Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Can you not use JavaScript to figure out your URL is a mess and redirect accordingly? JavaScript for redirecting people to the homepage of websites have been available on dynamicdrive.com for at least a decade now.

That's one redirect to the homepage (which you're already doing by 301-redirecting the JavaScript-free URLs anyway), so it's hardly going to be difficult.

I'm puzzled, considering the haphazard redirects already going on for incoming links to hash-banged sites, why this isn't a trivial problem.

Incoming link is to /shop/shoes#!shop/socks JavaScript right at the top of /shop/shoes that window.location to /#!shop/shoes



two problems

1) The link is weird and confusing in the first place, /shop/shoes#!shop/socks refers to two different resources

2) The server will already have done work to find the shoes, when the javascript redirects to the socks page.


1.) Is a limitation of Google's crawlable Ajax proposal. That would probably not have occurred with a proper standards body. What sequence of events would have to happen to have that as an inbound URL? I sense some previous JavaScript would have to have failed to allow that scenario.

2.) The site is already paying this price by redirecting _escaped_fragment_ URLs, and the old clean style urls. All inbound links will have this problem, so you're only shifting some of the burden through this door instead of the others.


no, with google's proposal, the #! links are all from the site root, see Lifehacker and Twitter's implementation. So these ugly half and half URLs never exist, and you're not paying a double request price


Google's proposed kludge doesn't limit URLs to the site root - a path segment is documented. Have a read of it: http://code.google.com/web/ajaxcrawling/docs/specification.h...


ah you're right, and yes that could possibly introduce the issue of redundant work done on the server depending on the implementation. However the two major implementations I've seen (Twitter and Lifehacker) use it from the root and so dont have that problem.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: