Hi, When it comes to SEO nothing is as simple as it seams - but then again common sense will get you a long way. The main difference between a static and dynamic site is in regards to URLs, in a static site each and every page has a clear usually understandable url e.g.: www.website.com/index.html www.website.com/about.html www.website.com/contact.html In many dynamic sites there is only one "page", that then takes an argument to indicate exactly what content to provide - this might be considered as "one page" by the search-engines (only this page has multiple URLs pointing to it - and this reduces it's pagerank) e.g. www.website.com/index.php?id=100 www.website.com/index.php?id=101 Another important part is that in a well named URL (such as those that are static) the actual search term (e.g. contact) is actually in the URL itself and hence it gets a better rank. This is why the best CMS's use url-rewriting (e.g. Taesk CMS) so that the actual title of the content of the given page is put into the url for that particular URL - this helps in A: making sure each content-page has its own unique URL, and B: puts the actual words from the content into the URL to give it a higher rank in case of a search on those words. Finally always remember that search engine optimization is just that - optimization - in other words it only improve whats already is there. The best way to improve your website search-rank is to improve your website! i.e. by getting better copy-writing. n.b. : if someone insists on having a static website, then do not forget that you can almost always "render" a static version of any website (and you can automatically re-render a new version when something changes in the db) ;-) Regards Michael Pedersen PLUSPEOPLE Samuel Waithaka wrote:
Yea that was the question Chris. I agree indexing for canonical urls is much faster of which dynamic pages are not until 'rewritten'; so it makes no difference. In fact I have a question: can the search engine tell the difference between a dynamic and a static page; well I'm not talking about trying to fool Google because sooner or later... Or what would be any other argument?
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Chris Mwirigi<mwirigic@gmail.com> wrote:
in terms of SEO then static sites outdo dynamic sites due to the fact that the search engine bots crawl and index the individual html pages, i.e. body content. URL rewriting on dynamic sites levels the playing ground. ama that was not ur question?
On 8/6/09, Samuel Waithaka <samwaithaka@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi guys,
I had dismissed the idea that there is a serious web site that can be static; I was however told of an SEO expert who convinced a client that static (html period...) is the safe way to go; I'm not talking about rewrites... How concrete is this?
-- Samuel Waithaka http://www.brighterdayweb.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/waithaka http://twitter.com/samwaithaka http://www.brighterdayweb.com/seo-articles.xml _______________________________________________ Skunkworks mailing list Skunkworks@lists.my.co.ke http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/skunkworks Other services @ http://my.co.ke Other lists ------------- Announce: http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/skunkworks-announce Science: http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/science kazi: http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/admin/kazi/general
_______________________________________________ Skunkworks mailing list Skunkworks@lists.my.co.ke http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/skunkworks Other services @ http://my.co.ke Other lists ------------- Announce: http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/skunkworks-announce Science: http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/science kazi: http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/admin/kazi/general