I am optimizing website for making it SEO friendly. There are certain controls which need to have Viewstate. So, I cannot completely disable it.
There are 2 ways through which I can achieve this.
- Moving Viewstate data to bottom of the page.
- Disable Viewstate only for crawlers.
Somewhere I had read that, changing contents for crawlers and normal user can affect SEO ranking. But not too much sure about the statement as this is going to affect ultimately a hidden field.
Moving Viewstate to bottom seems to take more resources then disabling the Viewstate for crawlers.
Please suggest what will be the best approach or any other option that I am missing.
I had a similiar question and ended up combining approaches so the ViewState is moved to the bottom only when the requesting agent is a crawler. My question was closed because SEO is off topic for StackOverflow, but it might be helpful to read over it if you'd like to try this aproach:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16328172/dealing-with-an-imperfect-viewstate-best-practices-move-to-the-bottom-disab
Best,
Stephen
Related
I have a few problems i could use some input on.
I have a website, where all the content is loaded with ajax, it works quite well. There are a few issues with that approach though, or some UX issues.
User cannot copy URL from loaded content, since it will allways show the default URL only.
SEO will take a hit, since it cannot be crawled, the sitemap is like 2 pages only, even though when a normal user browses, they will see alot more.
Browser history, back and forward, does not work. Hitting the back button goes to the main page.
Now, i have searched and read alot.
Google has a hack, that seems to allow the site to be crawled, IF you use # in your url, does not work with empty url, which leads me to...
Manipulating the browser history with pushState/popState.
Now, i have tried getting it to work, but i just cant get my head around which process is the best way to take. Should i redo all my ajax?
Right now i have 2 div boxes, and i switch between them with loaded content, to get that nice sweet transition between pages. My frontpage is basically just 2 empty divs, nothing else. It works, but i get the feeling it is a pretty bad way to do it, thoughts?
If anyone know some good guides, feel free to give me, i have as i said read alot, but i might have missed some golden ones out there.
Google does execute some Javascript when indexing and ranking pages. However, text which is not immediately visible to users is demoted when establishing content relevancy.
Manipulating the browser history with pushState/popState.
It is very unlikely Google will trust your content if you need to use those tricks. And content which is not trusted is not ranked.
UPDATE: Manipulating browser history with pushState is ok.
Moreover, if your URLs change all the time, Google won't appreciate it, unless you manage to set canonical links.
We have web applications elgifto.com, roadbrake.com in which we used AJAX at many places, especially to update major portions of a page. All the important functionality of elgifto.com was implemented using AJAX. Now we realize a few issues due to AJAX implementation.
All the content implemented using
AJAX is not available to the SEO
bots and it is hurting the page rank
of our site.
Users will not be able to bookmark
some of the pages as they are always
available through AJAX.
When we want to direct the user from
one page through an anchor link to
another page having AJAX, we find it
difficult.
So now we are thinking of removing AJAX for these pages and use it only for small functionality such as something similar to marking a question as favorite in SO. So before going ahead and removing, we want to know expert's opinion on this. Thanks.
The problem is not "AJAX" per se, but your implementation of it. Just as a for instance, you can fix the 'bookmark' problem like google maps does it: provide a generated link for each state of your webapp.
SEO can befixed by supplying various of these state-links to the crawlers, either organically trough links in your site, or by supplying a list (sitemap).
If you implement 2, you can fix 1 and 3 with those links.
In the end you must figure out if the effort is worth it, and if you are not overusing AJAX ofcourse, but the statements you've made are not set in stone at all.
I'm costantly developing ajax based websites, with no problems for SEO at all. You just have to use it in the best possible way.
For example, I have a website with normal links pointing to normal webpages (PHP pages), this for normal navigation if a user doesn't have JS enabled. But if a user has JS enabled, a script will change the links behavior, only fetching the content of the page needed.
This way you still have phisycal separated webpages with all their content, which will be indexed as normal.
I'm looking for real world experiences in regards to ajaxcrawling:
http://code.google.com/web/ajaxcrawling/index.html
I'm particularly concerned about the infamous Gizmodo failure of late, I know I can find them via Google now, but it's not clear to me how effective this method of ajaxcrawling is in comparison to serverside generated sites is.
