<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>nthidea : blog : SEO - SEM - Marketing - Cool News &#187; Static URL</title>
	<atom:link href="http://nthidea.net/blog/tag/static-url/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://nthidea.net/blog</link>
	<description>Nth Idea Blog : Design SEO Marketing Internet Branding Search</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2010 18:23:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Google on Static vs Dynamic URLs</title>
		<link>http://nthidea.net/blog/seo/google-on-static-vs-dynamic-urls/</link>
		<comments>http://nthidea.net/blog/seo/google-on-static-vs-dynamic-urls/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 19:47:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>J0nyD</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SEO / Search Engine Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dynamic URL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Indexing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search Engine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Static URL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[URL]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nthidea.net/blog/?p=6</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The debate is over! At least for now&#8230; in a recent Google Webmaster blog post, the folks at Google talk about Google&#8217;s current state of indexing URLs. A few interesting points. 1. Google can, in fact read dynamic URLs, and if you believe this post wholly, probably better than you may have thought previously. 2. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The debate is over! At least for now&#8230; in a recent <a title="Google Webmaster Blog - Static vs Dynamic URLs" href="http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/09/dynamic-urls-vs-static-urls.html">Google Webmaster blog</a> post, the folks at Google talk about Google&#8217;s current state of indexing URLs.</p>
<p>A few interesting points.</p>
<p>1. Google can, in fact read dynamic URLs, and if you believe this post wholly, probably better than you may have thought previously.</p>
<p>2. Google says limiting to 3 parameters is unneccesary and maybe even harmful to indexing attempts. Personally, I think there may still be times this can be smart to do, but it seems like you probably have to think about it a bit more to get it right in some cases&#8230;</p>
<p>Google wants you to let the ENGINE decide what is important and what isn&#8217;t. Their actual recommendation is to NOT rewrite the URL. That&#8217;s great, so long as the engine knows whats on your mind for importance on a page&#8230; I&#8217;m still willing to bet a smart SEO is better off figuring this out himself and holding the engine&#8217;s hand still for a while longer&#8230;</p>
<p>Google did provide a few guidelines to think about:</p>
<blockquote>
<ol>
<li>It&#8217;s quite hard to correctly create and maintain rewrites that change dynamic URLs to static-looking URLs.</li>
<li>It&#8217;s much safer to serve us the original dynamic URL and let us handle the problem of detecting and avoiding problematic parameters.</li>
<li>If you want to rewrite your URL, please remove unnecessary parameters while maintaining a dynamic-looking URL.</li>
<li>If you want to serve a static URL instead of a dynamic URL you should create a static equivalent of your content.</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://nthidea.net/blog/seo/google-on-static-vs-dynamic-urls/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

