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
-
Unsolved URL dynamic structure issue for new global site where I will redirect multiple well-working sites.
Dear all, We are working on a new platform called [https://www.piktalent.com](link url), were basically we aim to redirect many smaller sites we have with quite a lot of SEO traffic related to internships. Our previous sites are some like www.spain-internship.com, www.europe-internship.com and other similars we have (around 9). Our idea is to smoothly redirect a bit by a bit many of the sites to this new platform which is a custom made site in python and node, much more scalable and willing to develop app, etc etc etc...to become a bigger platform. For the new site, we decided to create 3 areas for the main content: piktalent.com/opportunities (all the vacancies) , piktalent.com/internships and piktalent.com/jobs so we can categorize the different types of pages and things we have and under opportunities we have all the vacancies. The problem comes with the site when we generate the diferent static landings and dynamic searches. We have static landing pages generated like www.piktalent.com/internships/madrid but dynamically it also generates www.piktalent.com/opportunities?search=madrid. Also, most of the searches will generate that type of urls, not following the structure of Domain name / type of vacancy/ city / name of the vacancy following the dynamic search structure. I have been thinking 2 potential solutions for this, either applying canonicals, or adding the suffix in webmasters as non index.... but... What do you think is the right approach for this? I am worried about potential duplicate content and conflicts between static content dynamic one. My CTO insists that the dynamic has to be like that but.... I am not 100% sure. Someone can provide input on this? Is there a way to block the dynamic urls generated? Someone with a similar experience? Regards,
Technical SEO | | Jose_jimenez0 -
2 sets of stats for same site
Somehow on OSE I managed to get two different sets of results appear for my page. The column on the left (PA 34) is for mysite.com/ and the second column is for www.mysite.com/ .Note that these are the same site. Why do i have two different sets of results ?(note some things are the same such as google +1 & FB likes)Im concerned ive done something wrong and could have a bigger beast with both sets of results merged together. Any help much appreciated. Chris QFNeGh7
Technical SEO | | cjkimber0 -
Do you think this site has been hit by penguin?
Hi Guys, I need some opinion on a website i am working on www.colourbnners.co.uk They updated their website in August but the company they used did not take into account the URL structure and hence there's a massive loss in links in August time. They also dropped off Google for all their key terms except their brand name 'colour banners'
Technical SEO | | gezzagregz
Since then, they have implemented a 301 redirect. Some key points They have not received any manual warnings in WMT I have disavowed some poor quality links that they have built over the years I am building high quality links quite selectively/slowly There were a lot of duplicate content issues - these have been resolved now.
So my question to you SEO pros is do you think its penguin? or something that i am missing?
If it is penguin, what is the best form of attack to get it removed? regards gezzagrez0 -
Site Launching, not SEO Ready
Hi, So, we have a site going up on Monday, that in many ways hasn't been gotten ready for search. The focus has been on functionality and UX rather than search, which is fair enough. As a result, I have a big list of things for the developer to complete after launch (like sorting out duplicate pages and adding titles that aren't "undefined" etc.). So, my question is whether it would be better to noindex the site until all the main things are sorted before essentially presenting search engines with the best version we can, or to have the site be indexed (duplicate pages and all) and sort these issues "live", as it were? Would either method be advisable over the other, or are there any other solutions? I just want to ensure we start ranking as well as possible as quickly as possible and don't know which way to go. Thanks so much!
Technical SEO | | LeahHutcheon0 -
Site verification in WMT
Hello all, I have a site and I want to set a preferred domain but when I do it says I need to verify my site but it gives me no ideas how to do that. I know that normally you have to do it when you set the account up but I had an analytics account for this domain first then just logged on with those details and I was in with no verification process. Cheers
Technical SEO | | jwdl0 -
Videos for SEO & Profits
Hello, I'm in the middle of developing a website that will be a tutorial site for SEO, http://universityofseo.com. My plan is to do video tutorials & blog posts to help entry-level SEOs and SMB Owners to help them become familiarized with SEO through quick and easy to watch videos. I eventually want to turn this into a revenue stream through advertisements. I want to know for both SEO and profit reasons, if I should host the videos on youtube and then embed them on my site, or do something like Bits on the Run / Whistia and put ads in the videos that way? I'm not overly obsessed with monetizing the site, but it would be nice to do it, but first and foremost i'm concerned with optimizing the site, having great and actionable content, then monetizing it. I'd appreciate any help on this matter, Zach
Technical SEO | | Zachary_Russell0 -
How to move a site slowly
I've got a site that I started back in 2001 (www.jaaroncaststone.com) to sell what I was making, concrete countertops and sinks. Well we're going to be discontinuing the concrete products in a month or so and want to start pointing all the links from the old site to a new one dedicated to a single product (www.jaaron-wood-countertops.com). I don't want to do a full 301 on the old site just yet but can I put a canonical tag on the index and about us pages pointing to the new site now so the search engines start looking that way or should I wait and do a full 301 when the day comes to pull the old site?
Technical SEO | | JAARON0 -
Delete old site but redirect domain to a new domain and site
I just have a quick query and I have a feeling about what the answer is so just wanted to see what you guys thought... Basically I am working on a client site. This client has a few other websites that are divisions of their company. However these divisions/websites are no longer used. They are wanting to delete the websites but redirect the domains to their name main website. They believe this will pass on SEO benefits as these old division sites are old and have a good PR and history. I'm unsure for DEFINITE, which way is correct?
Technical SEO | | Weerdboil0