Infinite Scrolling vs. Pagination on an eCommerce Site
-
My company is looking at replacing our ecommerce site's paginated browsing with a Javascript infinite scroll function for when customers view internal search results--and possibly when they browse product categories also. Because our internal linking structure isn't very robust, I'm concerned that removing the pagination will make it harder to get the individual product pages to rank in the SERPs.
We have over 5,000 products, and most of them are internally linked to from the browsing results pages in the category structure: e.g. Blue Widgets, Widgets Under $250, etc.
I'm not too worried about removing pagination from the internal search results pages, but I'm concerned that doing the same for these category pages will result in de-linking the thousands of product pages that show up later in the browsing results and therefore won't be crawlable as internal links by the Googlebot.
Does anyone have any ideas on what to do here? I'm already arguing against the infinite scroll, but we're a fairly design-driven company and any ammunition or alternatives would really help.
For example, would serving a different page to the Googlebot in this case be a dangerous form of cloaking? (If the only difference is the presence of the pagination links.) Or is there any way to make rel=next and rel=prev tags work with infinite scrolling?
-
Hi Guys,
I was going to post a separate question here., but this thread seems to have answer the questions very well.
My client has infinite scrolling on his product pages but also have rel="prev" and rel="next" (but no actual physical page 1, page 2, page 3) buttons. I was just reading the rel="prev" and rel="next" should be in the in this case anyway. Does this mean we don't need actual buttons?
I am confirming the date this was put on, as I can't see any reduction in pages indexed which is one of the concerns above.
Regards
Neil
-
Thanks for your replies everyone.
We weren't sure if Google would look at JS removing the page navigation as cloaking or not, so that's still a bit of a concern. We were reading Rand's post from 2008 on the subject http://www.seomoz.org/blog/white-hat-cloaking-it-exists-its-permitted-its-useful and Matt Cutts' replies on the subject. We know it was a few years ago, but he still seemed to be saying to be over-cautious with that kind of thing.
Should we be worried about cloaking if we use JS to "hide" the page nav?
-
The correct way to handle this (and quite frankly, any javascript functionality) is to build it to work without javascript (keep the pagination), then have the javascript remove the pagination and implement infinite scrolling. This ensures that visitors with JS disabled get the full experience of the site, search engines can easily crawl your full catalog, and users with JS enabled get the "enhanced" experience you desire from a UX standpoint.
It's not an "either or" scenario. You can absolutely have an easily indexed site that extensively uses JS.
-
You should have both. Keep the paged navigation at top, but keep the infinite scroll. Now you have the best of both worlds.
Although, I don't think the infinite scroll would end up 'delinking' thousands of pages. How often do you see store.com/category/page/6 in results, anyway? If it's a popular term, it's going to be for the main category landing page.
Serving up different content to Google is always a bad idea unless you have a good reason. This problem doesn't qualify.
-
Its a bit technical but you can go through this https://developers.google.com/webmasters/ajax-crawling/ to make sure the dynamic page that you generate is actually indexable by Google.
That said 5000+ products infinite scroll is a bit scary and I would look at using rel=next and rel=prev for the pagination ( http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com.au/2011/09/pagination-with-relnext-and-relprev.html )
I am not too sure what you mean by " internally linked to from the browsing results pages in the category structure: e.g. Blue Widgets, Widgets Under $250, etc. "
If you are referring to ability for users to sort through those products by picking one of the options like Blue Widgets, Widgets Under $250, etc. I would suggest rel canonical those pages to the base page . This should get you started http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=139394
-
you are coprrect, this will lead to de-indexing of your pages, unless your scroll page has every product on it at load, but this would mean a slow page for users. I assume that you are going to get pages on scroll via ajax or somthing on demand.
You would need to have to have other pages that link to the products.
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
-
Should I Redirect Pagination?
Working on a redirect map for a client moving platforms and they have all of their category pagination indexed - no canonical link and no rel next/prev's on any of them. Should I redirect the pagination pages to the main category page on the new platform? Or Should I allow the pagination to de-index itself type of thing? Thoughts and experience?
Web Design | | paul-bold0 -
Having a second homepage for a site would affect my SEO?
