file naming convention

Is there a best way to write your filenames for your web pages on your site to help in search engines?

eg: web_design.html

 

always use dash(web-design.html), thats what they say, but i dont really have a solid evidence just resources in the net...sowee

 

I've always used: web-design.html

SEO wise, i was always under the impression - was better than _ Nothing to back that up with though.

 

fallen1 - beat me to it

 

Technically, file naming has always been best using web_design.html but for SEO it's web-design.html because Google, in particular, views web_design to be one word (webdesign) and web-design to be two words (web design).

 

As above ... I always hyphenate my file names ... also I try to keep them short and concise and try to build keyword combinations using directory structure as well as file name.

A good example was when I did the SEO for smartnav this is an example of combined naming conventions at work:

smartnav.co.uk/satellite-navigation/comparison.asp

I left the company I worked for a few years when I did this work before I get flamed for anything wrong with the site |

 

The use of keyword based filenames

This is a major topic that generates many discussions in the SEO circle. So, lets start by selecting a keyword (keyword phrase).

Keyword-Phrase

There are now different scenarios that can be used but I placed them in order that it appears to be important and this starts the discussion:

http://www.keyword-phrase.com/
http://www.keyword-phrase-website.com/
http://www.website-keyword-phrase.com/
http://keyword-phrase.website.com/
http://www.website.com/keyword-phrase.html
http://www.website.com/keyword-phrase/index.html
http://www.website.com/webdirectory/keyword-phrase.html
http://www.website.com/keyword-phrase/keyword-phrase.html (spam)

http://www.keyword_phrase_website.com/ (no value at all)


As a standard desing concept, I use the following but with solid SEO:

http://www.website.com/keyword-phrase.html​

http://www.website.com/keyword-phrase/index.html​

http://www.website.com/webdirectory/keyword-phrase.html​

The results work, clients are happy, the SE like it, so...

Hope this helps
Jim Catanich
Search Engine Optimization Dallas Texas ( TX )
http://www.catanich.com/

 

how about file types: .htm vs .html vs .php?

is php equal to html?

 

I would say it does not matter on the file extension. After all, PHP can be configured so that even .htm and .html are parsed for PHP commands.

Concerning dashes versus underscores, Matt Cuts claimed dashes were better.

 

you can use web-design.html or webdesign.html but i think webdesign.html is the best for google SEO.

 

for me static basic pages are the best for SEO google...

 

Hyphens is the best option for SEO, but i have used different formats for different situations.

e.g.

/keywordphrase.htm for filenames
/keyword-phrase/ for directories
/keyword_phrase.jpg for images

Everything in lower case.

I do it this way because it is easier to manage.

 

Fantastic, thanks for all the great advice.

 

There's almost no difference between a .php or a .html extension.

In fact, the .php probably even has a slight advantage because it creates a shorter URL by one character. Other than that, no difference.

 

OK, so it's spammy if you put www.keyword-phrase.com/keyword-phrase.html

but what about if you use like three different keyword phrases, like:

www .lawn-furniture.com/outside-patio/barbeque-stoves.html

is that good?

 

yes thats good, because that would be:

keyword-phrase1.com/keyword-phrase2/keyword-phrase3.html

what he means is repeating same keywords...

 

I'm sure you meant static URLs, with no parameters. Static pages means they never change, content-wise. Fresh content is a good thing, not a bad one.

-Michael

 

Surely the one character in the file extension makes no difference.

 

Well, since length of URL is a criterea used in the algorithem to determine index placement, technically, one character could make a difference. It would be such a small difference though, that it wouldn't matter.

The point is, .html is not better than .php.

 

What would possibly make you think that is true? Where the hell did you hear that? That is not even close to being factual, nor would it ever make sense for that to be the case.

-Michael