High Rankings Search Engine Optimization ForumHigh Rankings Advisor Search Marketing Newsletter

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Important Announcement: ***Need an Affordable SEO Website Review?***
 
 Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Using Php Includes
Hazardpro
post Oct 1 2007, 01:26 PM
Post #1


HR 1
*

Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 25-February 07
User's local time:
Feb 9 2010, 07:59 PM
Member No.: 16,372
Hi all, is there any reason SEO wise why I shouldnt use PHP includes on my web pages?

Thanks

Doug
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
torka
post Oct 1 2007, 02:16 PM
Post #2


Vintage Babe
Group Icon

Group: Moderator
Posts: 4,142
Joined: 31-July 03
User's local time:
Feb 9 2010, 02:59 PM
From: Triangle area, NC, USA, Earth (usually)
Member No.: 89
None that I can think of.

--Torka (IMG:style_emoticons/default/mf_prop.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Darryl Payne
post Oct 1 2007, 03:30 PM
Post #3


HR 1
*

Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 22-May 07
User's local time:
Feb 9 2010, 03:59 PM
Member No.: 17,323
QUOTE(Hazardpro @ Oct 1 2007, 02:26 PM) *
Hi all, is there any reason SEO wise why I shouldnt use PHP includes on my web pages?

Thanks

Doug



Since PHP includes are resolved on the server side, the bots will never see them. They will be handed an html file, so you should be fine.

Darryl
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hazardpro
post Oct 1 2007, 05:10 PM
Post #4


HR 1
*

Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 25-February 07
User's local time:
Feb 9 2010, 07:59 PM
Member No.: 16,372
QUOTE(Darryl Payne @ Oct 1 2007, 08:30 PM) *
Since PHP includes are resolved on the server side, the bots will never see them. They will be handed an html file, so you should be fine.

Darryl

Thats great thanks.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jehochman
post Oct 1 2007, 10:38 PM
Post #5


Jonathan Hochman
Group Icon

Group: Moderator
Posts: 1,554
Joined: 27-November 05
User's local time:
Feb 9 2010, 03:59 PM
From: Connecticut - Land of Steady Habits
Member No.: 9,569
I'll go further. I love server side includes for SEO because they facility rapid website development, help reduce errors, and allow you to quickly add, remove and change links sitewide.

One of the fundamental rules of programming is "don't repeat yourself". That means you don't want to write the same chunk of code over and over again, such as the menus, headers, footers, and sidebars that appear on multiple, even all, pages on your site.

Anything that makes your website better can help SEO. Anything that makes website development easier will also tend to have a positive effect because you'll be able to spend more time on the good stuff, content, usability, and promotion, and less time hunting bugs and struggling with spaghetti code.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
maleman
post Oct 1 2007, 11:41 PM
Post #6


HR 6
******

Group: Active Members
Posts: 669
Joined: 9-October 04
User's local time:
Feb 9 2010, 04:59 PM
Member No.: 5,329
I'll go even one step further:

As jehochman allowed, includes can make short work out of a big project. Changing link menus across a site can be a lot of work and can be accomplished in short order via includes.

But...well written anchor text and img alt properties are staples of good SEO. IMHO, derived from first-hand experience, using the exact same link menu site-wide doesn't properly exploit the power of linking.

In other words, spend some time writing anchor text. Mix it up on different pages. If you have a huge site and must use includes for linking, don't use only one file for the menu.

Create several files for the menu. In the separate files, mix up the anchor text with unique phrasing that targets the keywords of the destination page.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vicplumb
post Nov 9 2007, 03:28 AM
Post #7


HR 2
**

Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 5-December 06
User's local time:
Feb 9 2010, 02:59 PM
Member No.: 15,404
Hello everyone,

Id like to take it a step back (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

What about PHP require ? It does basically the samething as includes but is there a different as far as the search engine are concerned?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MaKa
post Nov 9 2007, 03:40 AM
Post #8


HR 6
******

Group: Active Members
Posts: 848
Joined: 21-November 05
User's local time:
Feb 9 2010, 07:59 PM
From: Ogmore-by-Sea, Wales, UK
Member No.: 9,487
QUOTE(maleman @ Oct 2 2007, 04:41 AM) *
using the exact same link menu site-wide doesn't properly exploit the power of linking.


I don't necessarily agree with this. It could have numerous usability drawback where people get lost in your navigation. Site wide links are also thought to help with Google's site links tree structure for #1 positions.

QUOTE(vicplumb @ Nov 9 2007, 08:28 AM) *
What about PHP require ? It does basically the samething as includes but is there a different as far as the search engine are concerned?


No difference for SEs. The only difference is to what PHP does if it can't find the file. With an include a warning is displayed and processing is continued, with require processing is stopped and an error is generated.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lakshmi Narsimha...
post Nov 12 2007, 05:08 AM
Post #9


HR 3
***

Group: Active Members
Posts: 93
Joined: 13-December 06
User's local time:
Feb 9 2010, 02:59 PM
From: India
Member No.: 15,509
Great post! One more thing is, "that's the beauty of using global headers". I am happy as my pages are having more Code to Text ratio which means light pages for Search Engine Robots. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/thumbup1.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jill
post Nov 12 2007, 08:42 AM
Post #10


High Rankings Advisor
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 29,201
Joined: 21-July 03
User's local time:
Feb 9 2010, 02:59 PM
From: Ashland, MA
Member No.: 2
QUOTE
I am happy as my pages are having more Code to Text ratio which means light pages for Search Engine Robots.


That's a nice sentiment, but the search engine robots could care less....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
torka
post Nov 12 2007, 01:47 PM
Post #11


Vintage Babe
Group Icon

Group: Moderator
Posts: 4,142
Joined: 31-July 03
User's local time:
Feb 9 2010, 02:59 PM
From: Triangle area, NC, USA, Earth (usually)
Member No.: 89
QUOTE(dziningspot @ Nov 12 2007, 05:08 AM) *
I am happy as my pages are having more Code to Text ratio which means light pages for Search Engine Robots.

Here's a link to the Vanessa Fox interview (back when she worked for Google) where she confirms that code-to-text ratio is irrelevant to Google...

http://videos.webpronews.com/2006/12/06/va...oogle-sitemaps/

It's a few minutes in to the interview when she hits this specific topic.

Not sure what you mean by "global headers" but if you see the code when you view source in a browser, the SE spider will see it when it comes to spider the page. If that's the case, you're not "lightening" your pages at all, sorry. Even if "lightening" the page made a difference, which it doesn't... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nah.gif)

(Please tell me these "global headers" don't include identical title and META description tags for every page!)

--Torka (IMG:style_emoticons/default/mf_prop.gif)

This post has been edited by torka: Nov 12 2007, 01:54 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
« Next Oldest · Search Engine Friendly Design & Usability · Next Newest »
 

  
 Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Display Mode: Standard · Switch to: Linear+ · Switch to: Outline

Track this topic · Email this topic · Print this topic · Subscribe to this forum

This forum is sponsored by High Rankings, a Boston SEO Agency
- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 9th February 2010 - 02:59 PM