Hello guys, One of our clients is planning to have a new landing page for any users hitting the site for the first time. (returning users will still see the current homepage based on cookies ... in other words, the site would technically have 2 home pages). According to this client, they are planning to do something like this: https://www.websitename.com/ (for returning visitors) https://www.websitename.com/newuser (for first time visitors) Our instinct is that is not great to have 2 home pages (that would affect the SEO campaign we are managing for this company) and we are not sure how to handle this. That's why we would appreciate your opinion regarding this topic: From an SEO perspective, do you think this is a good idea? If not, what would you guys do differentiate first-time visitors vs returning visitors without affecting SEO? Maybe just a pop-up? Thanks in advance for your help !
Web Design | | Robertnweil10 -
URLs appear in Google Webmaster Tools that I can't find on my own site?!?
Hi, I have a Magento e-commerce site (clothing) and when I had a look through some of the sections in Google Webmaster Tools I found URLs that I can't find on my site. For example, a product url maybe http://www.example.co.uk/product-url/ which is fine. In that product there maybe three sizes of the product (Small, Medium, Large) and for some reason Googlebot is sometimes finding a url like: http://www.example.co.uk/product-url/1202/ has been found and when clicked on is a live url (Status code: 200) with is one of the sizes (medium). However I have ran a site crawl in Screaming Frog and other crawl tests and can't seem to find where Googlebot is finding these URLs. I think I need to: 1. Find how Googlebot is finding these urls? 2. Find out how to keep out of index (e.g. robots.txt, canonical etc.... Any help would be much appreciated and I'm happy to share the URL with members if they think they can have a look and help with this problem. I can share specific URLs which might make the issue seem clearer, let me know? Thanks, Darrell
Web Design | | clickyleap0 -
I need help with international SEO for two sites?
I'll try to keep this clear... I am working with an company based in Germany, they own company.com/de and company.com/en, and that's how they are currently structuring their domains. They also own companyusa.com that they really want to show up in USA only. They want to keep company.com/en for England/english speaking Europe and company.com/de for their German audience in Germany. They are wanting us to optimize/SEO for companyusa.com, and they want that URL to show up as the top google search in the USA for their "company" keyword. What is showing up now is www.company.com/en 1st in Google because it's been around longer and it has more domain authority. What is the best practice for us optimize companyusa.com so that it is the top dog in the USA while not messing up the other domains? Should we merge? Subfolders all around? Thanks for all the input.
Web Design | | Rocket.Fuel0 -
What's the best way to structure original vs aggregated content
We're working on a news site that has a mix of news wires such as Reuters and original opinion articles. Currently the site is setup with /world /sports etc categories with the news wire content. Now we want to add the original opinion content. Would it be better to start a new top /Opinion category and then have sub-categories for each Opinion/world, Opinion/sports subject? Or would it be better to simply add an opinion sub-category under the existing news categories, ie /world/opinion? I know Google requests that original content be in a separate directory to be considered for inclusion in Google news. Which would be better for that? Regarding link building, if the opinion sub-categories were under the top news categories, would the link juice be passed more directly than if we had a separate Opinion top category?
Web Design | | ScottDavis0 -
Image Maps vs. Normal Images
Hey Mozzer's, quick question: Does anyone out there have any opinions / research on whether the use of image maps is an effective way of linking to other pages on a site as opposed to using seperate images? Does Google read alternate text from an image map in the same way as a regular image?
Web Design | | MarkLoud0 -
Crawl Budget vs Canonical
Got a debate raging here and I figured I'd ask for opinions. We have our websites structured as site/category/product This is fine for URL keywords, etc. We also use this for breadcrumbs. The problem is that we have multiple categories into which a category fits. So "product" could also be at site/cat1/product
Web Design | | Highland
site/cat2/product
site/cat3/product Obviously this produces duplicate content. There's no reason why it couldn't live under 1 URL but it would take some time and effort to do so (time we don't necessarily have). As such, we're applying the canonical band-aid and calling it good. My problem is that I think this will still kill our crawl budget (this is not an insignificant number of pages we're talking about). In some cases the duplicate pages are bloating a site by 500%. So what say you all? Do we just simply do canonical and call it good or do we need to take into account the crawl budget and actually remove the duplicate pages. Or am I totally off base and canonical solves the crawl budget issue as well?0 -
Wordpress vs. mvc framework
What's the benefits of choosing an mvc framework such as codeigniter or cakephp over wordpress? Wordpress has so many plugins, and a universally known UI for customers, it just saves a ton of time. However, a lot of the 'big guys' like SEOmoz and Distilled(?) use Cakephp and other mvc frameworks so it has me wondering what the benefits are...... anyone?
Web Design | | DonnieCooper2