Marc Slemko wrote:
> Except it would also require the changing of a whole bunch of other pages
> on the site to use the new form of URLs, and there are a good thousand or
> so other pages. I'm quite familiar with all the options, and for a lot of
> reasons, making all the older message pages into static HTML pages just
> isn't an option.
>
> As I said before, there is nothing technically stopping me from changing
> the URLs to not have a "?" in them without changing the underlying way
> they are generated. It is simply a very significant effort, and it is a
> bit archaic that there is no way to tell a search engine to include such
> pages.
Perhaps you've thought of this, but one way to ease the effort is to
either (a) support both "?" and ordinary forms of the URLs or (b) change
to ordinary forms but leave the "?" forms as redirects to the ordinary
URLs. Season to taste.
-- George
