Google vs. Yahoo vs. Bing on 'deep linking:' Does it make any difference?

We found our first intentionally-sought-after, deeply-linked reference on Google for the query calculus. After Wikipedia, the #2 entry returned by Google was to this page on Calculus.org, a collection of links to multiple other pages and Java applets for teaching the fundamentals of calculus.

Yahoo linked to Calculus.org as #2, and Bing as #1. But neither one provided deep links, which indicates that neither of these sites has gotten around to indexing much else than Wikipedia. Other very general queries we tried -- "hedge funds", "Jerry Goldsmith", NASCAR -- failed to turn up deeply-linked references to any other site but Wikipedia.

The arguments in favor of using named anchors to enable deeply-linked Web pages come from software engineers and SEO experts who believe anything that can help elevate a site's keywords will increase its page ranking. Indeed, there's some evidence of this as Calculus.org did place highly in Yahoo and Bing, even though deep links did not appear in their search results.

Even here, though, the advocates of deep linking suggest that the naming of anchors and sub-pages be conservative, and concentrate on a few keywords. One such advocate is Web developer Ravi Shanker, who has built Deeplink.us, a search engine for selected deeply-linked sites only, so far with a smattering of participants.

Opponents to deep linking include bigger Web publishers whose revenue streams rely on readers being able to find their articles via the routes those publishers create for them. They don't want readers skipping over the top of the front page, which is prime real estate for advertisers -- or at least, it used to be.

But neither the supporters or opponents of deep linking may have anything to gain or fear from this week's developments among the leading search engines. Let's face it: Folks who really want to see articles of questionable validity written by any number of individuals with unknown reputation, perhaps plucked at random from a street corner, will go to Wikipedia directly -- they don't need Yahoo or Bing or Google to direct them there. So the idea of promoting a new research feature that, in essence, serves as a platform for elevating someone else's site in particular, may not be all that useful to everyday users after all.