Not to be antagonistic or anything, and I didn't attend the SEO meeting
(although I would have loved to, quite honestly...), but....

I have created and run two completely non-business-like websites for
completely selfish purposes.  Both sites contain a lot of dynamic content,
and they have horribly ugly URLs.

Both sites have successfully been spidered by google as well as other
big-name search engines (although I only really care about google).

This being said, both sites have URLs which can contain more than just one
or two $_GET variables.

I completely understand and agree with the "human" portion of this thread -
sites with ugly URLs being less appealing to humans - but, in my personal
experience, google couldn't care less how many variables are in the query
portion of the URL.  Am I missing something?

Does anyone else have any solid evidence that this is not the case?

For those who want to verify, the two sites are www.ldscompanion.org and
www.ilovemyjournal.com .

--Jason

On 8/29/07, justin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 8/29/07, Scott Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 8/29/07, justin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > yeah they did. unhtmlentified ampersands.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > So, for those of us who need it spelled out, there is no restriction on
> the
> > number of GET variables. The XHTML problem that he was having is, more
> than
> > likely, the unhtmlentified ampersands.  OK.  Got it.
> >
>
> right. sorry.
>
> since a single GET variable is encoded in the query "?var1=foo", and
> two would be written "?var1=foo&var2=bar", he would only see
> validation issues (i.e. an unhtmlentified '&') when he uses two GET
> variables.
>
> lonnie's right though. GET variables are generally bad for both humans
> and search engines, which basically covers the target audience for
> most websites.
>
> justin
> --
> http://justinhileman.com
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> UPHPU mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://uphpu.org/mailman/listinfo/uphpu
> IRC: #uphpu on irc.freenode.net
>

_______________________________________________

UPHPU mailing list
[email protected]
http://uphpu.org/mailman/listinfo/uphpu
IRC: #uphpu on irc.freenode.net

Reply via email to