7 ms·

I went through your links to understand the SEO issue, and I am having a hard time finding more than one technical reason to make URLs friendlier. The only thi

by Xurinos 15y ago

I went through your links to understand the SEO issue, and I am having a hard time finding more than one technical reason to make URLs friendlier. The only thing that stood out to me was along the lines of including searchable keywords in your URL, so indeed, rather than just an ID, having the word "walkman" in Sony's URL would raise their URL score in the search engine. The rest was pure speculation on what "users" do with URLs -- aka some engineer's personal opinion on what's pretty. Can anybody provide links to usability studies regarding what users actually do with URLs? This would be of far more value than some company's personal standard, be it Google or someone else. My experience is unfortunately anecdotal, but all my users just bookmark or copy-paste whatever they see. They are more concerned that the site has good navigation than that they can alter the URL or type it in directly. They use a starting point and then move on from there. So I have a hard time believing statements in these documents like "users may remove a part of the URL, thinking it is not important". The one exception is that I have seen newer users type "www." before URLs that do not need it.

Arjuna 15y ago
(I am attempting to repond to both Xurinos and romaniv in a single reply here.) My clean URL example was just an example. I did not intend to infer that the world is primarily navigating via URL manipulation, but it came across that way. Rather, I meant that it can be a nice touch for usability, in certain cases. For example, power users are going to quickly notice, "Hey, I can find a vehicle by manipulating the URL by using the 'manufacturer_carmodel' pattern." Of course, the site would have normal search functionality, so that traditional users could locate vehicles in that manner as well. In the end, it is more about SEO, but with the clean URL paradigm, you get both (again, in some cases), so it can be a win-win. Also, the URLs look nice when they appear in search results (i.e., nice keyword-based URLs instead of URLs with query strings and IDs) which can lend itself to readability/usability. Of course, even with clean URLs, a case where it probably does not work is a blog (as noted by romaniv). For example, no one is going to manipulate a long URL string for a blog posting; they will simply navigate the site for the information. Although, here is a real-world example that I have encountered: I have come across multi-part blog postings via Google searches. In many cases, "Part X" displays in the search results, but not "Part 1." In these cases, it is always nice when these sites are designed with clean URLs, making it a breeze to simply copy the URL from the search results, and change the "X" to "1". Clearly, this is not easy (or possible) to do if the URL is a query string with an unintuitive article ID. Ultimately, I think that clean URLs are about SEO, but I think they can have a usability factor, again, in some cases and well, for "power users" at least. I probably should have said "power users" instead of "users" in my original post.

by Xurinos 15y ago

Arjuna 15y ago

(I am attempting to repond to both Xurinos and romaniv in a single reply here.) My clean URL example was just an example. I did not intend to infer that the world is primarily navigating via URL manipulation, but it came across that way. Rather, I meant that it can be a nice touch for usability, in certain cases. For example, power users are going to quickly notice, "Hey, I can find a vehicle by manipulating the URL by using the 'manufacturer_carmodel' pattern." Of course, the site would have normal search functionality, so that traditional users could locate vehicles in that manner as well. In the end, it is more about SEO, but with the clean URL paradigm, you get both (again, in some cases), so it can be a win-win. Also, the URLs look nice when they appear in search results (i.e., nice keyword-based URLs instead of URLs with query strings and IDs) which can lend itself to readability/usability. Of course, even with clean URLs, a case where it probably does not work is a blog (as noted by romaniv). For example, no one is going to manipulate a long URL string for a blog posting; they will simply navigate the site for the information. Although, here is a real-world example that I have encountered: I have come across multi-part blog postings via Google searches. In many cases, "Part X" displays in the search results, but not "Part 1." In these cases, it is always nice when these sites are designed with clean URLs, making it a breeze to simply copy the URL from the search results, and change the "X" to "1". Clearly, this is not easy (or possible) to do if the URL is a query string with an unintuitive article ID. Ultimately, I think that clean URLs are about SEO, but I think they can have a usability factor, again, in some cases and well, for "power users" at least. I probably should have said "power users" instead of "users" in my original post.