Problem of printer friendly version.
-
For one of our client's side, most of the backlinks are going to printer friendly version page. I recommeded to him to use the canonical tag on printer friendly version pointing to other page.
Luckily, while searching i came across this posts at - http://www.seomoz.org/q/solving-printer-friendly-version
The solution recommended was this -
<link type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" media="print" href="our-print-version.css">
My questions are -
1. what should i write in place of our-print-version.css
Should it be print.css ?
2. Where do i place this code ? in which file ?
-
Correct.
Often a site will refer to numerous CSS files. There are tools which will combine multiple CSS files into a single file and properly compress the files to optimize them for page speed.
-
Thanks once again for clarification.
The only question is whether changes need to be made to optimize the code from a SEO or Page Speed perspective.
You mean to say, css code must reside in an external file and linked from page to minimise code.
-
Do i need to 301 printer friendly page ?
No. Your site's visitors need to access the printer friendly page. If you add a 301, then no one will be able to view the print friendly page.
I should also clarify, if your site currently offers a print friendly page and it works, then your programmer has already taken care of the issue from a website functionality perspective. The only question is whether changes need to be made to optimize the code from a SEO or Page Speed perspective.
-
"It would need to be accessible and declared on the printer friendly version page"
That' what i was looking for. I will ask designer to declare this file in printer friendly version page. So, the solutution will be -
We place this code in printer friendly version page -
<link type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" media="print" href="print.css">
print.css will have the css code for print format pages. and print.css will be a separate file
Do i need to 301 printer friendly page ?
-
How the CSS is presented is up to your web designer. It could be a part of the site's main css, or in a separate file. It would need to be accessible and declared on the printer friendly version page.
As part of speed optimizations, all CSS files may be condensed into a single file.
-
Thanks a lot Ryan.
CSS declarations are made in the of your HTML document
i was not sure, that's why i asked this. Should this declaration be made in printer friendly version page ?
-
Hi Atul.
I looked at the Q&A response link you offered. I will try to offer some clarifications:
Where do i place this code ? in which file ?
CSS declarations are made in the of your HTML document
what should i write in place of our-print-version.css
The name of the file which contains the css code for your print format pages
For one of our client's side, most of the backlinks are going to printer friendly version page. I recommended to him to use the canonical tag on printer friendly version pointing to other page.
Your recommendation is sound, and I agree with it.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
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
-
Category text not present in mobile version
Hey guys! I am looking into a site that has multiple category pages. These have descriptions that include relevant KWs. However, the text appears only on the desktop version, not on mobile. If I inspect the page, I still see the text's html tags. The site has been indexed by the smartphone google bot. Is there a chance the text's KWs are being detected by Google? I would think adding the text is the ideal route, but I´d like to see what you think. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Reprise0 -
Ranking for combined version of keyword but not separated version
Hi All, My site is currently ranking on page 1 for the term "golfholidays" but is ranking at the bottom of page 3 for the term I am targeting and have optimised for, which is "golf holidays". Does anyone have any experience with the combined keyword ranking above the singular version? Nowhere on my page doesn't it mention the term "golfholidays" and backlinks to my site mostly use the anchor "golf holdiays" Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Andy94120 -
Our homepage url has been 301'd to the new https version - as our MD wanted us to have the secure protocol
Hello Mozers I'm just checking whether it is good practice to 301 the main homepage url to its https version. Will this have any detrimental effect on ranking and DA?
Technical SEO | | Catherine_Selectaglaze0 -
Sizes and numbers in friendly urls - syntax
Ok, I'm trying to establish some business rules of syntax for SEO friendly URLS. I'm doing this for an OpenCart online store which uses a SEO-url field to construct the "friendly URL's". The good news of that is I have total control over the urls' the bad news is I had to do some tricky Excel work to populate them. That all said, I have a problem with items that have sizes. This is a crafts store so many of the items are differentiated by size. Examples: Sleigh Bells, come in 1/2", 3/4", 1", 1 1/2" etc. So far Ive tried to stay away from inch mark " by spelling it out. Right now its inch but could be in. The numbers, fractions, sizes etc. create some ghastly friendly URL's. Is there any wisdom or syntax standards out there that would help me. I'm trying to avoid this: www.mysite.com//index.php?route=craft-accessories/bells/sleigh-bells/sleigh-bells-1-one-half-inch-with-loop I realize that the category (sleigh-bells) is repeated in the product name but there are several 1 1/2" items in the store. Any thoughts would be useful, even if it's links to good SEO sites that have mastered the myriad of issues with dimensions in the urls. thanks
Technical SEO | | jbcul0 -
Has anyone had problems with google webmaster tools verified sites
Hi, i have just been into google webmaster tools and i have noticed that five of my websites are no longer verified. i have tried putting the code back into the head and also i have tried verifying it through google analaystics but nothing is working can anyone let me know what has happened and if anyone has noticed this regards
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-1848860 -
Best way to get SEO friendly URLSs on huge old website
Hi folks Hope someone may be able to help wit this conundrum: A client site runs on old tech (IIS6) and has circa 300,000 pages indexed in Google. Most pages are dynamic with a horrible URL structure such as http://www.domain.com/search/results.aspx?ida=19191&idb=56&idc=2888 and I have been trying to implement rewrites + redirects to get clean URLs and remove some of the duplication that exists, using the IIRF Isapi filter: http://iirf.codeplex.com/ I manage to get a large sample of URLS re-writing and redirecting (on a staging version of the site), but the site then slows to crawl. To imple,ent all URLs woudl be 10x the volume of config. I am starting to wonder if there is a better way: Upgrade to Win 2008 / IIS 7 and use the better URL rewrite functionality included? Rebuild the site entirely (preferably on PHP with a decent URL structure) Accept that the URLS can't be made friendly on a site this size and focus on other aspects Persevere with the IIRF filter config, and hope that the config loads into memory and the site runs at a reasonable speed when live None of the options are great as they either involve lots of work/cost of they involve keeping a site which performs well but could do so much better, with poor URLs. Any thoughts from the great minds in the SEOmoz community appreciated! Cheers Simon
Technical SEO | | SCL-SEO1 -
How to publish duplicate content legitimately without Panda problems
Let's imagine that you own a successful website that publishes a lot of syndicated news articles and syndicated columnists. Your visitors love these articles and columns but the search engines see them as duplicate content. You worry about being viewed as a "content farm" because of this duplicate content and getting the Panda penalty. So, you decide to continue publishing the content and use... <meta name="robots" content="noindex, follow"> This allows you do display the content for your visitors but it should stop the search engines from indexing any pages with this code. It should also allow robots to spider the pages and pass link value through them. I have two questions..... If you use "noindex" will that be enough to prevent your site from being considered as a content farm? Is there a better way to continue publication of syndicated content but protect the site from duplicate content problems?
Technical SEO | | EGOL0 -
Is there a way I can track Arabic keywords on the Arabic version of Google Qatar using SEOMOZ Rank checker?
I have a Qatari website in Arabic and I would like to know if it is possible to track the Arabic keywords using google.com.qa in Arabic using SEOMoz rank checker. When selecting the three search engines, I have no choice over the language. Only the country can be modified. Any solution?
Technical SEO | | mrlee1