[RFC] Human Readable URLs

Note: We are moving the topics of this forum and it will be deleted at some point

Publish your own request for comments/change or patches for the next version of phpBB. Discuss the contributions and proposals of others. Upcoming releases are 3.2/Rhea and 3.3.
Locked
User avatar
Pony99CA
Registered User
Posts: 986
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 2:35 am
Location: Hollister, CA
Contact:

Re: [RFC] Human Readable URLs

Post by Pony99CA » Sat Jun 23, 2012 1:09 am

bantu wrote:
Oleg wrote:On the generating side the code has to know whether to generate seo urls or not. A safe solution is to have a toggle in config.php that people can change when they e.g. move servers.
The problem here is that there is no way back. Once you have mod_rewrite, you will always need it, because "good URLs do not change" (another SEO rule as far as I know). As such I'd argue this feature should be an optional extension.
That's another benefit of my proposal -- it doesn't require mod_rewrite. So it can be implemented quickly, keeps phpBB working exactly as it does today (only the IDs are important) and doesn't require any extra system privileges/packages.

So what's the downside? Basically, URLs get longer. :) (Unless you implement Phase 2, but that's more work.)

Steve
Silicon Valley Pocket PC (http://www.svpocketpc.com)
Creator of manage_bots and spoof_user (ask me)
Need hosting for a small forum with full cPanel & MySQL access? Contact me or PM me.

Oleg
Posts: 1150
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:38 am
Contact:

Re: [RFC] Human Readable URLs

Post by Oleg » Sat Jun 23, 2012 5:30 am

bantu wrote:
Oleg wrote:On the generating side the code has to know whether to generate seo urls or not. A safe solution is to have a toggle in config.php that people can change when they e.g. move servers.
The problem here is that there is no way back. Once you have mod_rewrite, you will always need it, because "good URLs do not change" (another SEO rule as far as I know). As such I'd argue this feature should be an optional extension.
As I mentioned in the post you quoted, I was concerned that boards would be broken/unusable during/after server moves. A board that changes its urls continues to function, the only thing that happens is search engines look at it a little funny for a while until it gets fixed.

Oleg
Posts: 1150
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:38 am
Contact:

Re: [RFC] Human Readable URLs

Post by Oleg » Sat Jun 23, 2012 5:35 am

Pony99CA wrote: That's another benefit of my proposal -- it doesn't require mod_rewrite.
This is not a benefit as to my knowledge every web server currently in existence that is of any significance supports some form of routing arbitrary uri paths to php scripts.
So it can be implemented quickly, keeps phpBB working exactly as it does today (only the IDs are important) and doesn't require any extra system privileges/packages.
Unfortunately you don't get the benefit of proper urls, which makes the work done to implement your proposal more or less useless.
So what's the downside? Basically, URLs get longer. :) (Unless you implement Phase 2, but that's more work.)
The downside is that your proposal is not what search engines are looking for, nor is it what people want to see.

User avatar
callumacrae
Infrastructure Team
Infrastructure Team
Posts: 1046
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 9:37 am
Location: England
Contact:

Re: [RFC] Human Readable URLs

Post by callumacrae » Sat Jun 23, 2012 8:22 am

Pony99CA wrote:That's another benefit of my proposal -- it doesn't require mod_rewrite. So it can be implemented quickly, keeps phpBB working exactly as it does today (only the IDs are important) and doesn't require any extra system privileges/packages.
Yes, but it looks silly 0_o
Made by developers, for developers!
My blog

Senky
Extension Customisations
Extension Customisations
Posts: 283
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:41 pm

Re: [RFC] Human Readable URLs

Post by Senky » Sat Jun 23, 2012 10:18 am

callumacrae wrote:...Yes, but it looks silly 0_o
Well, less silly than
f=214&t=12575
. Adding topic title slug into URL will make decision wether visit page or not much easier. You look at url, and (asuming title makes sense) you know if it is worth visiting...

User avatar
callumacrae
Infrastructure Team
Infrastructure Team
Posts: 1046
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 9:37 am
Location: England
Contact:

Re: [RFC] Human Readable URLs

Post by callumacrae » Sat Jun 23, 2012 2:59 pm

Senky wrote:
callumacrae wrote:...Yes, but it looks silly 0_o
Well, less silly than
f=214&t=12575
. Adding topic title slug into URL will make decision wether visit page or not much easier. You look at url, and (asuming title makes sense) you know if it is worth visiting...
Actually, I think f=108&p=240969 looks much better than f=108&p=240969&title=RFC+Human+Readable+URLs.
Made by developers, for developers!
My blog

User avatar
Pony99CA
Registered User
Posts: 986
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 2:35 am
Location: Hollister, CA
Contact:

