http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com...tatic-urls.html

 

Which can Googlebot read better, static or dynamic URLs?

 

We've come across many webmasters who, like our friend, believed that static or static-looking URLs were an advantage for indexing and ranking their sites. This is based on the presumption that search engines have issues with crawling and analyzing URLs that include session IDs or source trackers. However, as a matter of fact, we at Google have made some progress in both areas. While static URLs might have a slight advantage in terms of clickthrough rates because users can easily read the urls, the decision to use database-driven websites does not imply a significant disadvantage in terms of indexing and ranking. Providing search engines with dynamic URLs should be favored over hiding parameters to make them look static.

 

This might be food for thought for anyone that currently uses a blog or ecommerce site and has friendly URL rewriting in place.

While google might have no problem with indexing dynamic URL, it is still a fact that you can put relevant keywords on static URL. Moreover, visitors are more likely to remember domain.com/big-evil-widget.htm than domain.com/index.php?act=Post&CODE=02&f=34&t=11472&qpid=81392

Very interesting! But I'm not sure I like this part : "Providing search engines with dynamic URLs should be favored over hiding parameters to make them look static." The first thing that comes to mind when I decide on a URL scheme is whether the link is logical (or rather if the file is located at a logical URL), then I think of how easy it is to remember, which goes hand-to-hand with clarity and simplicity. I really don't want to see /article.php?name=name&page=2 when I can use /article-name/2.

I didn't know this was a secret! Google has always been able to handle dynamic urls as long as they're not too long. But it would be a shame not to create "pretty urls" - just like the guys have said - they're better for humans and they have an SEO advantage too - watch your search keywords get highlighted in Google's SERP.

Here the Google has stressed to remove the unwanted parameters from the dynamic URL. However, though the link static URL is recommended, we should avoid converting dynamic URL into static URL, also remove the unwanted parameters from the dynamic URL.

Yep that's what we've known for years I've never seen any tangible difference between "SEF URL's" and those with a reasonable dynamic URL.

 

I particularly noted the words "Providing search engines with dynamic URLs should be favored over hiding parameters to make them look static." - to me that just confirms what i've suspected for a long time, that there is a lot of hype in the SEO world