Ok, probably a stupid question. But here goes... I know on regular websites a hashtag is an anchor to an element on the page, however, how does this work in mobile devices? It seems to me that mobile devices can use hashtags to slide to another section on the same page, sort of like another page.
How do urls work like that in mobile devices?? I've been to the jquerymobile.com site and noticed the webapp builder on the homepage, offers the ability to change features to slide, slideup, slidedown, fade, pop, etc. etc., however, the only URL to choose from is always "HOME" for these features. And home points to #page1, which is odd that it has a hashtag in it. How do mobile devices work with these hashtags? More importantly, how do I add the ability to slide to that hashtag, as in the way jquerymobile.com implies in the webapp builder?
I've tried doing my own research on this via google, but no luck, as mobile hashtags keeps bringing up other results, not what I am asking for here.
There's no difference between handling of the hash parts of URL in desktop vs. mobile browsers. The key point is that Javascript has access to the URL, including the hash part, and can do any programmatic thing based on the contents of the URL. So if the page author wants to slide in another section in response to changing the hash part of the URL, they can do that. People do the same thing on "desktop" sites, too.
Related
I have a personal project which consumes my free time and effort for about a year without significant profit. I have problems with it appearance in Google and would really appreciate to get help here.
This project (http://yuppi.com.ua - similar to craiglist in US) is WEB-based AngularJS 1.2 application that uses PHP rest API hosted on GoDaddy. And in order to make this application popular it have to be very visible in internet and very searchable in Google and users have to be able to share pages via social networks or skype.
According to Google specification, google crawlers doesn't run javascript to get content of a web page before index, so I've added _escaped_fragment_ page that displays content of web page without javascript. For example:
Page: http://yuppi.com.ua/#!/items/sub/18/_
Dirty : yuppi.com.ua/?_escaped_fragment_=/items/sub/18/_
This dirty page will be redirected here where google will see content.
http://yuppi.com.ua/server/crawler_proxy/routee.php?path=/items/sub/18/
So basically I have two versions on HTML file for that page. One version is the one that available to users, which has styles, a lot more HTML tags etc. And the second is the version for Google crawler - very light-weight without any styles. And I am expecting to see clean link to my site in Google, not dirty.
So, If to search all links to a web site in Google you will see that one of the links displays it's "dirty" state.
Another problem is sharing links in Skype.
When I send a link to someone, I am expecting that this link will be transformed to thumbnail image but it is not happens. Instead I see ungly link to my web site.
Please help me to understand how to make happy everyone: users, google crawler, GoDaddy and me.
I was encountering the same problems last year with a big project and we ended to use : https://prerender.io/.
It's a prerendering system that work with a phantomjs browser to detect bot request and render a full html template. It does also instanciate a cache service to not render again a template that haven't change.
Hope it help's.
I am making a website using AngularJS, I am curious to know that is there any disadvantage of hash in url with respect to seo ?
e.g. http://www.website.com/#about-us
I'll appreciate any contribution.
Thanks
If we go back to the basics, HASH # means a DIV ID in your HTML, and to talk in more details Google ignores anything after the HASH.
Example, this page www.mydomain.com is similar to www.mydomain.com/#about-us
This is an advanced technique some marketers are using it to track their campaign without using parameters like UTMs to avoid content duplication.
To make sure your page is loading without any errors, try to disable the JS from your browsers using "Web Developer Tool" and then load your page, i think you will get a white page without content and this is the way Google and most of the search engines see your pages.
Also there is another way to test it by going to Search Console "Webmaster tool" and use fetch as Google, here you will see exactly how Google view your page.
We have a separate mobile site and a separate desktop site. There's basically a "mobile" page for each normal page like this:
public_html/home.php
public_html/m/home.php
And the m/home.php is showing up in the search results. Is it possible to make google show the normal home.php instead?
Responsive design is a good solution, but that's not the answer I am looking for at the moment.
And I don't want to 301 redirect m/home.php because people on mobile still need to view it.
Is my only option to redirect the user to home.php from m/home.php when I detect that they are not using a mobile browser?
My advice put noindex meta on your all mobile pages that's help you to prevent mobile pages getting result on Google serp then add mobile detection script on your normal site set and redirct for mobile users.
One of the big flaws in Android webphones (and probably other Operating Systems for phones): You are surfing some website, and want to use the site's embedded share button for say Twitter. You want to use the embedded Twitter share because it pre-populates the tweet based on how the site designed it: namely, it has the title of the page and the link and maybe a relevant Twitter hashtag. If you were to use your mobile browser's share feature, you only get the link, and have to attempt to type in the title and guess relevant hashtags--not ideal. The same is the case with other social media shares, like facebook.
So, from the above, you understand why users would prefer to use a given website's own embedded share features, rather than that built into the mobile browser.
