Someone who pretends that is very good at SEO told me that the files within a web site shouldnt be named index.html (for example a section is named services and i have a folder with services and in it index.html)but moduleName.php but mandatory to be *.php.
Is this true ?
i mean ok,the name of the file i understand but why *.php ?
Thanks

it doesn't matters if your files show .html or .php main point is file name

Someone who pretends that is very good at SEO told

Obviously not as good as they think, 'cos it's BS

Naming the file with a descriptive name according to its contents is very important issue when it comes to SEO.

For example, if I have a page for selling flowers I can rename it whatever I want, but if I chose to rename it as buy_flowers.html or buyflowers.html, Google will rank this page better for this phrase (buy flowers) than if I named this page1.html.

This is what he meant by naming your files with a descriptive name. The extension doesn't affect the ranking AFAIK.

dahak as far as the extension is concerned it makes no difference to a search engine.

As for the name itself I like to use search friendly names. I prefer to use keywords in the names of the files, but more for people than search engines. I'm sure it's a ranking factor, but I doubt it's a major factor.

Tony I neither of the names you listed is really any good since Google or and the other search engines won't parse the single word into the the two you're going after. Yes I know they'll highlight the words in search results, but they aren't seeing them as two distinct words in the algorithm. If you want the file name to help rank for buy flowers you want to name the file buy-flowers.html

Use dashes to separate words in folder and file names.

I don't think it has a major impact on where your pages rank, but where it can make a difference is if the page does show up in search results it may get clicked more often because the keywords are in the url.

I've seen several studies indicating that people will click more when the see the keywords they typed in the search results. The number one place where the keyword will have an effect on click through is in the anchor text of the link so make sure to get keywords in your page title. The number two place that seems to impact click through turns out to be the url. So getting keywords in your url by naming files with keywords is a good thing.

I don't think it will play a major part in where the page ranks, though I do think it's a factor that is looked at.

Vangogh,

I agree that the name of the file will not have a very large effect on your ranking, but it will definitely push you up and that's what we all want right?

Originally Posted by bj_private

Vangogh,

, but it will definitely push you up and that's what we all want right?

There's no definitely about it.
It might help a little but on the other hand it could just as easily have the opposite effect

I do agree with the theories that vangogh presents. It is more important for a site to be found by the search engines. It does matter on the where your page is found. If you are found on the fourth page you will not benifet as much as if you were on the first or second. Users tend to click through the first and second page where the keywords are highlighted the most in the description. Then if they do not find what they are looking for they will most likely try a different search engine or change the phrase they are searching. I would think file names are important in some sense. Like vangogh stated I don't think it has a major impact on where your pages rank, but where it can make a difference is if the page does show up in search results it may get clicked more often because the keywords are in the url. There are alot of details to factor in that will give you the result you are looking for in the end.

I'm sure search engines will look at URLs as a ranking factor. I would doubt they play a major part in where your page ranks. I agree about using them though. I add keywords in my file names. But again to me it's more about the URLs being more descriptive for people and maybe help convince them to click.

I also use keywords because it's easier for me to find an edit a file when I've given it a descriptive name.

Google will highlight your search words in URLs and filenames in the SERPS, But i doubt they treat them any different to other searched words it finds on the page.

Like steve i like to give files descriptive names, But it's done for users.

Makes no difference. Someone should compile all the stupid things people say about SEO.

http://www.highrankings.com/forum/in...howtopic=15499

Well, I think the rule is

"Try to use descriptive names for your website pages"

because:

1. It will be easier and cleaner to your visitors (which is the most important issue ofcourse).

2. It *may* (according to some ppl including me ) help your page ranking. Even if this is not correct, Google will highlight the words in your website URL which will invite ppl to click on it.

3. It will help you keep your website organized.

Chris I think I stumbled on that post a long time ago. It's a good one too.

Tony I agree about naming files. Like I said I try to give them meaningful names for a few reasons. Mostly because it makes it easier for me to find them when I need to go back and edit them. Next would be to make the url more meaningful to someone viewing the page. And last would be for any search engine benefit.

I just don't think the benefit to search engines is much. Some, maybe, but not a lot. If I already had a site with poorly named files I don't think I would go in and change them for the sake of search engines, but if I'm creating a new file I'll go for what I think is a meangful name.

Originally Posted by vangogh

I just don't think the benefit to search engines is much. Some, maybe, but not a lot. If I already had a site with poorly named files I don't think I would go in and change them for the sake of search engines, but if I'm creating a new file I'll go for what I think is a meangful name.

I agree that the weight of this is not much, but if I don't have anything to loose by doing it... then why not do it. That's my point.

I have had to redesign a couple different sites in the last year due to the fact that they (had to) changed technologies. asp to php and cfm to php.

I figured I would take care of this problem in the future by not using the file name in the url... I have been putting every file in its own folder, giving the folder the name that I want and naming each file in the folder index.php.

The url the se's see is http://www.sitename.com/foldername/

If technologies are ever changed in the future, there will be no impact at all on search engines because the url's will remain the same.

Maybe a little over kill but I am getting use to this method. it is very easy to add a new page. Just copy the folder and give it the name of the new url.

And, you can have an expressive name for the url as well, without having the extension making the file name look ugly in the serps. Makes for a nice neat little url.

I have been playing around with this on the last few site designs and it is working out pretty good.