Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

IPB 3.0 Idea


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
45 replies to this topic

#21 ellawella

ellawella

    Spam Happy

  • Visitors
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 867 posts

Posted 25 August 2006 - 08:02 PM

QUOTE
Not all servers can handle the FURL mods.

But any web server can handle a FURL.

Technically, this is true. All servers, when configured somehow, can probably be eventually encouraged into handling FURLs. But it varies so much, there is little point in IPS providing this as a default option. If the server is Apache, mod_rewite will probably be an installed module (in all likelihood), but you can't know for sure. So IPB would have to figure out whether it was installed, then either enable the rewrites, or disable it, telling the (possibly bemused, inexperienced) user that it's not possible to rewrite.

Compatibility and behaviour may vary across Apache versions.

IIS, on the other hand, varies a lot more. I think IIS has no rewrite capability by default, so a 3rd party module would have to be installed.

These are the problems. This is why FURLs aren't included in IPB as standard. This is why IPB admins are free, at their discretion and provided their system supports it, to download a mod.
I am entirely superfluous.

#22 McQ

McQ

    IPB Newbie

  • Visitors
  • Pip
  • 28 posts

Posted 25 August 2006 - 09:30 PM

QUOTE(ellawella @ Aug 25 2006, 09:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Technically, this is true. All servers, when configured somehow, can probably be eventually encouraged into handling FURLs. But it varies so much, there is little point in IPS providing this as a default option. If the server is Apache, mod_rewite will probably be an installed module (in all likelihood), but you can't know for sure. So IPB would have to figure out whether it was installed, then either enable the rewrites, or disable it, telling the (possibly bemused, inexperienced) user that it's not possible to rewrite.

Compatibility and behaviour may vary across Apache versions.

IIS, on the other hand, varies a lot more. I think IIS has no rewrite capability by default, so a 3rd party module would have to be installed.

These are the problems. This is why FURLs aren't included in IPB as standard. This is why IPB admins are free, at their discretion and provided their system supports it, to download a mod.



You can't see the forest through all the trees.

Forget that any mod exists for FURLs, because they--and their limitations--have nothing to do with the feature request for FURLs.

This is a BASE CHANGE to IPB that would require a one-time conversion of existing URLS to FURLS. Any web server on the planet earth can handle FURLS. Nobody is asking Apache or IIS to rewrite anything.

This conversion would benefit almost EVERY IBP site SIGNIFICANTLY within one month in terms of search engine visibility. IPB could easily test this claim by mirroring THIS forum with an identical FURL-converted forum and then watching WHICH links rise to the top of the Google results.

#23 ellawella

ellawella

    Spam Happy

  • Visitors
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 867 posts

Posted 26 August 2006 - 08:55 AM

QUOTE(McQ @ Aug 26 2006, 03:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
You can't see the forest through all the trees.

Forget that any mod exists for FURLs, because they--and their limitations--have nothing to do with the feature request for FURLs.

This is a BASE CHANGE to IPB that would require a one-time conversion of existing URLS to FURLS. Any web server on the planet earth can handle FURLS. Nobody is asking Apache or IIS to rewrite anything.

This conversion would benefit almost EVERY IBP site SIGNIFICANTLY within one month in terms of search engine visibility. IPB could easily test this claim by mirroring THIS forum with an identical FURL-converted forum and then watching WHICH links rise to the top of the Google results.

If you can show me that IIS supports rewrites by default, and that rewrite implementations etc. don't vary across Apache versions, then I'll accept your point of view. But to the best of my knowlege, you are mistaken in assuming such wide compatibility.
I am entirely superfluous.

#24 Luke

Luke

    Too detail oriented

  • +Clients
  • 6,410 posts

Posted 27 August 2006 - 02:44 AM

The biggest problem with doing this is there are dozens of source files with redirects and custom links. Adding a mod_rewrite is easy, but the biggest issue is making all the links and redirects be used on the board as navigation (old links would still work since mod_rewrite translates them to the 'old' links anyway).

Doing something like this, the right way, would take a lot of effort. And even if it was included, it would be something optional. Right now, there are more important things to think about like improving existing features. If search engines couldn't read the boards at all, then it would be a more critical matter. But many search engines (Google, Yahoo, MSN, etc...) understand query string url's anyway. The real reason behind search friendly url's is (1) it looks nice, (2) it's easy to read. Right now I think you might be more interested in the operation/optimizations of the board rather than what the url looks like biggrin.gif

Don't know one way or another about this one... We'll just have to wait and see what Matt & Brandon have up their sleeves original.gif.
Luke

#25 =Charles

=Charles

    iCare

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,608 posts

Posted 27 August 2006 - 03:05 PM

SEO URLs +1

They can always be /index.php/test/ if mod_rewrite is not available.

#26 ellawella

ellawella

    Spam Happy

  • Visitors
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 867 posts

Posted 27 August 2006 - 05:31 PM

QUOTE(Aka Tolken @ Aug 27 2006, 09:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
SEO URLs +1

They can always be /index.php/test/ if mod_rewrite is not available.

Come to think of it, that was probably what McQ meant when he was going on about it. But again, as far as I can recall that requires another server-specific setting to be enabled. Plus virtually the entire of IPB would have to be altered so links were generated one way if FURLs were enabled, or another way if they weren't.

I still see this as a clear-cut modification option.
I am entirely superfluous.

#27 Jinghao

Jinghao

    IPB Newbie

  • Visitors
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 29 August 2006 - 06:45 PM

QUOTE(Aka Tolken @ Aug 27 2006, 01:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
SEO URLs +1

They can always be /index.php/test/ if mod_rewrite is not available.

Apache on windows servers? No way.

QUOTE(McQ @ Aug 25 2006, 11:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
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.

What you don't understand is that URL rewriting is not available on all servers. You keep saying they are, but you are completely wrong.

QUOTE(McQ @ Aug 25 2006, 07:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
You can't see the forest through all the trees.

Forget that any mod exists for FURLs, because they--and their limitations--have nothing to do with the feature request for FURLs.

This is a BASE CHANGE to IPB that would require a one-time conversion of existing URLS to FURLS. Any web server on the planet earth can handle FURLS. Nobody is asking Apache or IIS to rewrite anything.

This conversion would benefit almost EVERY IBP site SIGNIFICANTLY within one month in terms of search engine visibility. IPB could easily test this claim by mirroring THIS forum with an identical FURL-converted forum and then watching WHICH links rise to the top of the Google results.

You remind me of those people who keep arguing the same thing, using the same arguments, attacking the same arguments, with arguments that have already been proven false.

#28 McQ

McQ

    IPB Newbie

  • Visitors
  • Pip
  • 28 posts

Posted 31 August 2006 - 08:01 PM

QUOTE(Jinghao @ Aug 29 2006, 07:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
What you don't understand is that URL rewriting is not available on all servers. You keep saying they are, but you are completely wrong.


Let me break it down for you.

URLs are data--that's it. There is nothing magical about them.

Computer programs can systematically manipulate data.

Part of IPB's conversion to FURLs would be a program to systematically manipulate the URL data.

Get it?

No Apache required. No IIS required.

You guys keep talking about web servers and other stuff that has no bearing on a data conversion UNLESS the conversion is dependent on an existing mod.

EVERY current IPB board is using MySQL (or a commercial version of a SQL-based database). The conversion program (or SQL statements) might have to be tweaked for these variations, but that is about it.

DATA CONVERSION TIP: When you convert a large amount of data, do it via the database. Apache and IIS are not data conversion tools.

I'm done arguing in this thread. Hopefully somebody at IPB who understands the issue (and the technology) will do the test that I suggested in a prior post in this thread. Because the way companies stay ahead in a competitive business is by satisfying customer needs. So if most customers NEED FURLs, that need should not be met by an unsupported mod.

Now please excuse me while I get back to my job of converting tens-of-millions of rows (annually) of legacy data for the Philadelphia Police Dept.

McQ

fred.mcquiggan@phila.gov

#29 ellawella

ellawella

    Spam Happy

  • Visitors
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 867 posts

Posted 31 August 2006 - 10:20 PM

The only way to achieve what you're suggesting is to parse the incoming vars using $_SERVER['PATH_INFO'] as opposed to with $_GET, $_POST etc. within IPB's normal parse_incoming() function in /sources/ipsclass.php, then replace within the wrapper all URLs in the format of <boardurl>index.php?stuff=stuff&stuff=stuff with <boardurl>index.php/stuff/stuff/stuff/stuff using some kind of regex. But again, I don't think PATH_INFO is always available. I could be wrong. If it is, then I guess your suggestion is actually workable after all. But numerous staff members have dismissed it, so I assume PATH_INFO can't be relied on.
I am entirely superfluous.

#30 theslamforevryone

theslamforevryone

    IPB Newbie

  • Visitors
  • Pip
  • 20 posts

Posted 14 September 2006 - 02:21 PM

Uhh. Whats the big deal about having it default? Make it an option...thats all. Make it so that you can turn it ON...or OFF. Either one. Simple as that. That would solve all this bickering (ofcourse that would take some work, but if they made friendly url's hardcoded, they would plumet. I woudlnt be able to use it...I turn on mod_rewrite, and nothing works. So it would be loss of a sale from me...).

#31 Dan

Dan

    the same

  • +Clients
  • 4,293 posts

Posted 14 September 2006 - 02:44 PM

QUOTE(McQ @ Sep 1 2006, 02:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Let me break it down for you.

URLs are data--that's it. There is nothing magical about them.

Computer programs can systematically manipulate data.

Part of IPB's conversion to FURLs would be a program to systematically manipulate the URL data.

Get it?

No Apache required. No IIS required.

You guys keep talking about web servers and other stuff that has no bearing on a data conversion UNLESS the conversion is dependent on an existing mod.


With respect to exactly how this would be implemented, you appear to be missing the point. Of course IPB would be able to handle FURL's quite simply, and that would be manipulating data, and using the database as you describe. However, what is in question here is how you could create a friendly URL implementation that works across the major server software providers.

To create a URL such as mydomain.com/forums/My_Topic_Title_Here.html, you would need some sort of server software level rewriting, to allow your script to be called. Implementation of rewriting is massively different between the softwares and between the versions of each.

To create a URL such as mydomain.com/forums/index.php/My_Topic_Title_Here.html, your server software would need to provide PHP with the $_SERVER['PATH_INFO'] variable, to my knowledge, Apache is the only one that does this.

Of course, you could use URL's like mydomain.com/forums/index.php?My_Topic_Title_Here, or index.php?topic=My_Topic_Title_Here, but that's really not a lot more friendly than simply using query string URL's in the first place.

There really is no other way you could manipulate the URL used to access it via PHP alone. The server software in use does have a bearing on how this could work. Unless of course you're suggesting that all existing posts in the database be loaded, and cached to individual HTML files based on their topic title.

Of course, you don't have to take the word of me or any of the other web developers who posted here. Infact, I'd be beyond happy if you showed me up with a working, coded example of how to do this cross-platform, regardless of server software and configuration. thumbsup.gif

#32 Stuart Elliott

Stuart Elliott

    My 501st post was calling Matt a Cabbage Patch Kid

  • +Clients
  • 1,206 posts

Posted 14 September 2006 - 03:05 PM

QUOTE
Wouldn't a mod wanted by almost every admin be
..snip..

I think you're confusing your want, with everyone.. I sure as hell don't care whether my links look like numbers or words.
Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they're not all out to get you.

#33 ph_bradley

ph_bradley

    IPB Member

  • Visitors
  • PipPip
  • 57 posts

Posted 19 September 2006 - 11:00 AM

+1

IPB doing this would really impress me and secure my loyalty forever. I don't know a single admin who doesn't want better SERPS; anything IPB can do to provide that, should be done. I'd happily forego development of another AJAX feature, if they were to do a bit of SEO on their software. I don't want to be reinstalling mods every time there's an update

#34 BRamburn

BRamburn

    Advanced Member

  • +Clients
  • 331 posts

Posted 20 September 2006 - 12:26 AM

QUOTE(.Peter @ Aug 18 2006, 11:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I'd add a +1 to your first request, the problem is that they have to support windows users as well and aparently they don't have mod_rewrite...


you sure?

