 |
|
03-06-2006, 10:25 AM
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Inactive
Join Date: 03-06-06
Location: New York
Posts: 1
Latest Blog:
None
|
Problems with indexing dynamic content?
Sorry if this is a newbie question, but I couldn't find the answer from searching the forum.
I am thinking of building a site using postnuke. So, the content will be stored in a database and pulled up as needed. Do search engines have a problem with this dynamic content, or will it read the articles ok?
Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 10:47 AM
|
#2 (permalink)
|
|
Inactive
Join Date: 01-18-06
Posts: 139
|
As long as your URLs are all "clean" (i.e. no GET variables) and publicly visible you should have no problems.
|
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 10:58 AM
|
#3 (permalink)
|
|
Contributing Member
Join Date: 03-02-06
Location: floating on the C
Posts: 793
Latest Blog:
None
|
As far as you have link to dynamic page from anywhere it will get indexed.  Don't worry at all.Hmm link is important. |
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 11:03 AM
|
#4 (permalink)
|
|
Contributing Member
Join Date: 02-13-06
Posts: 278
|
I have to disagree with that.
If you look at queries crafted to return forum posts you'll see that google, yahoo, and msn index urls with get variables just fine.
A problem does occur when some engines encounter a session id in placed in in the url.
If you look at the top 100 of each engine for this query "car forum post reply"
You'll see that google and MSN allow session id's and that yahoo does not show any session ids in the top 100. Google allowing session id's in the url is a new thing that I had read about but hadn't verified until just now.
Here are links so you can check for yourself:
Google: car forum post reply
MSN: car forum post reply
Yahoo: car forum post reply |
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 11:21 AM
|
#5 (permalink)
|
|
Inactive
Join Date: 01-18-06
Posts: 139
|
Search engines do handle GET variables. However, Google ignores the variable "id". And it usually ignores anything past the first 3 variables.
Simply put, you can have get variables. But it's best not to. If you do have them, keep them to a minimum.
|
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 11:28 AM
|
#6 (permalink)
|
|
Contributing Member
Join Date: 02-13-06
Posts: 278
|
veridicus perhaps you should look at the link above to the google search results. Google doesn't ignore "id" anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 11:31 AM
|
#7 (permalink)
|
|
Individualist
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Japan, mostly
Posts: 42,521
|
I don't think they ever did. I remember 2 years ago or so there was a discussion of that at WMW and even then the allinurl:id search returned plenty of results. |
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 11:34 AM
|
#8 (permalink)
|
|
Contributing Member
Join Date: 02-13-06
Posts: 278
|
I don't go that far back with my own SEO ( as in I tested and verified stuff ) so I can't verify this but... discussion I have read on the topic elsewhere had people saying the an ID in the url dumped you into the supplemental.
I dunno.. thoughts ?
|
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 11:40 AM
|
#9 (permalink)
|
|
Individualist
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Japan, mostly
Posts: 42,521
|
Not sure about that.
Speaking of supplemental, v7n went supplemental a few days ago.
site:www.v7n.com v7n
Supposedly Google is looking into it, but I'm guessing it's not something they are going to fix. A lot of forums using vB went supplemental, and it may have more to do with dup content than URL's.
Oh well, looks like I might install that vbSEO hack after all. |
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 01:34 PM
|
#10 (permalink)
|
|
Inactive
Join Date: 01-18-06
Posts: 139
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JohnScott
A lot of forums using vB went supplemental, and it may have more to do with dup content than URL's.
|
Is it possible that most of the html on the page is common to vb sites while the real meat of the page is too small in proportion of the whole page's content? For example, on the main forum page I would imagine most of the layout html is common to other vb forums while the forum links are all that differentiate them. |
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 01:39 PM
|
#11 (permalink)
|
|
Contributing Member
Join Date: 02-13-06
Posts: 278
|
That wouldn't explain why a whole site gets dumped into the supplemental. Thread pages would still be signifigently different so they would get included with that hypothesis and googles near duplicate filter sucks and errors in the favor of inclusion.
|
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 09:18 PM
|
#13 (permalink)
|
|
Individualist
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Japan, mostly
Posts: 42,521
|
Thanks WP.  |
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 09:53 PM
|
#14 (permalink)
|
|
Banned
Join Date: 02-16-06
Posts: 9,607
Latest Blog:
None
|
probably a stupid question, but what's supplemental?
|
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 10:05 PM
|
#16 (permalink)
|
|
Banned
Join Date: 02-16-06
Posts: 9,607
Latest Blog:
None
|
um...
|
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 10:07 PM
|
#17 (permalink)
|
|
Individualist
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Japan, mostly
Posts: 42,521
|
Are you not seeing the Supplemental Tag?
Quote:
Webmaster Forum - Backdoor in 'Free PHP Directory Script' ?SevenSeek Web Directory - Advertise on v7n to the world you might be one person, but to one person you might be the world. Jazzee is online now ...
www.v7n.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13242 - 105k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 10:26 PM
|
#18 (permalink)
|
|
Banned
Join Date: 02-16-06
Posts: 9,607
Latest Blog:
None
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-06-2006, 10:38 PM
|
#19 (permalink)
|
|
Individualist
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Japan, mostly
Posts: 42,521
|
Odd! Very odd. Bastards at Google making me look silly.
|
|
