[pradeep]

Which one is search engine friendly, relative URLs or absolute URLs?

[shabbir]

Absolute urls. But you can have relative urls doing the job of absolute urls with the help of a .

<A href="one.html">One</A> - Relative URL
<A href="http://www.somesite.com/one.html">One</A> - Absolute URL
<A href="./one.html">One</A> - Absolute url but is actually a relative one.

[harry smith]

IMO, you should go with absolute urls as far as SEO is considered as most SE spiders are NOT intelligent like web browsers. With relative urls they tend to stop before proceeding onto a new directory.

[pradeep]

But I guess, absolute URLs are harder to maintain.

[harry smith]

Yes, that’s true..
But they will not make havoc in your site if something ( directory-subdirectory ) is changed. You will have to give each changed path which will ensure your site’s integrity.

[sarawiser]

I am sure that search engine spiders can understand both URL formats if they are used correctly.

[seo.darren]

Yes thats right, both URL's doesn't affect the ranking of a site.

[Adulu]

both are different?

I think no different because both are output the same html code

[shabbir]

The HTML output can be achieved in multiple ways but the better of the 2 is what makes the difference between ordinary and extra ordinary.

[lucyBrown]

Abosulute url's are comparatively better than Relative url's,but search engine can understand both.Absolute url's are use to identify a resourse independence of their context as compare to Relative url's.