Official Google Webmaster Central Blog |  |
- Pagination with rel=“next” and rel=“prev”
- View-all in search results
- Reconsideration requests get more transparent
| Pagination with rel=“next” and rel=“prev” Posted: 15 Sep 2011 05:09 AM PDT Webmaster level: Intermediate to Advanced Much like rel="canonical" acts a strong hint for duplicate content, you can now use the HTML link elements rel="next" and rel="prev" to indicate the relationship between component URLs in a paginated series. Throughout the web, a paginated series of content may take many shapes—it can be an article divided into several component pages, or a product category with items spread across several pages, or a forum thread divided into a sequence of URLs. Now, if you choose to include rel="next" and rel="prev" markup on the component pages within a series, you're giving Google a strong hint that you'd like us to:
 The relationship between component URLs in a series can now be indicated to Google through rel="next" and rel="prev". There's an exception to the rel="prev" and rel="next" implementation: If, alongside your series of content, you also offer users a view-all page, or if you're considering a view-all page, please see our post on View-all in search results for more information. Because view-all pages are most commonly preferred by searchers, we do our best to surface this version when appropriate in results rather than a component page (component pages are more likely to surface with rel="next" and rel="prev"). If you don't have a view-all page or you'd like to override Google returning a view-all page, you can use rel="next" and rel="prev" as described in this post.  Outlining your options Here are three options for a series:
Implementing rel="next" and rel="prev" If you prefer option 3 (above) for your site, let's get started! Let's say you have content paginated into the URLs: http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=1 http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=2 http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=3 http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=4 On the first page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=1, you'd include in the <head> section:<link rel="next" href="http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=2/>On the second page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=2: <link rel="prev" href="http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=1" /><link rel="next" href="http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=3" />On the third page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=3: <link rel="prev" href="http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=2" /><link rel="next" href="http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=4" />And on the last page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=4: <link rel="prev" href="http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=3" />A few points to mention:
Questions? More information can be found in our Help Center, or join the conversation in our Webmaster Help Forum!    |
| Posted: 15 Sep 2011 05:08 AM PDT Webmaster level: Intermediate to Advanced User testing has taught us that searchers much prefer the view-all, single-page version of content over a component page containing only a portion of the same information with arbitrary page breaks (which cause the user to click "next" and load another URL).  Searchers often prefer the view-all vs. paginated content with arbitrary page breaks and worse latency. Therefore, to improve the user experience, when we detect that a content series (e.g. page-1.html, page-2.html, etc.) also contains a single-page version (e.g. page-all.html), we're now making a larger effort to return the single-page version in search results. If your site has a view-all option, there's nothing you need to do; we'll work to do it on your behalf. Also, indexing properties, like links, will be consolidated from the component pages in the series to the view-all page. However, high latency can make the view-all less preferred Interestingly, the cases when users didn't prefer the view-all page were correlated with high latency (e.g., when the view-all page took a while to load, say, because it contained many images). This makes sense because we know users are less satisfied with slow results. So while a view-all page is commonly desired, as a webmaster it's important to balance this preference with the page's load time and overall user experience. Best practices for a series of content
It's not uncommon for webmasters to incorrectly use rel="canonical" from component pages to the first page of their series (e.g. page-2.html with rel="canonical" to page-1.html). We recommend against this implementation because the component pages don't actually contain duplicate content. Using rel="next" and rel="prev" is far more appropriate. Summary Because users generally prefer the view-all option in search results, we're making more of an effort to properly detect and serve this version to searchers. If you have a series of content, there's nothing more you need to do. If you'd like to hint more to Google how best to serve users your information:
Questions? As always, feel free to ask in our Webmaster Help Forum.   |
| Reconsideration requests get more transparent Posted: 15 Sep 2011 04:30 AM PDT Webmaster level: All If your site isn't appearing in Google search results, or it's performing more poorly than it once did (and you believe that it does not violate our Webmaster Guidelines), you can ask Google to reconsider your site. Over time, we've worked to improve the reconsideration process for webmasters. A couple of years ago, in addition to confirming that we had received the request, we started sending a second message to webmasters confirming that we had processed their request. This was a huge step for webmasters who were anxiously awaiting results. Since then, we've received feedback that webmasters wanted to know the outcome of their requests. Earlier this year, we started experimenting with sending more detailed reconsideration request responses and the feedback we've gotten has been very positive! Now, if your site is affected by a manual spam action, we may let you know if we were able to revoke that manual action based on your reconsideration request. Or, we could tell you if your site is still in violation of our guidelines. This might be a discouraging thing to hear, but once you know that there is still a problem, it will help you diagnose the issue. If your site is not actually affected by any manual action (this is the most common scenario), we may let you know that as well. Perhaps your site isn't being ranked highly by our algorithms, in which case our systems will respond to improvements on the site as changes are made, without your needing to submit a reconsideration request. Or maybe your site has access issues that are preventing Googlebot from crawling and indexing it. For more help debugging ranking issues, read our article about why a site may not be showing up in Google search results.   |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Google Webmaster Central Blog To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
No comments:
Post a Comment