A more important SEO consideration than dashes/underscores (since search engines usually treat them the same) is duplicate content/ canonical content. Googlebot doesn't like being fed an infinite number of URLs that all point to the same content. Ideally, there should be logic that would send HTTP 200 for myschool.edu/students/study-tips and HTTP 404 for myschool.edu/alumni/study-tips - but that doesn't often happen. Or you could insert <link rel="canonical" href="/ students/study-tips" /> so Googlebot could index only the canonical URLs and not the bogus ones. But that isn't as good. -- Michael McGinnis
On Aug 26, 11:19 am, villas <villa...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Aug 26, 1:38 am, Kevin <extemporalgen...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I personally consider hybridized URLs like <http://myblog.com/articles/5/ > > net-neutrality-and-you> to be junk because there are two unique > > identifiers in the URL). > > Hi Kevin, > > Your post was interesting and I was curious about your strong view in > your comment above. > > I always thought this kind of URL was most useful for SEO. You can > correct misspelt slugs, and even improve slugs, without any previously > indexed URLs giving 404s. That's a huge benefit, isn't it? In any > case, in your URL example, I would say there's one identifier, the id. > The slug is redundant. > > Just wondering if I missed something... > Thanks, David
