Rel Canonical tag usage on ECommerce website
-
Hello,
I have read up on the rel canonical tag and I'm ready to apply it to my site's categorization structure.
However, I'm concerned that, because my website does not have a "view all" button for our product pages, the rel canonical tag would not be appropriate.
For example, if you come to my site's main category url, you come to
At this level - you get the top 12 items in the category.
if you want to see the next page, you click a crawlable link that goes to
etc. etc.
The site does not offer a view all function.
Would applying the rel canonical tag be appropriate in this instance, or do I have to let Google crawl and index each page independantly?
Thanks.
-
Thanks! I understand what you're saying and I agree...this is exactly the method that our CMS generates these pages. The crawlable, additional pages are unique and should be crawled. This being said, from a search engine's perspective, the obvious "canonicalized" page should be the main category. I believe the robots, no index/follow is the best option for me - though I'm not exactly sure how to implement it with our CMS system.. Thanks.
-
Thanks!
Hadn't considered the robots tag like this. Unfortunately, our site's CMS system will make either of these options tough to actually implement. But it's great to know there're some options.
-
Technically, rel=prev/next is more appropriate, but it can be really tough to implement and Bing doesn't honor it.
If the paginated search pages don't have inbound links, you could just use META NOINDEX,FOLLOW on them (pages 2, 3, etc.). It's a lot easier to implement and is still very effective.
-
**if you want to see the next page, you click a crawlable link that goes to **
**mysite.com/main-category12-24 **
**The site does not offer a view all function. **
Would applying the rel canonical tag be appropriate in this instance, or do I have to let Google crawl and index each page independantly?
In this example you actually are talking about 2 different pages and in which case it can be appropriate to use the rel canonical.
Example take a look at a popular plateform like Oscommerce.
The Index.php page generates the following pages
- index.php
- category pages
- sub category pages
These are referenced by the software by the cPath (category Path) and would look much like this
- index.php
- index.php&cPath=1
- index.php&cPath=1_5
To a search engine these are all unique pages. Additionally, since many e-commerce platforms follow this type of module but also have ways to make the pages more SEO friendly you can in some cases access the same page via different URL's which is of course bad, due to duplicate content. In these case a rel canonical is very appropriate.
For example Oscommerce has a SEO friendly URL modification which turns the unspecific URL like index.php&cPath=1 into something like electronics.html However unless some sort of redirect is used you can actually access this page via either URL.
To simplify the answer the rel canonical tag is most appropriate for pages that generate dynamic URL's but content changes very little. In my examples above the pages are very different index.php and a index.php&cPath=1 page, however there can be times when you have interactions on those pages which would create a new url like say adding a product to the cart or a product selection filter, or any score of interactions that may change the url from index.php&cPath=1 to index.php&cPath=1&addToCart1&Product_ID=414&return in this case rel canonical would be very much appropriate as the page is not really changing you're just executing an action.
-
Here's an article from Google webmaster central with instructions on how to impliment it.
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/09/pagination-with-relnext-and-relprev.html
And a quick example of implimentation by Yoast for 'Page 2' of results.
http://yoast.com/rel-next-prev-paginated-archives/
Just a quick note, on 'page 1' there should be no rel=prev (your mysite.com/main-category in this case) On on the final page there should be no rel=next. All other pages should have both.
Hope these help.
-
Wow, thanks alot I hadn't heard this was even available. Any chance you could give me a link to where I could find info. to implement?
Thanks again for your help, either way!
-
I'd impliment rel=rev and rel=next on the pages to imply that their paginated, with the first page mentioned being the first in the chain.
rel=canonical then should point to the actual url, not the view-all page.
I think that is the 'correct' implimention for paginated content since rel=prev and rel=next were introduced.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
How can I increase my website speed?
Hi, I hope you are doing good. My website speed is too much slow. Mobile speed is 12 and Desktop speed is 39. Please check my website speed.
Web Design | | Bigbrand
&
What can I do for my website to increase speed?
