Forum Moderators: open
So, we decided to start backtracking and sure enough, most, if not all of them lead back to Yahoo! and Live. They are the perpetrators of our woes. We're fortunate in that we account for the trailing forward slash in "almost" all implementations. I say almost because apparently we overlooked one. It is a small group of pages but there were enough 404s being generated to take notice.
I go out to Yahoo! and do a site: search and sure enough, every single URI is stripped of its trailing forward slash, every one. Even when you force the slash, Yahoo! and Live trim them back to no slash.
YOU CANNOT DO THAT!
But you are! And you have been forever. Why must you break the protocol?
Here's what I think happens, some scrapers are designed to grab a "visual" URI reference. In Yahoo!'s case, the visual reference is minus the trailing forward slash. For most, this wouldn't be a problem because there are rules in place to prevent the non trailing forward slash version from being browsed to, you just 301 it to the slash. If you are using Content Negotiation, it may be the other way around. But, for some who don't know this little flaw, they may be seeing more than a handful of 404s for those references, I'd check.
So, can someone explain to me why both Yahoo! and Live strip the trailing forward slashes off the display URIs in the SERPs?
So, can someone explain to me why both Yahoo! and Live strip the trailing forward slashes off the display URIs in the SERPs?
It's hard to believe that after all this time, Yahoo and Live would be clueless on this topic. So I'm going to assume they are smart enough to know they're doing this to us. Therefore, there must only be one answer why...
Laziness.
And this is symptomatic of the problem at Live and Yahoo. They don't care about the details. And the details matter - just ask Google.
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
For the reasons why Yahoo does this, see the comment by Tim in this thread:
[webmasterworld.com...]
This is not a new phenomenon, here are a few earlier discussions on the topic (yes, from 2005)
lol, and one I started in 2007 January...
Display URI's in the SERPs - Google vs Yahoo! vs MSN
[webmasterworld.com...]
Us poor Windows folks get treated like "red-headed step-children" as they say. :(
And I too find Yahoo!'s response above unsatisfactory. Although I'm sure their reasoning weighed the pros vs cons. From my perspective, the cons far outweigh any pros from a user standpoint.
I was going to say "That's okay..." but its not. For those of you on a Windows Server who have a rewrite implemented or have done something to override the default Server Settings, I'd recommend verifying that you have the facilities in place to capture these incorrect URI requests and 301 them to their proper destination.
Bad Yahoo! Bad MSN! Who else does it?