I am running xampp with php5 and mysql 4 and it does have mod_rewrite

Playing with a Nuclear Device
Posted Image


#35 ZuCruTrooper2

ZuCruTrooper2

    Advanced Member

  • Visitors
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 421 posts

Posted 20 September 2006 - 12:44 AM

I believe he's referring to users who run Internet Information Services, the Windows integrated webserver, along with users of other software that isn't Apache. Although Apache is the most popular http server, it certainly isn't the only one. There are a lot of users for IIS, Xitami, Lighttpd, and thttpd.
Jeeps are for Cheerleaders--Trail Rated rigs are built, not bought by daddy!

#36 ellawella

ellawella

    Spam Happy

  • Visitors
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 867 posts

Posted 20 September 2006 - 05:58 PM

Heaven forbid people actually bothering to read the thread before posting a response.
I am entirely superfluous.

#37 cooldude7273

cooldude7273

    IPB Customer

  • +Clients
  • 2,654 posts

Posted 20 September 2006 - 08:57 PM

QUOTE(Stuart Elliott @ Sep 14 2006, 04:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
..snip..

I think you're confusing your want, with everyone.. I sure as hell don't care whether my links look like numbers or words.


Agreed. original.gif I find the numbering system just fine. Search engines don't need it either, I can see all 137,000 results for my forums on Google just fine. thumbsup.gif

Need Hosting? LimitlessHosting.net | *My Blog!* |TheTechArea.com
This Post Copyright 2008 Cooldude7273 enterprise, all rights reserved.
Biggest Bot List For IPB EVER v5.0.5 Released! + more!


#38 mrkredo

mrkredo

    IPB Member

  • +Clients
  • 56 posts

Posted 20 September 2006 - 11:22 PM

QUOTE(theslamforevryone @ Sep 14 2006, 03:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Uhh. Whats the big deal about having it default? Make it an option...thats all. Make it so that you can turn it ON...or OFF. Either one. Simple as that. That would solve all this bickering (ofcourse that would take some work, but if they made friendly url's hardcoded, they would plumet. I woudlnt be able to use it...I turn on mod_rewrite, and nothing works. So it would be loss of a sale from me...).

Yes. Every blog engine has it as optional feature you can enable/ disable at anytime. FURL.. I don't think it is a good mod. You not able to see any friendly URL until you reach page 3 or 4. Vbulletin enabled that friendly URL feature year ago. All you need is mod_rewrite enabed. If you don't, you just use default URLs.

Give us some SEO URLS, IPB people! Please? innocent.gif

#39 Kyanar

Kyanar

    Let's say my yearly license expired in...

  • +Clients
  • 5,189 posts

Posted 21 September 2006 - 03:20 PM

QUOTE(Dan C @ Sep 15 2006, 07:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
...

To create a URL such as mydomain.com/forums/index.php/My_Topic_Title_Here.html, your server software would need to provide PHP with the $_SERVER['PATH_INFO'] variable, to my knowledge, Apache is the only one that does this.

...


For reference, Internet Information Services does this also, at least in the 6 series and higher - assuming you don't mind editing the Metabase. And by that, I mean with a Metabase editor tool. It's not an option in IIS Admin Console.
Mat / Fusion Digital Entertainment Limited
Our Website: http://www.fusiondigital.co.nz/
Our Forums: http://community.fusiondigital.co.nz/

Chronicle, the desktop time tracker for Windows • Fusion Menu, the leading navigation enhancement application for IP.Board • CommunityContact, the in development community newsletter application


#40 BRamburn

BRamburn

    Advanced Member

  • +Clients
  • 331 posts

Posted 30 June 2007 - 12:48 AM

QUOTE(.Peter @ Aug 18 2006, 11:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I'd add a +1 to your first request, the problem is that they have to support windows users as well and aparently they don't have mod_rewrite...

they do have mod_rewrite but it has some funny way of understanding regex

Playing with a Nuclear Device
Posted Image