Rick rick-at-napalmriot.com |nyphp dev/internal group use| wrote:
inforequest wrote:
Rick rick-at-napalmriot.com |nyphp dev/internal group use| wrote:
It's the webserver that is configured to look for default-index
files, such as index.html, and not search engines. Search engines
only attempt to access valid resources, such as the "fake" resource
you mentioned (which is quite valid and not fake at all).
--
Rick
http://www.sensual.jp
(Top-posting requires top-posting... sorry Michael.)
Yes, technically correct -- it is the webserver. BUT, to the
traditional search engine, the URL defines the resource. Every unique
URL is potentially a unique resource, and ideally they are all tested
and included in the index if unique.
As webmaster, in the eyes of the indexing search spider, you have
defined your "site" by the URL structure you used to define the
resources, and not by the content (regardless of how that content is
served... by the web server or your PHP scripts). So it becomes
important to control the URL even more carefully than the content in
many cases.
This is now changing, as we move away from URL as defining name/label
(ajax, etc). If semantic web were more advanced, it might work, but
for now, it's a good thing we only have one search engine because its
behavior is slowly becoming less standardized and more customized
over time (that was sarcasm.... a little).
-=john andrews
John:
You are correct in saying that the URL defines the resource, and the
"permanence" (I use that loosely) is quite important really. The way
I translated the question was more or less along the lines of, "say I
have this resource, which looks like a folder, is it going to look for
an index.html file?"
In the case of my answer, no. The search engines are not going to try
to guess the default resource to go to in the event of something that
appears to be a folder. They merely go where they're told, and they
follow (usually) a number of rules along the way.
Recent comments suggest that Google does some figuring for "canonical"
urls, although it's not clear if they do it on a regular basis or only
when they have reasons to look closely. They have said they use clues to
help guide them, including how you set up internal links and how others
link to your resources.
Now then, as I understand it (please correct me if I'm wrong, John...
as I'm actually curious), if you move a resource to a new location,
you should provide the proper headers to do so (I believe 302 for
permanently moved, but I don't use it enough to know off the top of my
head), than most intelligent search engines are aware of the change.
Moving resources should be fairly painless, in that regard.
A 301 is used for a permanent redirect, and a 302 is supposed to be OK
for an internal redirect now although I still think Google screws up
interpretation of 302s too often. A 302 is a bad choice for a
cross-domain redirect, as it has been so widely abused in the past
search engines hesitate to trust them.
_______________________________________________
New York PHP Community Talk Mailing List
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
NYPHPCon 2006 Presentations Online
http://www.nyphpcon.com
Show Your Participation in New York PHP
http://www.nyphp.org/show_participation.php
