Simple SEO URL (OLD version) [support thread]

[mydanilo]

With modern browsers and search engines, SEO mods are more of a "want to have.. they are NO longer a "need to have". The part I highlighted in red from your vent is just not true.. Modern search engines handle dynamic URLs JUST fine.. and there are PLENTY of stores that can PROVE that their search engine rankings have not been harmed by not having pretty URLs. Also for CMS and Ecommerce frameworks that do include these pretty URL features as part of the core, it's still a CONFIGURABLE option that does NOT have to be turned on.. (For example, you are NOT required to turn on pretty permalinks in WordPress)

I do not doubt to what you are saying. I know they can handle the dynamic URLs, not my point. I claim that the pretty URLs are also handled well by the search engines. So not harm there to have them. They are plain just simpler and easier to understand by humans. That is what it is all about. Clear text URLs.

Example:
Sometimes I email a link to a customer to a certain page. Or post a link in a forum.

http://waxx.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=48

http://myx.com/floating-candles/blue-butterfly-floater-candle

Personally I would trust to click the 2nd link way more as I already have an idea what I will see when I get there. I know that is more a psychology issue. But shopping and clicking on links definitely falls in that category.

I am gladly take every possible step to make things easier for my customers. This issue with pretty URLs is a matter of tech people tell the marketing guys that it does not matter. Human behavior is the key issue here not computers.

[DivaVocals]

The point to my post was and STILL is that pretty URLS are still a WANT TO HAVE feature.. You do not NEED to have pretty URLS in order for a site to be:

• easy to use
• effective
• found by search engines
• friendly
• usable, etc..

(There are TONS of SUCCESSFUL sites out there which totally prove this to be true)

BTW, I want to be clear that I never said ANYTHING to the effect that pretty URLs are NOT "handled well by the search engines".. I did comment on the part of your original post where you erroneously stated (with regard to dynamic URLs) that "search engines seem to at least like them equally well too"

I do not doubt to what you are saying. I know they can handle the dynamic URLs, not my point. I claim that the pretty URLs are also handled well by the search engines. So not harm there to have them. They are plain just simpler and easier to understand by humans. That is what it is all about. Clear text URLs.

Example:
Sometimes I email a link to a customer to a certain page. Or post a link in a forum.

http://waxx.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=48

http://myx.com/floating-candles/blue-butterfly-floater-candle

Personally I would trust to click the 2nd link way more as I already have an idea what I will see when I get there. I know that is more a psychology issue. But shopping and clicking on links definitely falls in that category.

I am gladly take every possible step to make things easier for my customers. This issue with pretty URLs is a matter of tech people tell the marketing guys that it does not matter. Human behavior is the key issue here not computers.

[mydanilo]

Correct, I want to have this feature. I want the choice to use it or not. Did not want to make a statement that there is a technological disadvantage. It is in my books pure human friendliness.

Many things in shopping experience are nice to have and hard to proof if they make a difference in sales. I happen to think that the pretty URL's is something I want to provide for my customers.

I thought SSU is going to be the one to be used and supported going forward. Yellow's main effort to create it was the lack of a good free solution and the lack of ongoing support for Ultimate SEO. Now for SSU we are left in the same boat. I have gone from Ultimate to SSU and now sincerely wish Zen would offer pretty URLs as a core feature to not run into the same situation over and over again.

[fairestcape]

... and now sincerely wish Zen would offer pretty URLs as a core feature to not run into the same situation over and over again.

There is no compelling technical reason why the dev team should add this feature, for the same reason they have no obligation to offer other "nice to have" features.

In the latest version (1.5) there was a GOOD reason to incorporate a feature that was initially developed as an "add-on" (Admin Profiles), and while the feature in 1.5 is functionally different in some respects, the decision to incorporate it stemmed out of a practical necessity... making zencart PCI compliant.

But this whole prettying-up of URL's is still very contentious. In my opinion, it is used mostly by people who need a "crutch", and who are generally incapable of proper seo, or who have a sheep-like mentality and just follow the crowd. Most people add the URL feature because they HOPE it will raise their page rank. They think, "that's all I have to do..." and they sit back and cross their fingers...

All the while such modules remain contentious, and whose value is dubious, if not risky... there is no reason to even consider it - let alone actually incorporate it.

[SPH]

But this whole prettying-up of URL's is still very contentious. In my opinion, it is used mostly by people who need a "crutch", and who are generally incapable of proper seo, or who have a sheep-like mentality and just follow the crowd. Most people add the URL feature because they HOPE it will raise their page rank. They think, "that's all I have to do..." and they sit back and cross their fingers...

