Comments on: Learn about the Canonical Link Element in 5 minutes

By: matthew carson

matthew carson — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:37:40 +0000

Question: Are canonical links or 301 redirects more appropriate in this case?

You have ppl entering a page with this link: http://www.domain.com/page.html

but you’d prefer them to enter here: http://www.domain.com/page.html#total

By: bob phillips

bob phillips — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 09:19:15 +0000

I think this might be a rather amateurish question. I got to your comments on canonical links because I was searching “web links”. What I want to know is – for a naive author of a simple blog – can I provide the reader with “paths” through my blog? What I want to do is to suggest to the reader, quite visibly, that if he/she has just read blog x, then bloq q might be a sensible one to read next, rather than going serially on to blog y. In fact, what I would like to be able to do is to say to the reader: “If you are interested in topic A, then I suggest you read in the sequence x, q, r, s, f ….; but if you are interested in topic B, then I suggest you read in the sequence x, y, j, k, l” Can I do that in the popualr blog software, Currently I am using the Blog software provided on One.com, the Danisk company founded by Jacob Jensen.

By: Chip D

Chip D — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 05:46:21 +0000

This may be a naive question, but here goes. I have installed a couple of Google Custom Search Engines on sites in which the search results are written to an iframe on a page called, “search.html.” In Google Analytics I see these page addresses, with long strings of stuff on the tail of a ?, likely because I have ga.js tracking code on the “search.html” page.

This is not creating duplicate content, is it? I don’t need to put rel=”canonical” in the of “search.html” pointing right back at “search.html,” as: , right?

Thank you for sharing!

By: Margarita Grisales

Margarita Grisales — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:27:48 +0000

I recently discovered a cute little C on my Firefox browser bar next to the RSS icon. I love it because if you’re on a page that has the canonical link element, the little C tells you whether or not that page is the canonical version. If it is the C is gray and if it is not the C is blue.
My problem is that I have no clue how I got that to show up in my browser, and I would like for my co-workers to also have it, so if anyone know how to get it please let me know!

Thanks!
MG

By: jayvee

jayvee — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 17:15:04 +0000

Great read here! I normally use a wordpress blog and use the all in one seo pack plugin. It has a tick box for use canonical link there… Thanks for this informative post.

By: Seo London

Seo London — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 13:15:34 +0000

Canonical link element will make ulrs more representable.

By: Meng

Meng — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 21:14:56 +0000

harmonsmith: You can tell the webserver to treat html files as php – it’s just a setting. And on top of this you can use for example Apache’s mod_rewrite to point something.html to something.php internally. His example is perfectly valid.

By: Todd Gerberding

Todd Gerberding — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 03:42:11 +0000

If I do a permanent Redirect will search engines be able to tell that my site is indeed just one site. For example, I have mydomain.com and http://www.mydomain.com, search engines might think those are two different sites. Is this true? or should I not worry about it? Thx!

By: praveen

praveen — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 05:18:58 +0000

Why google doesnot understand this all urls are one page address?

By: harmonsmith

harmonsmith — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 05:51:57 +0000

Good article but you use wrong URL for you examples, means you used this canonical URL
http://example.com/page.htm
http://www.example.com/page.html?sid=asdf314159265 .

But simple HTML page cannot have variable in URL. it should be .php or .aspx extension. I hope you understand my point of view