Great community. Great ideas.
Welcome to SEOChat, a community dedicated to helping beginners and professionals alike in improving their Search Engine Optimization knowledge. Sign up today to gain access to the combined insight of tens of thousands of members.
Oct 25th, 2012, 01:32 PM
When do remote-hosted content/page elements affect SEO?
Newbie trying to understand exactly what determines when 3rd party hosted content or page elements begin to affect SEO.
Nov 2nd, 2012, 06:03 PM
Nov 15th, 2012, 11:23 AM
somebody has to know. If my videos and images are hosted on an Amazon S3 account rather than on my website's server, does that negatively affect SEO. IF not, then I'm trying to understand what determines when having elements on a remote server does have an affect.
Does my site still get all SEO benefit if I move absolutely everything - videos, images, css, even text - to a remote server/address, and leave only a skeleton of html that pulls everthing back into the webpage?
Nov 28th, 2012, 12:53 AM
This deserves a bump.
Take this with a grain of salt, as this just educated assumption.
Search engines rely on text. You can move scripts and css off-site (If you're using cookies, it's actually recommended to have content like scripts and css off-site, at least on a subdomain, as it affects caching speed)
Text should be on-site. If you're a web app that could mean making sure the text you generate from PHP or Ruby or whatever is properly served in the html of a page. Avoid cloaking content though.
Video seems like a safe bet to store off-site. You'll probably have better leverage if you mark up the page it's embedded on with Schema(dot)org tags.
Images, could be a bit of a split. It seems like Google indexes them based on the page they're on rather than the domain they're served from (like s3), but I'll let someone chime in with a more exact answer.
By lkmbrd in forum Web Design, Coding and Programming
Last Post: Mar 22nd, 2006, 05:56 PM