What is the correct Canonical tag on m.site?

[kguard]

We have 2 separate sites for desktop (www.example.com) and mobile (m.example.com)

As per the guideline, we have added Rel=alternate tag on www.example.com to point to mobile URL(m.example.com) and Rel=canonical tag on m.example.com to point to Desktop site(www.example.com).However, i didn't find any guideline on what canonical tag we should add ifFor Desktop sitewww.example.com/PageA - has a canonical tag to www.example.com/PageBOn this page, we have a Rel=alternate tag m.example.com/pageAWhat will be the canonical we should add for the mobile version of Page Am.example.com/PageA - Canonical tag point to www.example.com/PageA -or www.example.com/PageB?Kalpesh

[BlueprintMarketing]

Hi, I hope this helps,

Do NOT point desktop pages to m. pages via a rel="canonical" tags use rel="alternate" for that & make sure rel="canonical" tag on the m. URL pointing to the corresponding desktop URL

Annotations for desktop and mobile URLs

1. On the desktop page, add a rel="alternate" tag pointing to the corresponding mobile URL. This helps Googlebot discover the location of your site's mobile pages.
2. On the mobile page, add a rel="canonical" tag pointing to the corresponding desktop URL.

We support two methods to have this annotation: in the HTML of the pages themselves and in sitemaps. For example, suppose that the desktop URL is https://example.com/page-1 and the corresponding mobile URL is https://m.example.com/page-1. The annotations in this example would be as follows.

Annotations in the HTML

On the desktop page (https://www.example.com/page-1), add the following annotation:

<code dir="ltr"><linkrel="alternate"media="only screen="" and="" (max-width:="" 640px)"<br="">href="https://m.example.com/page-1"></linkrel="alternate"media="only></code> 

On the mobile page (https://m.example.com/page-1), the required annotation should be:

 <code dir="ltr"><linkrel="canonical"href="https: www.example.com="" page-1"=""></linkrel="canonical"href="https:></code> 

This rel="canonical" tag on the mobile URL pointing to the desktop page is required.

A page have a self-referencing canonical URL

In the example above, we link the non-canonical page to the canonical version. But should a page set a rel=canonical for itself? I strongly recommend having a canonical link element on every page and Google has confirmed that’s best. That’s because most Sites & CMS’s will allow URL parameters without changing the content.

So all of these URLs would show the same content:

• https://www.example.com/page-1
  

• https://www.example.com/page-1/?isnt=it-awesome
  

• https://www.example.com/page-1/?cmpgn=twitter
  

• https://www.example.com/page-1/?cmpgn=facebook
  

Using a mobile website version of their desktop version, they need to implement a canonical tag on their mobile website page with an URL of the desktop version.

For example,

Your main domain: iamexample.com

Your mobile version: m.iamexample.com

Then, have this tag in the section of your main domain -

And, have this tag in the section of your mobile version page -

Mobile-Specific URLs, Such as AMP Pages or a Mobile-Specific Subdomain

Creating content with mobile in mind is a marketing must -- just be sure to remember to set your canonical URLs when you have pages that are specific to mobile but have the same content as a page on the desktop version of your website. For AMP pages specifically, Google also provides detailed guidelines on how to correctly differentiate your Accelerated Mobile Page from your standard webpage.

SEE:

• https://developers.google.com/search/mobile-sites/mobile-seo/separate-urls
• https://yoast.com/rel-canonical/
• https://moz.com/blog/cross-domain-rel-canonical-seo-value-cross-posted-content
• https://moz.com/learn/seo/canonicalization
• https://moz.com/blog/rel-canonical

Hope this helps,

Tom

[effectdigital]

You shouldn't have canonical tags on either pointing to the other IMO. A canonical tag, deployed on a web-page, says to Google "I am the non-canonical version of a page. Unless you have signals like links which contradict this tag strongly, don't index this non-canonical page at all. Only index the canonical URL which I am pointing you to"

So the page which you place the canonical tag on, becomes (itself) non canonical and therefore gives a medium-to-strong signal to Google that it should be de-indexed. As such, if you plaster your mobile site in canonical tags, you are essentially telling Google that the entire mobile site is non-canonical and thereby probably not a great candidate for indexation. Do you want your mobile site to rank? I assume you do

I don't know what guidance you have read. Google's guidance is often woefully out of date as their documentation update cycle for organic-search stuff is really poor. If it was something here on Moz, I personally disagree with it

I would just stick with the alternate tags. Anyway if you have canonicals going in two directions, you will create a soft redirect loop where both URLs specify themselves as non-canonical. That could make things way worse than they are now