I would like to make a wiki that lives mostly on the client side, and which is populated by ajax json. It just feels more fluid, and I think it would be a pluspoint over my competition. (wikipedia, wikimedia)
Obviously, for a wiki it's incredibly important to have working SEO.
I would be very happy for any experiences you have had dealing with clientside development.
My research shows that the general consensus on the web right now is, that you should absolutely avoid doing ajax sites unless you don't care about SEO (for example, a portfolio site, a corporate site etc).
Well, these SEO problems arise when you have a single page that loads content dynamically based on sophisticated client-side behavior. Spiders aren't always smart enough to know when JavaScript is being injected, so if they can't follow links to get to your content, most of them won't understand what's going on in a predictable way, and thus won't be able to fullly index your site.
If you could have the option of unique URLs that lead to static content, even if they all route back to a single page by a URL rewriting scheme, that could solve the problem. Also, it will yield huge benefits down the road when you've got a lot of traffic -- the whole page can be cached at the web server/proxy level, leading to less load on your servers.
Hope that helps.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 12 years ago.
My friend and I are building a website together, and he is insistent that page refreshes are a thing of the past and that we should build the whole website in AJAX. His only reason why page refreshes are 'annoying' is that they are too slow.
However, the page is running fine without AJAX currently and when I click from page to page, it seems instantaneous to me. It doesn't seem that it would benefit from additional speed, but he just says I'm being stubborn.
I do want to use AJAX for certain features and pages within the site. I feel like I understand the pros and cons. He references that gmail is made in AJAX, but the url changes as I go into different mailboxes, so I don't think it is 100% AJAX.
I reference wikipedia, which is actually much more similar to our site, as an example of a highly succesful website which doesn't seem to NEED AJAX. But he says that's just one example, and that I am fixated on on wikipedia.
Some personal rant:
1. When I tell him that AJAX is great, but that most of the internet will still require page refreshes and page links, he thinks I'm crazy.
2. When I tell him that using AJAX when not needed will make the back-button useless, he tells me that I'm obsessed with the back button.
3. I think AJAX is something that can be added later to make functionality smoother on certain features, but that it is OK to build the core of the website without it for now.
What is your opinion on the matter? When is ajax really needed in a website?
Thanks
No, Ajax is not necessary for a website to be great. But it can improve usability if used correctly and not overused.
A site built entirely with Ajax and non-functional with JavaScript disabled is a nightmare. No navigation back/forward. No bookmarking. Not to mention its effects for SEO, that is the site will be invisible to search engines.
The golden rule: build the site in classic fashion then add little elements of Ajax to improve usability now and then.
For certain advanced functions it might be okay to be only available as Ajax, but try to make sure the most of the site is at least accessible in read mode when JavaScript is disabled. StackOverflow is a great example of that approach.
My rule of thumb is - what are you building: a website or a web application?
if its a website, content should just NOT be loaded via ajax. It breaks many assumptions that the end users have about the website. Other problems:
1. SEO
2. back button breaks
3. more work to do on your side to make the website UI consistent
4. placing relevant ads will be more complicated
An excellent example is wikipedia.
If its a webapp, then ajax can really help:
1. you can design better user interaction
2. the user will actually expect the app to behave like a rich app, and not like a website.
3. you can dramatically increase the responsiveness of the app using ajax.
I hope that helps.
Of course, AJAX is not necessary to build a great website. It can, however, improve the user experience in certain situations. It is necessary to carefully study and understand your requirements, the structure of your site, and the navigation your users will undertake.
One important thing to consider, however, is bookmarks. Using AJAX extensively makes it extremely difficult to be able to simply bookmark a certain spot or "state" of your website.
Sorry to not post on topic, but I agree with the answers other posted (AJAX in great if not used too much.) It also DEPENDS on the website, if it's more like a web app where you don't need SEO and bookmarks (like gmail) you can go with full ajax (try GWT), if it's content rich- go with just a little AJAX.
