[ic] more list

[Frank Reitzenstein]

On 3/27/2010 1:39 AM, Mike Heins wrote:
> Quoting Frank Reitzenstein (frank at aussievitamin.com):
>   
>> On 3/27/2010 12:40 AM, Stefan Hornburg (Racke) wrote:
>>     
>>> Ton Verhagen wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Hello All,
>>>>
>>>> I had the impression that it would be possible to format the 'current
>>>> page' link in the more list. Unfortunately I cannot find anything
>>>> right now.
>>>>
>>>> The ITL below:
>>>> <ul>
>>>> [more-list]
>>>> [link-template]<a href="$URL$">$ANCHOR$</a>[/link-template]
>>>> [more]
>>>> [/more-list]
>>>> </ul>
>>>>
>>>> generates code like (page 1 is current page):
>>>>
>>>> <ul>
>>>> <li><a href="#" rel="nofollow">Next</a></li>
>>>> <strong>1</strong>
>>>> <li><a href="#">2</a></li>
>>>> <li><a href="#">3</a></li>
>>>> <li><a href="#">4</a></li>
>>>> <li><a href="#">5</a></li>
>>>> <li><a href="#" rel="nofollow">Previous</a></li>
>>>> </ul>
>>>>
>>>> This breaks html because of the current page (strong tags without <li>)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What I want is following (page 1 is current page):
>>>>
>>>> <ul>
>>>> <li><a href="#" rel="nofollow">Next</a></li>
>>>> <li class="down">1</li>
>>>> <li><a href="#">2</a></li>
>>>> <li><a href="#">3</a></li>
>>>> <li><a href="#">4</a></li>
>>>> <li><a href="#">5</a></li>
>>>> <li><a href="#" rel="nofollow">Previous</a></li>
>>>> </ul>
>>>>
>>>> wouldn't there be a 'current_page_template' sub tag for the more list
>>>> or such?
>>>> Thought there was something.....
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> I switch to use my own paging routine. [more-list] templates are not
>>> flexible
>>> enough.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>          Racke
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> [more-list] templates are not google friendly.
>>
>> I use static pages with content and list items on that:
>>
>> http://www.aussievitamin.com/shop/aussievitamin/couleur-caramel.html
>>     
> Yes, we all do that, for SEO reasons.
>
>   
>> We plan to do better, but packing and ordering is my main occupation
>> nowadays.
>>     
> There's no reason we can't make them more friendly. Would this
> type of work?
>
>     http://www.aussievitamin.com/shop/pager/MM/Xw399awaqa/1/30/100.html
>
> Then we just write a "pager" ActionMap which rearranges the components
> of the path.
>
>
>   

Mike,

Not for me.

The makeup page was an exception. On a typical page only www and com are
not keywords:

http://www.aussievitamin.com/allergies.html

(After a few scripts in the httpd.conf to remove your /cgi-bin/)

We might omit the www too on future sites, use hyphens and not use the
meaningless keyword aussie.

But yes if you can stop those pages that expire, but which google will
spider that IS a good thing. I think we may have tried to block them in
robots.txt.

If the generated pages 2..3.. are not linked from home they are in
danger of being orphaned by google. Too deep and google behave as if
they don't have the resources.

Remember no more than 100 links per page? The common navigation (eg left
hand and top) on each page is likely to be 50 links. So you can only
really splash 50 links dynamically, which makes the more list on the
foundation store unattractive, because it breaks the rules by it's very
design. Nor can you keep linking pages 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 to the
home page for the same reason. Nor is reducing displayed product to 25
necessary or desirable.

Is this just theory? Well no we had 100s of links (product lists) on
some pages and sales increased when we applied these rules. We removed a
lot of products from view. By the laws of statistics more products = 
more sales, but not so if you clutter your site or display too far from
home.

This was last year and we heard about the rules years ago.

But hey that's just what we do. Google hates shopping carts, China and
Yahoo! There are other factors like how many external links, so others
may think differently.

Regards,

Frank Reitzenstein