How bad really are subdirectories?

for real, i think they look good and i need atleast 3 if i gonna use them

some important things come as content at that depth....so does it really mean i shouldnt use subdirs then?

Hi,

I suppose that depends on the search indexer. For example Google should go down that far as long as theres links to the content. They are good for organisation and also for security purposes (you can change the permissions of just on folder to allow a user to do more while still retaining the security on the rest of your site.

Displeaser

In an SEO aspect, if you name the the sub dir's you are going to use with keywords, there isn't a problem using them.

A SE will index pages, and if the search matches the page relavance, it will pull it up through any amount of sub dirs.

\o/

Just make sure that the pages are 3 or less clicks away from the homepage. Then it shouldn't matter where they are located URL-wise on the site.

I agree with the other posters mostly, but I would also suggest not to go any deeper then 3 directories. As much as SE's are only supposed to go as far as you want them too, they still can have some small heart-attacks if you go to deep. I saw this on a site that I had directories 5 deep, and the outer pages were never even touched, even though some were linked directly from the home page. After a huge redesign and a 3-month waiting period, all of the pages are getting indexed. I've got the same navigation structure, just taken it back to 2 directories deep.

google search design and structure is not based on sub directories.
its based on page rank system for example: PR(A) = (1-d) + d (PR(T1)/C(T1) + ... + PR(Tn)/C(Tn))

so that wasn't a good example. yeah up to 3 directories its fine with a normal website, but for further directories you can go for paging or indexing technologies, or use dynamick databases.

URL rewrites are also good for this kind of stuff.