Fairestcape, I think you're a little harsh here, even though what you say re seo ranking may be true. How many would turn on seo urls if it came with zencart, like with other free carts? If unwritten and rewritten urls work equally well, then there would be no compelling reason not to turn them on, either.

I think the main risk with seo urls and zencart is that since they are not built-in mods, imcompatibality with other mods or upgrades will always be a concern.

Even so, I just installed and turned on Ultimate SEO URLs on my second test 1.5 cart, worked again:

http://www.prom-mart.com/zencart-demo-2/

My main site (1.3.9h) uses dynamic urls. Sometimes I wish I had rewritten urls, as I cannot tell what my product is by looking at the url. That alone would cause me to use it, if it were totally reliable.

sph
www.prom-mart.com
My Ecommerce Cart Testing Area

[DivaVocals]

Most people add the URL feature because they HOPE it will raise their page rank. They think, "that's all I have to do..." and they sit back and cross their fingers...

and of the few clients that I have installed a URL re-write add-on it is for this reason here.. These few clients could NOT be convinced otherwise, and it wasn't worth the time arguing the point.. So I did all the things that REALLY needed to happen for good SEO and used one of the more stable URL re-writing add-ons (not SSU) and moved on. By and large I do not include URL re-writers in my standard install because I KNOW that it's NOT required at all.. I know shoppers and search engines aren't having "issues" with dynamic URLs, so why "fix" something that ain't broken..

[schoolboy]

The length of this thread with all the hassles these mods create almost warrants its own forum. If this was such a "good" way of rendering a site, why do so many people end up wrecking their sites when using it.

Actually... I am ALL FOR SEO URL's (but only on everyone else's site)... in that way, OUR sites will have less competition on the search engines ...

[DivaVocals]

The length of this thread with all the hassles these mods create almost warrants its own forum. If this was such a "good" way of rendering a site, why do so many people end up wrecking their sites when using it.

Not ALL of these add-ons wreck sites.. SSU certainly does seem to do a fair bit of damage, and so does Ultimate SEO..

[SPH]

What is meant that seo urls may wreck sites? That it may cause a conflict with some mod and blow up the site, as one of my demo 1.5 sites did the other night? * Or is it meant that seo urls don't rank as well as dynamic urls?

I've heard time and again and kind of believe that dynamic urls rank well. This may be the first I've heard suggesting that re-written urls don't rank well. My experience is that would be incorrect. Rewritten urls plus good content can rank at least as high as unwritten urls plus good content, insofar as I've seen.

The ONLY problem with seo urls and zencart that I see is that since they are not built in, there is always the risk of conflict with something. I truly believe that if seo urls were a built-in zencart option to turn on or off in the admin and were stable, the majority of users would turn them on.

No reason not to, in that case.

I've been thinking, maybe there is a reason why the zencart team does not take some of the more popular mods and just incorporate them in to the default install (IH, for example). Many are template specific, and the team would have to write instructions for whatever template the user ends up with.

But seo urls (right now I'm more familiar with the new Ultimate SEO URL) don't seem to be template specific. I guess the zencart team has their reasons for not taking that mod or the basic CEON URI and making it part of the basic install. I cannot believe that "they don't work" can be the reason.


*I don't know if it was Ultimate SEO URL, the new free template I tried, or the failed Lightbox install (wouldn't accept sql), but site went kaput when tried to switch back to prior template:

www.prom-mart.com/zencart/

But it's Ultimate SEO URL seems to still be working....

sph
www.prom-mart.com
Ecommerce Cart Testing area

[DivaVocals]

What is meant that seo urls may wreck sites? That it may cause a conflict with some mod and blow up the site, as one of my demo 1.5 sites did the other night?

I can't speak for others, but what you said here is what I meant by "they wreck sites". Also what I meant by they "wreck sites" is the fact that mods like SSU and Ultimate SEO offer no means to STOP using them without a fair bit of work to create proper re-directs from the static URLS they generate. (The Ceon URI mod is the only one that supports historical URIs)

I don't expect mods like SSU or Ultimate SEO or even Ceon URI to EVER become part of the Zen Cart core, and I think asking about it is a HUGE waste of time since it will likely never happen.

BUT...

getting back to the topic of this support thread it doesn't look like SSU has an active maintainer at this time and therefore anyone looking to use SSU with Zen Cart v1.5 has only three options:

1. Live with dynamic URLs
2. Invest in the services of an outside developer to update SSU for them
3. Find another add-on to replace SSU
   (I recommend Ceon URI as it is better supported, written and maintained than other add-ons like SSU -- sorry that's my opinion)