Site architecture & breadcrumbs
-
Hi
A client hasn't structured site architecture in a silo type format so breadcrumbs are not predicating in a topical hierarchy as one would desire (or at least i think one would prefer)
For example: say the site is called www.fruit.com and it has a category called 'types of fruit' and then sub/content pages called things like 'apples' and 'pears'. So in terms of architecture that should be: www.fruit.com/types-of-fruit/apples and www.fruit.com/types-of-fruit/pears etc etc
The client has kept it all flat so instead architecture is: www.fruit.com/types-of-fruit and www.fruit.com/apples and www.fruit.com/pears
As a result breadcrumbs follow suit and hence since also not employing logical predication dont reflect the topical & sub-topical hierarchy
I have seen that some seo's at least used to think this was better for seo since kept the page/s nearer the root but surely its better to structure site architecture in a logical topical hierarchy so long as dont go beyond say 3 or 4 directories/forward slashes in the url's?
Also is it theoretically possible to keep url structure as is (flat) and just edit/customise the breadcrumbs to reflect a topical hierarchy in a silo structure rather than change the entire site architecture & required 301'ing etc in order to do this (or is that misleading or just not possible?)
Cheers
Dan
-
Hi Dan,
Well that will probably make it easier actually...
If you are using the Yoast plugin then it can produce breadrumbs which are pretty flexible and you can also manually add canonicals for individual pages. In that case I would think just set up the breadcrumbs as you like and if it makes sense choose a main category for any pages in multiple categories and canonical to the main one. Test to confirm, but I would think you might be able to do it without getting your hands into the code at all! The canonical tags themselves shouldn't effect the breadcrumbs in any way, so you should be good to go.
-
HI Lynn
In this particular case it is not actually although thats great info thanks very much for sharing, Everett is great i always refer to his posts/advice whenever i have an ecommerce project.
In this case my client i'm talking about is a music education establishment with many different courses and the site is in Wordpress, any ideas if possible to edit breadcrumbs in wordpress ?
Cheers
Dan
-
Hi Dan,
Just to confirm something that came to mind, is this for an ecom site with the potential to have products in multiple categories? If this is the case it is quite common to canonical the individual product pages to the root (or Everett Sizemore recommends to a standard /product/ or similar url which is also good for analytics filtering, check this video: http://moz.com/webinars/ecommerce-seo-fix-and-avoid-common-issues). If this is the case then depending on your cms it can be tricky to get the breadcrumbs to be created when people are directly hitting the single product page from a social share or other direct link.
It is possible though! I have had success with custom breadcrumb coding in Magento where if the single product page is directly accessed the breadcrumb will be created based on the products 'main category' and this has worked well in some situations. Again depends if you are talking ecommerce and which cms system you are using as to how tricky it will be.
-
Hi Jarno & Lynn,
Thank you both for taking the time to respond !
Yes i agree i think this logical structure is best since helps search engines AND the users better understand the content since its associated with other immediately related content too both in terms of semantic relationship & close architectural proximity. This is also reinforced by good internal linking provided by breadcrumbs (which do help contribute to rankings in part since contributes to setting relevance of the pages content and its context).
I think in the case of a single item of content needing to be in more than one folder then maybe in that kind of scenario its better to have the content page 'off the root' and canonicalised to avoid duplicate content issues from displaying it in the 2 different category folders it will also be displayed in. Then so long as you have breadcrumbs (which from Lynns comments looks like you can edit/customise for the 2 different paths) you still benefit from the logical hierarchy and internal linking beneficial for both users and engines.
Although i must confess since i'm not that technical i don't know this for a fact and welcome the view of others to clarify/confirm. So does having the canonicalised page off the root stop engines seeing the silo structure therby defeating the purpose of this suggested solution OR would they still see the other page instances & associate it with the path but just not penalise it for being duplicate (since the page 'off the root' is the canonical version) hence is a good solution ??
All Best
Dan
-
Hi Jarno & Lynn,
Thank you both for taking the time to respond !
Yes i agree i think this logical structure is best since helps search engines AND the users better understand the content since its associated with other immediately related content too both in terms of semantic relationship & close architectural proximity. This is also reinforced by good internal linking provided by breadcrumbs (which do help contribute to rankings in part since contributes to setting relevance of the pages content and its context).
I think in the case of a single item of content needing to be in more than one folder then maybe in that kind of scenario its better to have the content page 'off the root' and canonicalised to avoid duplicate content issues from displaying it in the 2 different category folders it will also be displayed in. Then so long as you have breadcrumbs (which from Lynns comments looks like you can edit/customise for the 2 different paths) you still benefit from the logical hierarchy and internal linking beneficial for both users and engines.
Although i must confess since i'm not that technical i don't know this for a fact and welcome the view of others to clarify/confirm. So does having the canonicalised page off the root stop engines seeing the silo structure therby defeating the purpose of this suggested solution OR would they still see the other page instances & associate it with the path but just not penalise it for being duplicate (since the page 'off the root' is the canonical version) hence is a good solution ??
