Some SEO features for CMSMS

[marcgeldon]

Hello guys!

I would like to add two simple SEO features to CMSMS.

The options
- "description" (text field)
- "keywords" (text field)
- "robots" (two checkboxes for follow and index)
in the page options.

Does it make any sense to change the source and upload the changed files here?

Should I wait for CMSMS 2.0 to come out?

Is there any interest for that feature?

Check: http://dev.cmsmadesimple.org/tracker/?f ... 6&atid=104

I also had a problem with doubled content in Google, which I fixed this way, check:
http://dev.cmsmadesimple.org/tracker/?f ... 6&atid=101

What do you think? Home to hear from you soon.


Best wishes,

Marc

[alby]

I would like to add two simple SEO features to CMSMS.

The options
- "description" (text field)
- "keywords" (text field)
- "robots" (two checkboxes for follow and index)
in the page options.

Have you look in Option tab of page (metadata field)?
Enter here your html meta tag

Alby

[nuno]

http://dev.cmsmadesimple.org/tracker/?f ... 6&atid=101

In my view would always be without the www

best R.

[marcgeldon]

I think we all know that the subdomain "www" is the standard.

So there are too options:
- make it configurable (so that the admin can choose to use it with or without "www")
- make "www" the standard, people who don't want the subdomain "www" have to change the file

[calguy1000]

The description, keywords, and other meta tags can be done with smarty and content blocks now..... look in the tips & tricks forum I've posted a howto there.

I feel that there is no need to add specific fields like this to CMS when a little smarty imagination can take care of the problem.

This will be even easier in CMS 2.0 when
a) modules will be able to add fields into the edit content page to associate data items with a page
b) block types will aide in specifying different types of content blocks

Putting specifics like this into packages in my opinion are always a bad thing:
a) they are always useless in some environments (intranets) which ends up in extra un-needed bloat
b) somebody always wants something slightly different, or slightly extra which then requires a generic field
    mechanism anyways.

In fact, if you ask me.... the access key stuff and title attribute etc, etc, fields that we have now should have been done in a generic way.  Hopefully this will be solved in 2.0

[marcgeldon]

@calguy1000 -> Maybe I am blind... but can you post the link? I cannot find the post you talked about in the Tips&Tricks forum.

[calguy1000]

http://forum.cmsmadesimple.org/index.php/topic,16842.0.html

[applejack]

I think we all know that the subdomain "www" is the standard.

No it is not standard if the domain names DNS has been set up correctly then you should be able to also use http://domainname

Also I use other subdomains besides www frequently during production.

[marcgeldon]

@applejack: DNS is set correctly "domain.com" and "www.domain.com" (for example) do both work. The problem is that for Google "domain.com" and "www.domain.com" are two different domains. So you have duplicate content in the Google index.

[marcgeldon]

@calguy: Thank you very much. Such a simple and good idea!

[Zappa]

@applejack: DNS is set correctly "domain.com" and "www.domain.com" (for example) do both work. The problem is that for Google "domain.com" and "www.domain.com" are two different domains. So you have duplicate content in the Google index.

To prevent this you can add this code to your .htaccess file

Code: Select all

#changes site.com to www.site.com
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^mysite.com [NC] 
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.mysite.com/$1 [L,R=301]