textpattern

Hi

We have a large static website with good google rankings for selected
keywords. However, one of our developers wants to move to using
Textpattern - the content management software. Would this have an
adverse effect on our rankings?

We need to know whether it would be easier or harder for the googlebot
to crwal the site and exactly how does it do it if the page viewed is
actually creaetd on the fly?

Any advice would be great.

Thanks

P
keyboardsleeper.

On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 14:13:41 +0200, <support (AT) compactlaw (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

We have a large static website with good google rankings for selected
keywords. However, one of our developers wants to move to using
Textpattern - the content management software. Would this have an
adverse effect on our rankings?

We need to know whether it would be easier or harder for the googlebot
to crwal the site and exactly how does it do it if the page viewed is
actually creaetd on the fly?

No idea how textpattern works (or what it is) but as long as you can
retain content and URLs changing layout only, it doesn't matter what tools
are used. Note that crawler doesn't know how the page was
created/generated - all it knows is "this URL serves this content". Period.

Best,
Borek
--
http://www.chembuddy.com
http://www.ph-meter.info

On 7 Apr 2006 05:13:41 -0700, support (AT) compactlaw (DOT) co.uk wrote:

Hi

We have a large static website with good google rankings for selected
keywords. However, one of our developers wants to move to using
Textpattern - the content management software.

Any idea why they want to do this?

Would this have an
adverse effect on our rankings?

Hard to tell with so little info.

We need to know whether it would be easier or harder for the googlebot
to crwal the site and exactly how does it do it if the page viewed is
actually creaetd on the fly?

If it's done properly the Googlebot will be indifferent as essentially
it makes a request and is presented with a page. The end result of the
request is the page, whether it already exists as an object, or
whether it is hastily assembled from a database of bits and pieces and
presented as a page. The bot gets to see a page. Where this can get
complicated is in how the bot sees the page. If the url of the page
isn't presented just so, when the bot comes back next time it will not
recognise the page and think it's a brand new one. Theoretically, you
could have a three page site, dynamic pages, and the bot could bounce
back and forth between them believing it was seeing a new page every
time. It could stay there forever, right? This used to be a big
problem with dynamic sites, these days, not so much. But I mention it,
since you ask.

BB (merit badge for being technical there).
--

http://www.kruse.co.uk/hoarding-pagerank.htm
http://www.here-be-posters.co.uk/erte-prints.htm
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/dreamsicles/index.html

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote

We have a large static website with good google rankings for selected
keywords. However, one of our developers wants to move to using
Textpattern - the content management software.

Any idea why they want to do this?

Would this have an
adverse effect on our rankings?

Hard to tell with so little info.

We need to know whether it would be easier or harder for the googlebot
to crwal the site and exactly how does it do it if the page viewed is
actually creaetd on the fly?

If it's done properly the Googlebot will be indifferent as essentially
it makes a request and is presented with a page. The end result of the
request is the page, whether it already exists as an object, or
whether it is hastily assembled from a database of bits and pieces and
presented as a page. The bot gets to see a page. Where this can get
complicated is in how the bot sees the page. If the url of the page
isn't presented just so, when the bot comes back next time it will not
recognise the page and think it's a brand new one. Theoretically, you
could have a three page site, dynamic pages, and the bot could bounce
back and forth between them believing it was seeing a new page every
time. It could stay there forever, right? This used to be a big
problem with dynamic sites, these days, not so much. But I mention it,
since you ask.

Just thought I might mention that the OP may want to read :

"At Google, we're able to index most types of pages... "
http://www.google.com/webmasters/facts.html



--
in best regards,
Fred
http://canadian-web-site-promotion.blogspot.com/

On Fri, 7 Apr 2006 09:59:59 -0400, "canadafred"
<admin (AT) rezultz-web-site-promotion (DOT) com> wrote:

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:5epc32132mueb3u78dce9v9fa2dtvv9p7r (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...

We have a large static website with good google rankings for selected
keywords. However, one of our developers wants to move to using
Textpattern - the content management software.

Any idea why they want to do this?

Would this have an
adverse effect on our rankings?

Hard to tell with so little info.

We need to know whether it would be easier or harder for the googlebot
to crwal the site and exactly how does it do it if the page viewed is
actually creaetd on the fly?

If it's done properly the Googlebot will be indifferent as essentially
it makes a request and is presented with a page. The end result of the
request is the page, whether it already exists as an object, or
whether it is hastily assembled from a database of bits and pieces and
presented as a page. The bot gets to see a page. Where this can get
complicated is in how the bot sees the page. If the url of the page
isn't presented just so, when the bot comes back next time it will not
recognise the page and think it's a brand new one. Theoretically, you
could have a three page site, dynamic pages, and the bot could bounce
back and forth between them believing it was seeing a new page every
time. It could stay there forever, right? This used to be a big
problem with dynamic sites, these days, not so much. But I mention it,
since you ask.

Just thought I might mention that the OP may want to read :

"At Google, we're able to index most types of pages... "
http://www.google.com/webmasters/facts.html

After my concise and bleeding-edge explanation?

BB
--

http://www.kruse.co.uk/hoarding-pagerank.htm
http://www.here-be-posters.co.uk/erte-prints.htm
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/dreamsicles/index.html

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote


<snip>

Just thought I might mention that the OP may want to read :

"At Google, we're able to index most types of pages... "
http://www google com/webmasters/facts.html

After my concise and bleeding-edge explanation?

