SEO-friendly urls

Continuing the discussion from RFC: Allow uriSegment to be empty for default presets:

I just didn’t want to pollute that thread with SEO discussions, so let’s move it here.
A few thoughts:

  1. Argument 2) (ability to add dimensions to existing site without breaking links) is way more important than SEO, at least for me, so that alone should be enough.
  2. SEO-wise, urls work similar to other text signals like title: the longer the url, the less density of keywords you get. A lot of respectable sites tell the same story:
    “Keyword effectiveness in URLs decreases as URL length and keyword position increases” https://d1avok0lzls2w.cloudfront.net/img_uploads/anatomy-of-a-url.jpg
    "#11: Fewer folders is generally better" https://moz.com/blog/15-seo-best-practices-for-structuring-urls
  3. On websites with majority of website users coming from one country, language serment in url may seem a little surprising and weird.
  4. Customer may have formal requirements enforced by business

Hey Dmitri,

except for the last point, those arguments are not exactly objective and subject to change (i.e. 1. With clever redirects it could be achieved w/o breaking links, 2. significance of URLs seem to decrease with the browsers hiding parts of it, 3. you could also argue that a site with partly “un/localized URLs” might be confusing).

For me it boils down to the same reason why we made the “defaultUriSuffix” configurable: It is a matter of taste and (sometimes) requirements… So IMO no need to re-discuss this topic!?

2 Likes