However, if a user clicks the site's embedded social media share button, it opens a new browser window for that social media. Ideally, this would not happen, as typical users do not log into these social tools using the mobile browser, and the resulting pop-up share is clunky to use on a small mobile screen. Instead, ideally, you would click on the site's embedded share button and it would attempt to open at least the official twitter (or whatever) app on your phone instead. This is ideal because users tend to use the apps to use their social media, and so would already be logged in. Moreover, such an app is obviously optimized for mobile use, and thus not as clunky.
And yet, this apparently does not exist... am I right?
That is, as a web designer, there is nothing I can do on my embedded Twitter and Facebook share buttons to prompt mobile phone users to use the official app to share (rather than through the mobile browser). Is that right?
Thanks,
Derek
At least on my iPhone the twitter url-scheme does work.
the following opens the twitter app:
twitter://post?message=hello%20world
And facebook is fb://
Haven't tested it on android.
(via: http://wiki.akosma.com/IPhone_URL_Schemes )
What about open a pop up box (not window)- when we click a link to share the URL site/page we are in, without have to go through the mobile browser ?
just a pop up box.
do you think it is possible? or any social media link would automatically opened in a browser?
Is there a way to use responsive design principles with Google Sites. Has anyone tried that. Could you direct me to a sample site. I looked at this google help topic but then that is supposedly about exclusively mobile sites.
My main focus is a normal website which is optimized for web rather than primarily a mobile site.
Alternatively would Blogger be a better option in this case as that allows to change CSS.
I think your negative impression is right. It doesn't implement the features you'd expect in responsive design.
The key to your question is that Google Sites don't use a viewport declaration (meta viewport in the head element). If you don't have that, then device browsers treat you as a legacy desktop-only website. They assume you'll break completely below ~830px, and set a page min-width accordingly. That doesn't sound much like responsive design to me.
Google Sites don't let you write your own CSS or HTML HEAD, so you can't implement a more responsive design yourself.
To be fair, you can choose to not set a fixed page width. Also navigations buttons will reflow on relatively narrow windows, if you're using the "horizontal navigation" feature. The latter isn't great design but at least it's degrading gracefully.
There is an option "Automatically adjust site to mobile phones" under Manage site -> General. However many people suggest it's better not to use it :). I tried enabling it on an old site, previewing the page, and selecting "preview in mobile". At least on Firefox on my original netbook (800px width), it was not responsive. It didn't expand to use the 800px screen properly.
As an aside, the line-wrapping (or absence of it) is a pre-existing issue with my site. You could blame this on me for not testing it :). However it illustrates a limitation of the WYSIWYG editor in Google Sites. It doesn't show, check for, or filter out the formatting that causes this problem.
Mobile yes, responsive no.
I was messing with Google Sites today and you can make a site mobile friendly (I had to come here to get started!). I just used the "Blank Template" to mess around with.
You do need to activate (like others that have mentioned):
Options (gear icon) > Manage site > (scroll down to Mobile) Check.. Automatically adjust for mobile phones. Yeah, let's bury that option way down at the bottom!
Considering the whole mobile "push" Google implemented in the spring of 2015 this should be ON by default for any newly created Google Site.
Just selecting that option makes an OK (basic) mobile site. Not a responsive site. So on my iPhone it does scale photos correctly to fit the device and switches the main horizontal menu to the "hamburger" icon/menu. But collapsing the desktop browser window does not produce responsive results.
https://sites.google.com/site/rwstws51/
As a test, I uploaded a way too large photo (2.5mb) to see what would happen. Running the site through Google PageSpeed Insights it did not display any "optimize photos" warning, so seems to serves up an optimized photo for phones and desktops.
I guess the basic theme is actually called "Ski." I tried out the "Legal Pad" theme and it was totally borked on mobile. I think due to the header and content area background images.
To me Google Sites is ideal if you are already heavy into Google's other products... drive, docs, Google+, webmastertools, analytics, etc... As it has links to add those types of items when editing. Or need a quick site for collaborating as you can easily set the site access like YouTube,Drive items.
Also, you are very limited as to what html you can added. Trying to add a script tag gets stripped out when attempting to save. So again depending on the use there are definitely other options out there.
The answer applying to old "Classic" google sites is NO.
If you create your own custom HTML forms with apps script, you can add the #media viewports etc to the css for those pages/forms,so that helps...
but the google site frame around overrides custom css attempting
responsive design at the page level.
now a days its possible to make a responsive Google Site. since Google has enhanced this feature "Automatically adjust site to mobile phones" option in the Manage Site option button.
to find the option- go to> Manage Site> General> , in the general settings page's lower portion you can see a radio button named "Automatically adjust site to mobile phones". Just tick the radio button & u have enhanced the feature.
Refer an example site made with responsive Google site www.jyotiprokashmusic.com