But what I wanted to underline is the relation with your friend: you have to be careful when you start a big website with somebody else. If your fight is too big for such a detail you'll have much more problems later.
Get a website that supports a lot of connections, see how they do things and you might understand where and when ajax is used. Start looking at StackOverflow for instance.
This entire site is serving 16 million
pages a month and we are doing it off
of 2 servers, which are almost
completely unloaded. The Microsoft
stack is a pretty good stack.
Joel Spolsky, StackOverflow.com
Form validation using Ajax is the way to go.
I hate clicking "Submit" only to have the page return in a few seconds saying my password is not strong enough or that user ID is already in use. It should be instantaneous while I'm filling in the fields!
As far as StackOverflow, I think it's great how when I click on "Show additional comments", I see the spinner and then they immediately appear. When I change the sort on the answers by "newest" say, I hate how the page refreshes.
I don't think you need Ajax for a site to be great. That said, more sites that are great make use of Ajax. Good RIAs are awesome.
I dont see a lot of ajax on Digg, ArsTechnica, LifeHacker, and the such. Those are all (subjectively) pretty good sites.
No, you don't need it. It just needs to perform well for what your intended audience needs.
Yeah I think you do need it, having to submit pages is so pre-millenium.
More seriously, if you are presenting data, I really think it improves the user experience if asynchronous calls to server are used and the returned data displayed without the need for a complete page refresh.
I remember the first time I saw it used (years back) I was extremely impressed, awed even.
Anyone got example of dynamic, data driven websites that look great and don't use ajax ?
AJAX is not an absolute NEED for a website application. It does not necessary mean that your page will be faster. A lot more things determine page speed, such as:
client side minifying (css and js)
image compression and sprites
server location
and much, much more
Of course, applying AJAX in some strategic point of your website will be where you will most benefit from it. Use it where there is likely to be a lot of activity from your users. I personally always make my website without any http requests handling at first, and then implement the rest by adding AJAX where there is the much concern.
I think your friend is being a bit too concerned about AJAX. Like everything in life, it always tastes better with moderation.
One potential downside of AJAX, when misused, is that content can't be bookmarked.
Try and follow the rule of thumb, that the user should be able to link to content by copying the URL from the address bar. There are several ways to achieve this, with traditional page loads being one.
AJAX is not a must for any website. But if your website has voting, save as favorite, or add to cart, etc ajax will definitely add value.
i am planing to start a full ajax site project, and i was wondering about SEO.
The site will have urls like www.mysite.gr/#/category1 etc
Can Google crawl the site.
Is something that i have to noticed about full ajax and SEO
Any reading suggestions are welcome
Thanks
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/768233/do-hashes-in-urls-affect-seo
You might want to read about so called progressive enhancement.
Google supports indexing of AJAX sites, but unfortunately it involves extra work for the developer. See http://code.google.com/web/ajaxcrawling/docs/getting-started.html
I don't think Google is capable of doing so (yet)
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/10/proposal-for-making-ajax-crawlable.html
However you can of course make your site usable with or without JavaScript. That way, browsers will have the full candy stuff and Google (and text browsers) still can navigation your site.
In addition to SEO, you also need to think about usability standards here. A site that is that reliant on AJAX isn't going to work for things like screen-readers as well as spiders. You need a system for graceful degreadation. A website that can't function without JavaScript isn't really a functioning website.
The search engines will spider the initial page load - what happens to the page (with ajax) after that is irrelevant to listings.
Google itself doesn't crawl ajax content but advice a mechanism for it. For this you first need to change # to #!
Whole process to SEO AJAX content is explained here along with simple asp.net code to start working on it.
Imagine having to hit the “refresh” button in your browser to update your Twitter feed rather than just hitting the button on the page itself and having it instantly update? These are the types of problems that AJAX solves, although it does come with its pitfalls. Google might claim it’s able to crawl and parse AJAX websites, yet it’s risky to just take its word for it and leave your website’s organic traffic up to chance. Even though Google can usually index dynamic AJAX content, it’s not always that simple. This guide covers some of the things that can go wrong and how you can make sure your AJAX website is crawlable: https://prerender.io/ajax-seo/