for trailing slahes to no trailing slashes for my urls. EG: www.url.com/page1/ 301 redirect to www.url.com/page1 Already got a redirect for non-www to www already. Just wondering in my case would it be best to continue using htacces for the trailing slash redirect or just go with Canonical URLs?
Technical SEO | | upick-1623910 -
Directory URL structure last / in the url
Ok, So my site's urls works like this www.site.com/widgets/ If you go to www.site.com/widgets (without the last / ) you get a 404. My site did no used to require the last / to load the page but it has over the last year and my rankings have dropped on those pages... But Yahoo and BING still indexes all my pages without the last / and it some how still loads the page if you go to it from yahoo or bing, but it looks like this in the address bar once you arrive from bing or yahoo. http://www.site.com/404.asp?404;http://site.com:80/widgets/ How do I fix this? Should'nt all the engines see those pages the same way with the last / included? What is the best structure for SEO?
Technical SEO | | DavidS-2820610