My note was intended to be as a supplement to your insights. I only wanted
to add an element to your response in assistance for the OP in tailoring a
plan which should be based primarily on your thoughts.


--
in best regards,
Fred
http://canadian-web-site-promotion.blogspot.com/

On Sat, 8 Apr 2006 11:13:54 -0400, "canadafred"
<admin (AT) rezultz-web-site-promotion (DOT) com> wrote:

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:sagd32hffkq3uh5p2gkdjvc31p76mtk3pn (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...

snip

Just thought I might mention that the OP may want to read :

"At Google, we're able to index most types of pages... "
http://www google com/webmasters/facts.html

After my concise and bleeding-edge explanation?

My note was intended to be as a supplement to your insights. I only wanted
to add an element to your response in assistance for the OP in tailoring a
plan which should be based primarily on your thoughts.

I was being self-mocking again. Canadians, eh? Maybe I should use
sub-titles for them.

BB
--

http://www.kruse.co.uk/validation.htm
http://www.here-be-posters.co.uk/lempicka-prints.htm
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/mahog...ess/index.html

On 7 Apr 2006 05:13:41 -0700, support (AT) compactlaw (DOT) co.uk wrote:

Hi

We have a large static website with good google rankings for selected
keywords. However, one of our developers wants to move to using
Textpattern - the content management software. Would this have an
adverse effect on our rankings?

I've tried Textpattern and the end result is search engine friendly,
so it's not a bad choice for an easy optimised static website, will
take your static pages and put them into a database making them easier
to update templates etc...

We need to know whether it would be easier or harder for the googlebot
to crwal the site and exactly how does it do it if the page viewed is
actually creaetd on the fly?

Since Textpattern uses mod_rewrite Googlebot won't see dynamic URLs,
so in this case it's not even an issue. That said the major search
engines can spider dynamic looking URLs, so they are not a barrier to
spidering in themselves anyway. If you can avoid dynamic looking URLs
though you should.

Any advice would be great.

Textpattern though very good lacks a usable template system (it really
sucks big time, takes ages to add a template and you can only use one
at a time!!). Take a look at Wordpress instead, it does basically the
same thing as Textpattern (and other things), but has a much better
template system in place and thousands of templates you can adapt to
your needs. You can upload hundreds of templates to Wordpress and test
them in seconds, to see if the look is what you want, with Textpattern
you'd have retired years earlier to test 100 templates (not kidding).

Never thought I'd be praising Wordpress which is a blogging tool :-)

Thanks

P
keyboardsleeper.

BTW the blog in the sig is made with Wordpress.

David
--
SEO Tutorial http://www.seo-gold.com/tutorial/
More Earnings Blog http://www.morearnings.com/

problem with dynamic sites, these days, not so much. But I mention it,
since you ask.

I can vouch for that... Especially "devious" sites that
generate new content and links (with parameters) based
on parameters in links. It is solveable, but still kinda evil :-)


--
best regards
Thomas Schulz
http://www.micro-sys.dk/products/sitemap-generator/
http://www.micro-sys.dk/products/website-analyzer/

__/ [ David ] on Sunday 09 April 2006 00:02 \__

On 7 Apr 2006 05:13:41 -0700, support (AT) compactlaw (DOT) co.uk wrote:

Hi

We have a large static website with good google rankings for selected
keywords. However, one of our developers wants to move to using
Textpattern - the content management software.

Any move to a CMS is a wise one, it seems.

Would this have an
adverse effect on our rankings?

Try to keep the old URL's in tact or else they may break. If you do a staged
URL migration, do so carefully as to avoid duplicate content.

I've tried Textpattern and the end result is search engine friendly,
so it's not a bad choice for an easy optimised static website, will
take your static pages and put them into a database making them easier
to update templates etc...

There may be plugins available, which add some meta content. This improves
your site from an SEO perspective. I haven't any experience with this, but
it's available for WordPress.

We need to know whether it would be easier or harder for the googlebot
to crwal the site and exactly how does it do it if the page viewed is
actually creaetd on the fly?

Since Textpattern uses mod_rewrite Googlebot won't see dynamic URLs,
so in this case it's not even an issue. That said the major search
engines can spider dynamic looking URLs, so they are not a barrier to
spidering in themselves anyway. If you can avoid dynamic looking URLs
though you should.

The generation of URL's and the underlying process is transparent (a 'black
box' situation rather) to the crawler. Of your Web server is overloaded,
however, pages will take longer to be delivered. This will have search
engines assume that they interfere and crawling /may/ slow down.

Any advice would be great.

Textpattern though very good lacks a usable template system (it really
sucks big time, takes ages to add a template and you can only use one
at a time!!). Take a look at Wordpress instead, it does basically the
same thing as Textpattern (and other things), but has a much better
template system in place and thousands of templates you can adapt to
your needs. You can upload hundreds of templates to Wordpress and test
them in seconds, to see if the look is what you want, with Textpattern
you'd have retired years earlier to test 100 templates (not kidding).

Never thought I'd be praising Wordpress which is a blogging tool :-)

It is used increasingly as a CMS tool as well. It continues to improve.

snip /

Best wishes,

Roy

--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Coffee makes mw to0 jittery
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
2:20am up 43 days 16:03, 6 users, load average: 0.86, 0.84, 0.66
http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project