All Best
Dan
-
Hi Dan,
I don't really think that the existence or lack of the category on the url is going to be a major problem for ranking as long as other factors are lining up. As Jarno says though, it has an effect on how human users view the url, influencing perhaps how they share it and there is also a data analysis issue where it might be nice to be able to filter by category name in analytics etc to get a more detailed overview by various categories separately.
Whether to change the url structure is up to you and depends on a number of factors including CMS used, man hours needed etc. Depending on the complexity, I would probably be inclined to do it if it helps make the urls more readable for humans. In regards your second question, it is certainly technically possible to make a custom breadcrumb trail. Whether it would have an effect on rankings or not is debatable, but again it would certainly help make the site more easily browsed for real people.
-
Dan,
i get what you are saying and as a matter of fact I'm currently involved in a test about this subject on a clients page. Putting files up as near to the root as possible and putting files in special folders and measuring the ranking capability and effectiveness of those pages.
However, for makeup of the URL I would prefer the folder version (domain/folder/file) since that looks more natural to me.
And there is always the fact of duplicate pages in that case. For instance, I've just written a plan for a new website in the netherlands. This website will enlist different kind of companies in different categories per province. So the same category gets to exist in the province Groningen but also in Drenthe.
Therefor I need to use: domainname/Groningen/Category/filename.
Do you feel that that's the best decision on this case? I will net you know about my test as soon as I see some results.
regards
Jarno
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Site Architecture & URL length
Hello SEO Folks, Wanting to have an expert advice on which one we should give preference. We understand a well put-together site architecture is one of the major factor ranking factor. In the other hand shorter URL also an important factor. Since our site aim to have many pages and destination wise product pages, in order to have shorter URL we avoid to follow the best site structure. in our site a product page do not have the right path to have right architecture, would it hurt our DA ? Thanks in advance John Adventure Emirates
Technical SEO | | Johnauh0 -
Badges & SEO
Hello, Moz Community! We're working on creating an affiliate badge for events that make our best-of list and we're wondering: if every event website embedded the badge (could be as many as 70), would having the same image hosting URL for each one raise concerns with Google? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | EveryActionHQ0 -
Can view pages of site, but Google & SEOmoz return 404
I can visit and view every page of a site (can also see source code), but Google, SEOmoz and others say anything other than home page is a 404 and Google won't index the sub-pages. I have check robots.txt and HTAccess and can't find anything wrong. Is this a DNS or server setting problem? Any ideas? Thanks, Fitz
Technical SEO | | FitzSWC0 -
Cross links between sites
hi, We have several ecommerce sites and we cross linked 3 of them by mistake. We realize that the sites were linked through WMT, We have shut down 2 of the sites about 2 months ago, but WMT still shows the links coming from those 2 sites. how do we make sure that google will see the sites are shut down. Is there a better of way resolving this issue. We are no longer using those sites, so do not need them to be active. whats the best solution to show google that the links are no longer there. Crawler shows that it was able to crawl the site 45 days after it is shut down. thanks nick
Technical SEO | | orion680 -
Configure a mobile site with WMT
Hello Everyone, I'm in a situation that I have no idea how to handle. I have only really dealt with RWD, and not a mobile-specific site. Anyway, I have a client who is launching an m.domian.com for their mobile site, how do I add/configure this in WMT? Thanks Zach
Technical SEO | | Zachary_Russell0 -
Site Crawl
I was wondering if there was a way to use SEOmoz's tool to quickly and easily find all the URLs on you site and not just the ones with errors. The site that I am working on does not have a site map. What I am trying to do is find all the URLs along with their titles and description tags. Thank you very much for your help
Technical SEO | | pakevin0 -
Site maintenance and crawling
Hey all, Rarely, but sometimes we require to take down our site for server maintenance, upgrades or various other system/network reasons. More often than not these downtimes are avoidable and we can redirect or eliminate the client side downtime. We have a 'down for maintenance - be back soon' page that is client facing. ANd outages are often no more than an hour tops. My question is, if the site is crawled by Bing/Google at the time of site being down, what is the best way of ensuring the indexed links are not refreshed with this maintenance content? (ie: this is what the pages look like now, so this is what the SE will index). I was thinking that add a no crawl to the robots.txt for the period of downtime and remove it once back up, but will this potentially affect results as well?
Technical SEO | | Daylan1 -
Google & Separators
This is not a question but something to share. If you click on all of these links and compare the results you will see why _ is not a good thing to have in your URLs. http://www.google.com/search?q=blue http://www.google.com/search?q=b.l.u.e http://www.google.com/search?q=b-l-u-e http://www.google.com/search?q=b_l_u_e http://www.google.com/search?q=b%20l%20u%20e If you have any other examples of working separators please comment.
Technical SEO | | Dan-Petrovic3