What is best way to increase website speed. Here is my website: https://www.myqurantutor.com/0 -
NO Meta description pulling through in SERP with react website - Requesting Indexing & Submitting to Google with no luck
Hi there, A year ago I launched a website using react, which has caused Google to not read my meta descriptions. I've submitted the sitemap and there was no change in the SERP. Then, I tried "Fetch and Render" and request indexing for the homepage, which did work, however I have over 300 pages and I can't do that for every one. I have requested a fetch, render and index for "this url and linked pages," and while Google's cache has updated, the SERP listing has not. I looked in the Index Coverage report for the new GSC and it says the urls and valid and indexable, and yet there's still no meta description. I realize that Google doesn't have to index all pages, and that Google may not also take your meta description, but I want to make sure I do my due diligence in making the website crawlable. My main questions are: If Google didn't reindex ANYTHING when I submitted the sitemap, what might be wrong with my sitemap? Is submitting each url manually bad, and if so, why? Am I simply jumping the gun since it's only been a week since I requested indexing for the main url and all the linked urls? Any other suggestions?
Web Design | | DigitalMarketingSEO1 -
Website usability
We have just re-launched one of our websites, but we are looking at ideas to create it more usable. The website is aimed at engineers and aimed at getting more inquiries for the products with high value - and create more sales for products with a relatively low value. In terms of the design of the site, this is something we are open to, we also know the page speed is not the greatest and we are looking at improving this in the meantime. https://aropumpshop.com/ Any suggestions for usability and SEO would be greatly appreciated. Cheers
Web Design | | tfpumps0 -
URL Structure for a shopping website
I have a website which currently has a bad URL structure. I would like to change it. Proposed URL Structure: www.website.com www.website.com/category/ www.website.com/category/men/ www.website.com/category/men/jackets www.website.com/category/men/jackets/product-name Is it a good URL structure? I have seen some other website uses their product name right after their root domain. www.website.com/product-name I have also seen another structure which changes like below: www.website.com/womens-jackets/products www.website.com/mens-jackets/products Which is Good URL structure for SEO & users?
Web Design | | BBT-Digital0 -
Wow, does a website's hosting company have that much affect on SEO?
As a small SEO agency, we also handle hosting for some of our clients. Our clients' sites are Wordpress. We set them up with a Bluehost account with a dedicated IP address, and spend a lot of time focusing on load times (implementing a CDN, optimizing images, installing W3 Total cache and using recommended settings, etc.). Last month, we had a client inform us that they are bringing their web marketing efforts in-house, so they switched to a new hosting provider and took their (existing) site to the new hosting company. They kept their old Google Analytics code installed, so I can still see how much traffic they're getting. Since switching to a new host, despite the load times taking longer, no CDN, and other errors that came up prior to us spending time "optimizing" the website, their organic traffic has increased by 26%. Same exact website, same inbound link profile. According to Webmaster Tools, their impressions and clicks have also seen dramatic increases. So now, obviously, I'm considering looking into other options for the hosting of our other clients' websites. From your experience, and especially when it comes to Wordpress websites, do you think that a hosting company can make that big of a difference in terms of SEO? I've heard of positive results from people who have used WP-Engine, and other Wordpress-dedicated hosting companies, but I just find it hard to believe that we spent so much time on load-time-specific ranking factors and come to find out, a different hosting company would have made a huge difference. Any thoughts/feedback?
Web Design | | georgetsn1 -
New Website launch, asking for feedback
Hey Guys, I just launched my new website. I just asking around for feedback. Please check it out if you have time and let me know www.benjaminmarc.com
Web Design | | benjaminmarcinc1 -
Metro style design for a new eCommerce Platform: will it survive?
Hello, While developing eCommerce solution for building webstores in WordPress, our team decided to use metro style design for our dashboard. Could you check the Dashboard screenshot please and discuss several questions with me: How do you think, is it a good idea to use this kind of style? Do you think if there are many people who hate it?:) Should we offer more dashboard designs that can be changed through admin area (may be to offer a standard WP design) or this style will be enough for the start? Thank you very much! Yaros, GosuSell 001_dashboard.jpg
Web Design | | GosuSell0 -
Can the website pages have the site name like Title of the page | Sitename.com
Hi, Can the website pages have the site name like Title of the page | Sitename.com I have a site with 50K pages and all pages have | Sitename.com mentioned would that be a good practice or bad? Thanks Martin
Web Design | | mtthompsons0