IPB 3.0 Idea SEO Friendly Urls + Pips
#1
Posted 18 August 2006 - 09:35 AM
Also I would like to see pips for new sub-folder posts, like in http://www.getpaidforum.net for example.
#3
Posted 18 August 2006 - 10:19 AM
Edit: I think IPB 3.0 Should be revolution btw
#8
Posted 18 August 2006 - 04:53 PM
Invision Power Services, Inc. - Developer
My Stuff: My Forum · My Resources · My Tutorials
Contact Me: Email · Facebook · Twitter
#10
Posted 18 August 2006 - 05:30 PM
#11
Posted 20 August 2006 - 08:25 PM
Agreed.
#13
Posted 22 August 2006 - 07:45 AM
Chronicle, the desktop time tracker for activeCollab, Basecamp, etc - v1.1 coming soon!
IP.Board Mods also available: Ventrilo Server Status, Recent Topics in Selected Forums, Enhanced IPB XML-RPC Interface, Staff Posts in Colour, Blank Avatar Per Skin
Paid IPB mods: Fusion Menus - Easy global menus in IPB
#14
Posted 23 August 2006 - 01:27 PM
For the second suggestion, -1. That would annoy me to no end.
#15
Posted 24 August 2006 - 01:41 AM
I say keep it as a MOD.
I'm not sure I understand your logic here.
Wouldn't a mod wanted by almost every admin be something that SHOULD be worked into the base feature set? Do the majority of IPB admins NOT want their forums properly indexed by search engines?
I am a recent convert to IPB from Groupee (formerly UBB) using their hosted Eve forums. Prior to Groupee switching to search engine-friendly URLs my forums barely registered in the search engines beyond a few links from the forums' homepage. But shortly after Groupee converted to search engine-friendly URLs my forums shot to near the top of Google on several categories without ME changing a thing. Now, a few months after switching to IPB, I'm back to my forums being nearly-invisible again.
That being said, I am VERY happy that I made the switch to IPB due to MANY significant shortcomings in Groupee and its product development path (or lack thereof). My forums aren't particularly dependent on search engine traffic anyway.
But since I would IMAGINE that the GREAT MAJORITY of site admins WANT high search engine visibility for their websites AND simple website administration, working search engine-friendly URLs into the core IPB product seems like a good idea to me.
#16
Posted 25 August 2006 - 10:32 AM
#17
Posted 25 August 2006 - 06:33 PM
How?
If correctly implemented (as it was by Groupee), the new FURL links worked and the old links worked (part of the conversion process created the old URLs as aliases for their related new FURLs.).
What "structure" is jeopardy here?
More importantly, going forward shouldn't IPB be incorporating desired features into the base product? If so, is there a reason that MOST admins would not want their sites to be properly indexed by search engines? Is IPB marketing itself as the preferred option for sites that want to run in "stealth" mode on the Internet?
Mods can be wonderful things. But they aren't supported by IPB, so using them is inherently risky and can inject needless complexity into the site administration process.
But more to the point, FURLs would be a major advance for most board administrators and IPB, since FURLs significantly increase the search engine visibility of websites and IPB products.
To this day, Google has THOUSANDS more links to posts/threads from my old Groupee forums that had FURLs (no mod required), despite the fact that Groupee has been constantly accessing my IPB forums since May.
Admins should not have to mod a product to get the industry-standard search engine (Google) to properly index their sites.
#18
Posted 25 August 2006 - 09:34 PM
I'm sorry about the above confusing typo on my part. What I MEANT to say was...
"To this day, Google has THOUSANDS more links to posts/threads from my old Groupee forums that had FURLs (no mod required), despite the fact that Google has been constantly accessing/spidering my IPB forums since May."
I guess I can't shouldn't do three Yeager Bombs before posting anymore.
#20
Posted 25 August 2006 - 11:07 PM
Anyway, the deal with friendly URLs is this: not all servers can use them,
Incorrect.
Not all servers can handle the FURL mods.
But any web server can handle a FURL. In fact, it wouldn't be much of an Internet at all if Google and the other search engines could not easily index all the sites with FURLs.
A enhancement to IPB base(as opposed to a mod) would be a one-time conversion of all existing URLs to FURLs, as well as an aliasing of those existing URLS so that any old links (or links within forum postings, etc.)from other sites would still work. Obviously any new links would be created as FURLs only.
That would be the END of the process. No stand-alone, third-party mod to maintain or worry about. No headaches for the many IPB site admins who value simplicity in site administration.
I'm sure that there are many admins who like tweaks and mods. But if IPB surveyed their users, they would quickly learn that many MORE admins prefer simplicity, with the option to mod.
Since Internet search engine visibility is a powerful driver for GROWING a site and its related REVENUE, why would ANYBODY be resistant to moving FURLs to IPB's base product? Base should reflect core customer needs. Mods should address the variations from those core customer needs.
Also, just as an example, below are two Groupee threads (identical) discussing FURLs during the period when Groupee made their conversion to FURLs. Note that one is a FURL and one is an alias for the same thread:
Alias (not search engine friendly): http://community.gro...p;f=32010334563
FURL: http://community.gro...3/m/13410621763

Sign In
Register
Help




MultiQuote