Re: [RFC] Human Readable URLs

Post by Pony99CA » Sun Jun 24, 2012 7:26 am

Oleg wrote:
Pony99CA wrote: That's another benefit of my proposal -- it doesn't require mod_rewrite.
This is not a benefit as to my knowledge every web server currently in existence that is of any significance supports some form of routing arbitrary uri paths to php scripts.
My point wasn't whether Web servers support mod_rewrite or not. The Bantu post that I quoted said that there's no going back if you use mod_rewrite, but with my proposal, there is (because it doesn't require mod_rewrite).
Oleg wrote:
So it can be implemented quickly, keeps phpBB working exactly as it does today (only the IDs are important) and doesn't require any extra system privileges/packages.
Unfortunately you don't get the benefit of proper urls, which makes the work done to implement your proposal more or less useless.
Are you saying that phpBB doesn't use "proper" URLs? What are "proper" URLs and what benefits do they have that I'm missing?
Oleg wrote:
So what's the downside? Basically, URLs get longer. :) (Unless you implement Phase 2, but that's more work.)
The downside is that your proposal is not what search engines are looking for[...].
Are you sure about that? Do you know for a fact that search engines would ignore the keywords in my proposal?

Steve
Silicon Valley Pocket PC (http://www.svpocketpc.com)
Creator of manage_bots and spoof_user (ask me)
Need hosting for a small forum with full cPanel & MySQL access? Contact me or PM me.

User avatar
Pony99CA
Registered User
Posts: 986
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 2:35 am
Location: Hollister, CA
Contact:

Re: [RFC] Human Readable URLs

Post by Pony99CA » Sun Jun 24, 2012 7:28 am

callumacrae wrote:
Senky wrote:
callumacrae wrote:...Yes, but it looks silly 0_o
Well, less silly than
f=214&t=12575
. Adding topic title slug into URL will make decision wether visit page or not much easier. You look at url, and (asuming title makes sense) you know if it is worth visiting...
Actually, I think f=108&p=240969 looks much better than f=108&p=240969&title=RFC+Human+Readable+URLs.
There's no accounting for taste. :P

Seriously, with any of these suggestions, I presume that you'll be able to turn them on (and maybe off) from the ACP, so you can still have your incomprehensible URLs. :)

Steve
Silicon Valley Pocket PC (http://www.svpocketpc.com)
Creator of manage_bots and spoof_user (ask me)
Need hosting for a small forum with full cPanel & MySQL access? Contact me or PM me.

User avatar
tmbackoff
Registered User
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 3:25 am

Re: [RFC] Human Readable URLs

Post by tmbackoff » Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:22 pm

Let's leave the preferential slams at the door, shall we? ;)

I also like the f=108&p=240969 URLs. Also, regrading the presumption that you'll be able to "turn them on (and maybe off)", people already complain about how many options are in the ACP. This is one configuration option that I think should be considered though.

Oleg
Posts: 1150
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:38 am
Contact:

Re: [RFC] Human Readable URLs

Post by Oleg » Mon Jun 25, 2012 6:24 am

Pony99CA wrote:
Oleg wrote:
Pony99CA wrote: That's another benefit of my proposal -- it doesn't require mod_rewrite.
This is not a benefit as to my knowledge every web server currently in existence that is of any significance supports some form of routing arbitrary uri paths to php scripts.
My point wasn't whether Web servers support mod_rewrite or not. The Bantu post that I quoted said that there's no going back if you use mod_rewrite, but with my proposal, there is (because it doesn't require mod_rewrite).
Since mod_rewrite or equivalent facilities can be assumed to be always available to anyone who is serious about their website, this point is moot.

The only sites that would possibly not have such facilities that I can imagine would be free hosts or bottom of the barrel paid hosts. In which case, if a board chooses to move to such a host it would still work but links from search engines would 404. Similar situation to if you host on one free board host and move to another free host - your domain changes and your old links are 404. My guess is if you are looking for free hosting traffic from search engines is not exactly first thing on your mind.
Oleg wrote:
So it can be implemented quickly, keeps phpBB working exactly as it does today (only the IDs are important) and doesn't require any extra system privileges/packages.
Unfortunately you don't get the benefit of proper urls, which makes the work done to implement your proposal more or less useless.
Are you saying that phpBB doesn't use "proper" URLs? What are "proper" URLs and what benefits do they have that I'm missing?
http://www.google.com/search?q=google+u ... mendations
Oleg wrote:
So what's the downside? Basically, URLs get longer. :) (Unless you implement Phase 2, but that's more work.)
The downside is that your proposal is not what search engines are looking for[...].
Are you sure about that? Do you know for a fact that search engines would ignore the keywords in my proposal?

Steve
Ignore, no. Not rank the site as highly, pretty sure.

Locked