Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote:
> www.1-script.com wrote:
>
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> However, Google
>>> returns results with the '?from_rss' included. Should this be a
>>> cause for
>>> concern? Many news site use similar strategies, so can they be
>>> wrong?
>>
>> Yes, the PR dilution would be the one negative effect I can think of.
>> But the main question is: why don't you just alter your 'wp-rss2.php'
>> and 'wp-rss.php' so they do not add the '?from_rss' into your
>> <link>*</link> lines?
>
> I added them intentionally. I assumed that the question marks will
> have the URL's treated the same. In fact, they /should/ be treated in
> the same way.
No, since
foo?bar
foo?baz
can be two different pages.
> The BBC and others appear to have added an extra layer like /rss/
> which I assume has some Apache directive behind it. If it causes a
> loss or PR, I doubt they would do it, would they? Am I being moronic?
One way to solve it might be to 301 redirect the ?via_rss stuff. You
still get your access_log hit, *and* no PR "loss"
--
John Perl SEO tools: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
Experienced (web) developer: http://castleamber.com/
Get a SEO report of your site for just 100 USD:
http://johnbokma.com/websitedesign/seo-expert-help.html
|
|
