Javascript
-
Hi mozzers,
For my website I use various affiliate programs on commission junction. Some of the text ads are in javascript. Will google read the text ads or not?
Cheers,
Peter
-
Again, great resources, Daniel. The first link provides some empirical evidence that ajax based links do get interpreted. SEOmofo had a nice recommendation that should stop google from indexing your JS if need be. He basically said put your JS in an external file that you disallow in robots.txt.
From your second link
The search appliance only executes scripts embedded inside a document. The search appliance does not support:
- DOM tracking to support calls, such as
document.getElementById
- External scripts execution
- AJAX execution
Not exactly sure what "AJAX execution" means. However, if it means downloading JSON or JS and evaluating it that makes sense. Perhaps not external JS gets executed by google?
The third link discusses the "agreement" you can make with a crawler if you have an ajax based site using hash bang urls. Not super relevant for me but good to know so thanks!
- DOM tracking to support calls, such as
-
Thanks very much for this. Can't wait to check these resources out.
-
Yeah let me point you to some resources on this:
http://www.seomoz.org/ugc/new-reality-google-follows-links-in-javascript-4930
Your best resource is from Google here:
To your question though, I do believe Google will execute external javascript files. Ajax stuff I'm not as sure about. They have a primer on this here:
<cite>code.google.com/web/ajaxcrawling/docs/learn-more.html</cite>
The 90% thing I recall from SMX advanced last year I believe. Basically people would try to hide internal links in javascript since using nofollow for pagerank sculpting was debunked by Matt Cutts in 2009. Turned out Google could see most links being created in javascript.
You can read up on that second link there in javascript crawling from Google and it goes into a lot of detail about what they can do, hope it helps.
-
Hey Daniel,
Would you mind diving into that statement a little more? I didn't realize that Google could execute 90% of javascript. Do you think they will load in external javascript files? Does google make ajax calls?
I only ask the questions b/c I have a web site who's home page that has too many links and too much HTML. I'd love to use javascript to do some progressive rendering and keep some links and additonal HTML out of the initial HTTP response sent back when someone requests a page on our site.
Thanks in advance!
Tait
-
very helpful thanks!
-
Google has said they can execute about 90% or so of all javascript at this point, so there is a good chance Google will be able to see these affiliate links, even if they are being done in javascript.
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
-
Dynamically Inserting Noindex With Javascript
Hello, I have a broken plugin creating hundreds of WP-Content directory pages being indexed by Google. I can not access the source code of these pages to add a noindex to them. The page URL's all have the plugin name within them. In order to resolve the issue, I wrote a solution with javascript to dynamically add in a noindex tag to any URL containing the plugin name. Would this noindex be respected by Google and is there a way to immediately check that it is respected? Currently, I can not delete the plugin due to issues with it's php. If you would like to view the code: https://codepen.io/trodrick/pen/Gwwaej?editors=0010 Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Tom3_150 -
My Homepage Won't Load if Javascript is Disabled. Is this an SEO/Indexation issue?
Hi everyone, I'm working with a client who recently had their site redesigned. I'm just going through to do an initial audit to make sure everything looks good. Part of my initial indexation audit goes through questions about how the site functions when you disable, javascript, cookies, and/or css. I use the Web Developer extension for Chrome to do this. I know, more recently, people have said that content loaded by Javascript will be indexed. I just want to make sure it's not hurting my clients SEO. http://americasinstantsigns.com/ Is it as simple as looking at Google's Cached URL? The URL is definitely being indexed and when looking at the text-only version everything appears to be in order. This may be an outdated question, but I just want to be sure! Thank you so much!
Technical SEO | | ccox10 -
Javascript redirects -- what are the SEO pitfalls?
Q: Is it dangerous (SEO fallout) to use javascript redirects? Tech team built a browser side tool for me to easily redirect old/broken links. This is essentially a glorified 400 page -- pops a quick message that the page requested no longer exists and that we're automatically sending you to a page that has the content you are looking. Tech team does not have the bandwidth to handle this via apache and this tool is what they came up with for me to deliver a better customer experience. Back story: very large site and I'm dealing with thousands of pages that could/should/need to be redirected. My issue is incredibly similar to what Rand mentioned way back in a post from 2009: Are 404 Pages Always Bad for SEO? We've also decided to let these pages 404 and monitor for anything that needs an apache redirect. Tool mentioned above was tech's idea to give me "the power" to manage redirects. What do you think?
Technical SEO | | FR1230 -
How valuable is content "hidden" behind a JavaScript dropdown really?
I've come across a method implemented by some SEO agencies to fill up pages with somehow relevant text and hide it behind a javascript dropdown. Does Google fall for such cheap tricks? You can see this method used on these pages for example (just scroll down to the bottom) - it's all in German, but you get the idea I guess: http://www.insider-boersenbrief.de/ http://www.deko-und-kerzenshop.de/ How is you experience with this way of adding content to a site? Do you think it is valuable or will it get penalised?
Technical SEO | | jfkorn0 -
Javascript usage
Hi Guys, I know that since a couple years Google can crawl and read better Javascript(JS), but JS can still harm your website especially in the navigational bar but I don't know how to identify it. Can Someone tell me how to identify in the source page when JS can harm your website?
Technical SEO | | Ideas-Money-Art0 -
Javascript late loaded content not read by Gogglebot
Hi, We have a page with some good "keyword" content (user supplied comment widget), but there was a design choice made previously to late load it via JavaScript. This was to improve performance and the overall functionality relies on JavaScript. Unfortunately since it is loaded via js, it isn't read by Googlebot so we get no SEO value. I've read Google doesn't weigh <noscript>content as much as regular content. is this true? Once option is just to load some of the content via <noscript> tags. I just want to make sure Google still reads this content.</p> <p>Another option is to load some of the content via simple html when loading the page. If JavaScript is enabled, we'd hide this "read only" version via css and display the more dynamic user friendly version. - Would changing display based on js enabled be deemed as cloaking? Since non-js users would see the same thing (and this provides a ways for them to see some of the functionality in the widget, it is an overall net gain for those users too).</p> <p>In the end, I want Google to read the content but trying to figure out the best way to do so.</p> <p>Thanks,</p> <p>Nic</p> <p> </p></noscript>
Technical SEO | | NicB10 -
Is use of javascript to simplify information architecture considered cloaking?
We are considering using javascript to format URLs to simplify the navigation of the googlebot through our site, whilst presenting a larger number of links for the user to ensure content is accessible and easy to navigate from all parts of the site. In other words, the user will see all internal links, but the search engine will see only those links that form our information hierarchy. We are therefore showing the search engine different content to the user only in so far as the search engine will have a more hierarchical information architecture by virture of the fact that there will be fewer links visible to the search engine to ensure that our content is well structured and discoverable. Would this be considered cloaking by google and would we be penalised?
Technical SEO | | JohnHillman0 -
How valuable or not is javascript linkback from a competitor?
A sector competitor has decided to link to me using the method[](javascript:OpenLink('http://www.example.com')) [It's a contextually rich page and the link is in the body surrounded by relevant text although not so high in the code](javascript:OpenLink('http://www.example.com')) [Moz Metrics of the page/domain linking to me are: PA 30 mR 2.67 mT4.61
Technical SEO | | PaulGaileyAlburquerque
21 links from 9 root domains
Root Domain DA 88 DmR 6.77 DmT 6.68 2.6m links from 24k domains Is the method of linking to me strictly from an SEO perspective: A. Positive
B. Neutral
C. Negative Thanks!](javascript:OpenLink('http://www.example.com'))0