I think a flat URL namespace would be slightly better in that it gives you complete flexibility over the URL. For example, you may have a parent page in radiant named 'topic1'. All child pages would then contain 'topic1' in the URL by default. If 'topic1' is not a keyword that the child pages are targeting, then it may "water down" the SEO value of keywords in the child pages' slugs.
Even so, I don't think the benefits are great enough to mandate a change in Radiant. I would agree that the current Radiant namespace is a slight disadvantage, but I don't think it's that important. Jay On 6/11/07, Oliver Baltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > dave4c03 wrote: > > You lose nothing but gain great benefit using a flat URL namespace in a > > radiant system. It is "having your cake and eating it too!" The benefit > > accrues because the namespace is not contaminated by the directory structure > > while at the same time radiant retains and allows the use of and for you to > > use the directory structure. > > Maybe someone can fill me in or point me to relevant documents. Why is a > "flat" URL namespace so much better for search engines than a > hierarchical? From an algorithmic point of view I don't seem to see the > difference except that a hierarchical space gives you the benefit of a > context, which certainly some spiders (should) use. > > Cheers, > Oliver > _______________________________________________ > Radiant mailing list > Post: [email protected] > Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ > Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant > _______________________________________________ Radiant mailing list Post: [email protected] Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
