Register your domain name

Nick S · 19-03-2009, 04:29:12 PM

Hi,

Just wondering what peoples views are on whether absolute links or relative links are better for SEO.

Cheers

Nick

dtm · 19-03-2009, 04:37:24 PM

I would never write:
href="http://www.....co.uk/thispage.html" (Unless it was external of course)
always
href="./thispage.html"

Relative is usually the norm, search engines probably wouldn't care and would just strip off the absolute part, but it's more data, less efficient I suppose.

Systreg · 19-03-2009, 04:43:35 PM

I didn't know there was a difference, never heard the term absolute links or relative links before.

Internal and external links on my sites are always in the form of:

href="http://www.....co.uk/thispage.html"

I'm a creature of habit so always do it like that, same when I type a url in to my browser, I always type the www. before the domain name.

donreeco · 19-03-2009, 05:17:01 PM

I think relative links are generally classed as better practice - it certainly would make moving a website to a different domain easier.

Having said that someone from Google was reported to say, "absolute links have less potential for getting messed up [when Google indexes your page]. Even though it shouldn�t make a difference, I recommend absolute links"

dtm · 19-03-2009, 06:23:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by donreeco

Having said that someone from Google was reported to say, "absolute links have less potential for getting messed up [when Google indexes your page]. Even though it shouldn’t make a difference, I recommend absolute links"

I think this quote must be referring to people using bad syntax for relative links for example just using href="index.php" instead of href="./index.php"

PS. I think this should be moved to the 'Web Design Forum'

Nick S · 20-03-2009, 03:37:46 PM

Cheers, thanks for your comments.

tifosi · 20-03-2009, 04:02:09 PM

IMO absolute links should be for external links only.

For any project (read site as well) there should be a setting of the absolute_root (e.g /home/username), web_root (e.g /home/username/www), and optionally app_root.

using internal links is better practice - both absolute e.g /path/to/dir for 'relative' to web root (or //) and path/to/dir for relative. Windoze/apache have some quirks but relatively easy to workaround.

S

CJB · 24-03-2009, 09:00:43 PM

Using absolute links can help avoid canonicalisation issues and might also help you get a few links when other sites scrape your content so I guess they are better than relative links (at least from an SEO perspective).

19-03-2009, 04:29:12 PM	#1 (permalink)
Nick S Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Leeds Posts: 67 No Classified Ratings Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 5)	Absolute or Relative Hi, Just wondering what peoples views are on whether absolute links or relative links are better for SEO. Cheers Nick

19-03-2009, 04:37:24 PM	#2 (permalink)
dtm Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Cheshire / Warwickshire Posts: 768 No Classified Ratings Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 42)	I would never write: href="http://www.....co.uk/thispage.html" (Unless it was external of course) always href="./thispage.html" Relative is usually the norm, search engines probably wouldn't care and would just strip off the absolute part, but it's more data, less efficient I suppose. __________________ Club Classics - ASCII - YMN

19-03-2009, 04:43:35 PM	#3 (permalink)
Systreg Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: County Cork Republic of Ireland Posts: 3,906 No Classified Ratings Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 104)	I didn't know there was a difference, never heard the term absolute links or relative links before. Internal and external links on my sites are always in the form of: href="http://www.....co.uk/thispage.html" I'm a creature of habit so always do it like that, same when I type a url in to my browser, I always type the www. before the domain name. __________________ For Sale sat.co.uk - pda.co.uk

19-03-2009, 05:17:01 PM	#4 (permalink)
donreeco Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Leeds Posts: 135 No Classified Ratings Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 12)	I think relative links are generally classed as better practice - it certainly would make moving a website to a different domain easier. Having said that someone from Google was reported to say, "absolute links have less potential for getting messed up [when Google indexes your page]. Even though it shouldn�t make a difference, I recommend absolute links" __________________ sleeping bags

24-03-2009, 09:00:43 PM	#8 (permalink)
CJB Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 79 No Classified Ratings Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 6)	Absolute URLs Using absolute links can help avoid canonicalisation issues and might also help you get a few links when other sites scrape your content so I guess they are better than relative links (at least from an SEO perspective).

20-03-2009, 03:37:46 PM	#6 (permalink)
Nick S Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Leeds Posts: 67 No Classified Ratings Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 5)	Cheers, thanks for your comments.

20-03-2009, 04:02:09 PM	#7 (permalink)
tifosi Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Lancashire Posts: 1,792 No Classified Ratings Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 7)	IMO absolute links should be for external links only. For any project (read site as well) there should be a setting of the absolute_root (e.g /home/username), web_root (e.g /home/username/www), and optionally app_root. using internal links is better practice - both absolute e.g /path/to/dir for 'relative' to web root (or //) and path/to/dir for relative. Windoze/apache have some quirks but relatively easy to workaround. S

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Domain Name Community	Replies	Last Post
Relative merits of Mini-sites over parking	disruptive	Mini Sites	0	15-07-2008 09:59:47 AM
is this our very own Grandin?	disruptive	General Board	69	21-11-2006 12:51:14 AM