SEO file extension vs directory extension-less name?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • acctman
    Confirmed User
    • Oct 2003
    • 2840

    #1

    SEO file extension vs directory extension-less name?

    I've been doing some research and been reading mixed opinion on using MyFile.html .php etc. on a file rather than a rewrite /MyFile/. visually the directory extension-less looks better but the arguement has been Google may give more weight to an extension being that its more than likely human generated than a extension-less directory.

    Anything thoughts? i'm going to have both and use a rewrite
  • Klen
    • Aug 2006
    • 32234

    #2
    I asked same question on seo forum and they said it is completely irrelevant what is used since both is easily read by se bot.And it's probably true,since i saw bad url's having good rankings.

    Comment

    • Why
      MFBA
      • Mar 2003
      • 7230

      #3
      i really dont think it matters much.... i try to avoid extensions when possible, but thats because i use a LOT of mod_rewrite

      Comment

      • fris
        I have to go potty
        • Aug 2002
        • 55750

        #4
        modrewrite is your friend
        Since 1999: 69 Adult Industry awards for Best Hosting Company and professional excellence.


        Totally Free Templates

        Comment

        • Barry-xlovecam
          It's 42
          • Jun 2010
          • 18083

          #5
          Dynamic pages are the rule today rather than the exception (php, cgi, jsp, asp) and these pages are often forced to .htm .html or rewritten for so called SEO reasons so who's kidding who?

          If you said to me that "I make human friendly URLs with mod_rewrite" then the use of mod_rewrite would make sense.

          That "I can fool Google with mod_rewrite" is ludicrous -- just check your headers :P

          Comment

          Working...