Search Engine Friendly URLs - Best SEO Links for Web Stores

Does your shopping cart produce long, difficult to read and remember, page names for your category and product pages? e.g.

http://www.mydomain.com/store/abilong.abc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=CX710

Are you concerned that your page names (URLs) contain no keywords? (If they don't, you should be.)

Are some of the methods suggested for creating people and search engine friendly URLs impractical for your shopping cart and/or store setup and so you are confused as to the next best method that you should use?

Worry no longer.

Below is a detailed list of types of search engine and people friendly URLs, ranked in order of effectiveness. The lower the number, the more effective the URL type (1. is best).

It is highly likely that the best method of linking and others close to the top ranked method, aren't available to you. If so, don't despair because:

• keywords in page names is only one of more than one hundred factors that search engines examine and
• whether you use e.g. the best method or the 4th best method, is going to make very little difference to your search engine rankings. Your objective should be to improve your "page names" (i.e. the URLs) so they are the best that you can get them. Don't worry if they aren't THE BEST.

For the purposes of the examples below, let's assume the following:

• Domain/store name: "mydomain.com"
• Product Name: the "Mazda 2010 CX7"
• Product Code: "cx710" (meaningless i.e. not a keyword) or "2010-mazda-cx-7" (meaningful i.e. comprised of keywords. In some stores, it is possible to make the product code the same as the product name).
• Category Name: Passenger Cars
• Category Code: "passenger" (meaningful i.e. a keyword) or "mpc10" (meaningless)
• Identifier (required for URL rewriting in the .htaccess file (Apache): "p" (the "p" indicates that it is a product)

Short Links Examples, Ranked by Effectiveness

1. http://mydomain.com/2010-mazda-cx-7.html.
   Best. This uses just the product code where the product code (i.e. 2010-mazda-cx-7) is the same as the product name, except with hyphens between the words. This results in the shortest URL and one where keywords are the densest. However product codes like this are fraught with difficulties in store admin and, in fact, impractical in the vast majority of stores with more than a couple of hundred products).
2. http://mydomain.com/2010-mazda-cx-7/p-cx710.html or:
   http://mydomain.com/2010-mazda-cx-7/p/cx710.html.
   This is the next best - i.e. where the product name is first, "p-" or "p/" is the .htaccess determiner that it is a product page redirection and this identifier is next and the (meaningless) product code is last in the string.
3. http://mydomain.com/p-cx710/2010-mazda-cx-7.html or:
   http://mydomain.com/p/cx710/2010-mazda-cx-7.html.
   Next best (meaningless product code and identifier are first in the URL and the product name last.)
4. http://mydomain.com/2010-mazda-cx-7/p-cx710/passenger.html or:
   http://mydomain.com/2010-mazda-cx-7/p/cx710/passenger.html.
   Next best (product name, then meaningless product code and identifier then meaningful category code). Why is this not as good as 2. even though it has a keyword (passenger) as the category code? Firstly, the URL is longer i.e. it contains more keywords and dilutes the effectiveness of the REAL keywords i.e. the product name and secondly, it is better to avoid category codes in links to products due to issues with duplicate pages (wasting internal PageRank). There are workarounds for the latter though.
5. http://mydomain.com/2010-mazda-cx-7/p-cx710/mpc10.html or:
   http://mydomain.com/2010-mazda-cx-7/p/cx710/mpc10.html.
   Next best (product name, then meaningless product code and identifier then meaningless category code). Why is this not as good as 2. even though it has a keyword (passenger) as the category code? Firstly, because the URL is longer i.e. it contains more keywords and dilutes the effectiveness of the REAL keywords i.e. the product name and secondly, it is better to avoid category codes in links to products due to issues with duplicate pages (wasting internal PageRank). There are workarounds for the latter though.
6. http://mydomain.com/passenger/2010-mazda-cx-7/p-cx710.html or:
   http://mydomain.com/passenger/2010-mazda-cx-7/p/cx710.html.
   Next best (meaningful category code, product name, then meaningless product code). Why is this worse than 5. when this URL has more keywords? Because the real keywords are the product name and this URL dilutes them plus moves them further away from the root (i.e. the domain name).
7. http://mydomain.com/mpc10/2010-mazda-cx-7/p-cx710.html or:
   http://mydomain.com/mpc10/2010-mazda-cx-7/p/cx710.html.
   Next best (meaningless category code, product name, then meaningless product code). Why isn't this as good as 6.? Because a meaningless word (mpc10) appears between the root and the product name thus diluting the keywords and their prominence (closeness to the URL root).
8. http://mydomain.com/cx710.html
   Next best (meaningless product code only). Why is this worse than many of the others above? From a search engine optimization perspective, this URL contains no keywords and is thus pretty much useless. However, from a human visitor's perspective, this URL probably beats No.s 2. - 7. because there is not much to remember and type. At times when search engines dial down the value of keywords in the URL, this URL would definitely be the second best choice. The problem is that for most of the time, one or other search engines do seem to give a reasonable "score" for a URL significantly matching the subject of the page so we wouldn't use this format, if one of the other formats above, were available.
9. http://mydomain.com/cx710/mpc10.html
   Next best (meaningless product code and meaningless category code). Two non keywords. Who wants to rank for those?

Notes about Page Names (URLs) and SEO for Web Stores

• Myth: A meaningless short URL (e.g. 8.) is better for SEO than a longer URL containing keywords which reflect the subject of the page e.g. 2. or 3. If you believe that, then be my guest. Our clients don't.
• Myth: for the identifier, it is better to use something like "p-" rather than "p/" because search engines prefer pages closest to the root (i.e. rather than pages in sub directories or sub sub directories etc. Search engines don't care (within reason i.e. as long as the page loads just as quickly) how far down in the sub directories a page is located. What they care about is how many clicks the page in question is from the home page. e.g. Assuming both of these URLs/links were listed on the home page: http://mydomain.com/p-cx710/2010-mazda-cx-7.html and http://mydomain.com/p/c/x/7/10/2010-mazda-cx-7.html, search engines would probably rank them equally (I say probably because I have exaggerated the situation, way past normal and haven't yet tested such an exaggerated URL). Search correctly regards slashes (/) as spacers, just like hyphens, plus signs (+) and underscores (not so much underscores, with all search engines. Underscores are regarded as word joiners (kind of like hyphens are word joiners in written English)).

The Internet is a growing, rapidly changing and dynamic market place. A successful web business requires application of the same fundamental business principles as a successful bricks and mortar business, however the techniques utilised, are different. And they are changing rapidly.

One solution is to employ the services of an expert web business consultant, who can help you make your site a winner.