tedd schreef:
At 9:55 PM -0700 8/23/08, Prasad Chand wrote:
This is off-topic, but the reason I was touchy about includes was
because it could create seo problems.
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=31519
any takers on how the above link was found? lol
Bzzzzttt -- nope -- two different types of "includes".
indeed, there is an SEO issue with URLs google et al see as
being 'dynamic' i.e. with large numbers of params BUT
1. this is not at all black and white, and really unless your
fighting tooth and nail with well clued up SEO pirates for every
SERP hit ... your probably not going notice.
2. it's way above the OP's abilities ... good (& Honest[tm]) SEO is hard,
well at least if your in a cut-throat market like real-estate (JMHO).
3. the OP was using a form to post a request for a certain bit of content ...
I personally have never assumed that a search engine would go through a
form, they might do that (occasionally?), but I'd personally make sure
I'd have all pages I want indexed linked to via simple links and not hidden
behind forms.
The link above is discussing having data included the url and not php
includes. The advice/code that Jochem gave you was using php includes
which is a completely different critter.
I use php includes for all my sites and don't have any problem
whatsoever with SEO.
I think the SEO argument stems from the fact that different content
would seem to come from a single URL ... indeed not good for SEO, but
that comes down to shit design it's not a fault of php includes.
Cheers,
tedd
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
