[RFC] Hide forum (f) variable from topic url

[DavidIQ]

Isn't the forum being determined internally for other features when it's not present? i.e. the breadcrumbs.

[nickvergessen]

Well we create the parameter later on viewtopic, but when we create the session entry nothing has been done and we need the session/auth to do stuff

[Volksdevil]

It's not only about showing "yourself", but it doesnt show "yourself" to anyone. So when we remove it from the URL, the feature becomes quite useless, as everyone does not show to anyone.

Ah, understood. So it's more of an issue than it first seems. It's not really my thing but, can it not be fixed via a query somewhere? Apologies if that sounds too 'Simple' but like I say, database stuff is way over my head.

[nickvergessen]

yes, 1 additional query on the most loaded page of phpbb for each page call, instead of adding simple 4 characters to some urls

[Louis7777]

It's not only about showing "yourself", but it doesnt show "yourself" to anyone. So when we remove it from the URL, the feature becomes quite useless, as everyone does not show to anyone.

Shouldn't this be considered a major bug?


Here's why I think that:

Some time ago we had the problem of duplicate links. Now that we point to canonical links that problem hopefully belongs to the past. However, Google will now serve the canonical links, which means that all visitors coming from search engines will have clicked on links without the f= parameter and as a result they will be all browsing as invisible.

[nickvergessen]

Some time ago we had the problem of duplicate links. Now that we point to canonical links that problem hopefully belongs to the past. However, Google will now serve the canonical links, which means that all visitors coming from search engines will have clicked on links without the f= parameter and as a result they will be all browsing as invisible.

No, they will just be listed as browsing the board instead of a topic in this particular forum.
Also as soon as they use the pagination, they will be listed in the forum.

But yes, all this is a bug, so we use this easy workaround (adding f= to the url)

[Sumanai]

However, Google will now serve the canonical links, which means that all visitors coming from search engines will have clicked on links without the f= parameter and as a result they will be all browsing as invisible.

Absence of the parameter f= in canonical link is a mistake, I believe.

[Louis7777]

Absence of the parameter f= in canonical link is a mistake, I believe.

And the reason is...?

[Sumanai]

Canonical version should be one the most common. Now most references on the forum with the parameter f =.
I think a mistake that all the links are with the parameter f =, and the canonical version without

[nickvergessen]

well we use without f= so when the topic is moved, the canonical URL does not change.
Otherwise you get duplicate pages again, because the old links will still work