Does Bing support cross-domain canonical tags?
-
We have heard Bing takes canonical tags as hints, but do they support cross-domain canonical tags? I don't think this has ever been discussed? Does anyone have an answer or insight?
Thanks!!
-
Thank you all for the responses. I hope they start supporting it soon.
-
Admittedly, public opinion from the industry still seems to be that support is limited. This is the kind of case where I generally believe the reps, though, because it's mostly a technical question. It's not like asking "How many times should I use my keyword in the TITLE tag?"
-
It's strange they began supporting this functionality without any public announcement. With that said, I'll trust your source. If someone has the opportunity to test it, the confirmation would be helpful.
-
Ok, well just to confuse the issue, Stefan Weitz at Bing just replied that they DO support cross-domain canonical. So, maybe it's a relatively recent development (?)
You have to keep in mind that, if it's anything like Google, the cross-domain application is only a suggestion. If the engines think that the cross-domain canonical doesn't make sense or the sites really shouldn't be collapsed that way, they may simply ignore it. So, even with general evidence or official sanction, your own application isn't guaranteed. On the other hand, if you're applying it legitimately, there's virtually no risk. Worst case, it doesn't work.
-
General consensus seems to be that cross-domain canonical is not supported on Bing. One SEO I know says he's tested it and confirmed that. Granted, it's hard to conclusively prove something doesn't work, but it seems like this one is Google-only for now.
-
All the information I could locate on this topic said it was planned for later this year, but there hasn't been any announcement for it so I don't believe it is currently offered.
The most current discussion I could locate is: http://theresultspeople.com/2011/01/18/keep-an-eye-on-bing-webmaster-tools/
Based on the above I would say Bing does not currently support cross-domain canonical tags.
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
-
Added a canonical ref tag and SERPs tanked, should we change it back?
My client's CMS uses an internal linking structure that includes index.php at the end of the URLs. The site also works using SEO-friendly URLs without index.php, so the SEO tool identified a duplicate content issue. Their marketing team thought the pages with index.php would have better link equity and rank higher, so they added a canonical ref tag, making the index.php version of the pages the canonical page. As a result, the site dropped in the rankings by a LOT and has not recovered in the last 3-months. It appears that Google had automatically selected the SEO-friendly URLs as the canonical page, and by switching, it re-indexed the entire site. The question we have is, should they change it back? Or will this cause the site to be reindexed again, resulting in an even lower ranking?
Technical SEO | | TienB240 -
Wrong title tag
Hi, need help. I notice Google always , on all my pages (about 30), index wrong title tag. If I try to use "my-keywords-here | my_company_name" Google always index "my_company_name: my-keywords-here" and can't figure why is that :(
Technical SEO | | MirkoL
The problem is always only with "my-keywords-here | my_company_name".
If I use "my-keywords-here - my_company_name" or "my-keywords-here my_company_name" (without sign | ) everything is fine
Is anybody having any reasonable explanation?
Is anybody having Joomla page with "my-keywords-here | my_company_name" in the title and have indexed by Google like that? one example is www.ferometal-prerada.hr Thank you1 -
Will doing a 301 redirect for one domain to another give the latter domain the formers links?
I have some websites that I built a few years ago that are still in existence, but I no longer have access to the sites as they weren't hosted by myself. These sites all carry a "Designed by Me" text on the footer with a link to my (now old) website. I have since done 301 redirects on the domain names that are used in the footers of these sites so they link directly to my new site. However, will these websites now show up on Google Webmasters for example as external links to my site?
Technical SEO | | mickburkesnr0 -
I disappeared from Google, but not Bing?
A few weeks ago the company I work for created a website called Nabceptraining.com in hopes to find clientele who are looking to become NABCEP Certified. So we installed WordPress and a nice looking theme that we edited, and we saw that without any real content on the page we were already rank 12 on Google! We never even submitted our site. So we decided to Search Engine Optimize our website to gain even better rankings. So on the first day we added an SEO Tool that would allow us to change the page titles and descriptions on our site, a Sitemap generation tool so we could submit the site to Google, Bing, and Yahoo. At the end of the day we submitted the site and was beginning to create our content. That next morning our ranking was gone and we were not to be found on Google, but we were rank 3 on Bing!? What happened? Why did we disappear? We didn't receive any messages from Google on the webmaster tools saying we were blacklisted. Does anyone have an idea?
Technical SEO | | edlinkim0 -
Domain hacked and redirected to another domain
2 weeks ago my home page plus some others had a 301 redirect to another cloned domain for about 1 week (due to a hack).The original pages were then de-indexed and the new bad domain was indexed and in effect stole my rankings.Then the 301 was removed/cleaned from my domain and the bad domain was fully de-indexed via a request I made in WMT (this was 1 week ago).Then my pages came back into the index but without any ranking power (as if it's just in the supplemental index).It's been like this for a week now and the algorithms have not been able to correct it. So how do I get this damage undone or corrected? Can someone at Google reverse/cancel the 301 ranking transfer since the algorithms don't seem to be able to?I have the option to do a "Change of Address" in WMT from bad domain to my domain. But I don't think this would work properly because it says I also need to place a 301 on the bad domain back to mine. Would a change of address still work without the 301?Please advise/help what to do in order to get my rankings back to where they were.
Technical SEO | | Dantek0 -
Grabbing Expired Domains
How hard is it to grab expired domains? I have my eye on a domain that is expiring in 3 days, but I don't think it's quite that simple. Doesn't it go through months of waiting to become available? Is there an easy way to grab domains that are set to expire? Are the services that offer this type of service good? And who do you guys recommend?
Technical SEO | | applesofgold0 -
Sub Domains
Hi,,, Okay we have 1 main site , a few years back we went down the road of sub domains and generated about 10. They have page rank and age but we wish to move them back to the main web site. What is the correct or best way to achieve this. 1 copy all content to the main web site creating dup pages and then use a redirects from the sub pages to the new dup pages on the main domain... or 2 write new content on the main domain for the subdomain pages and redirect to the new content. Problem with 2 is the amount of work involved...
Technical SEO | | NotThatFast0 -
Canonical tags and relative paths
Hi, I'm seeing a problem with Roger Bot crawling a clients site. In a campaign I am seeing you say that the canonical tag is pointing to a different URL. The tag is as follows:- /~/Standards-and....etc Google say:- relative paths are recognized as expected with the tag. Also, if you include a <base> link in your document, relative paths will resolve according to the base URL Is the issue with this, that there is a /~/, that there is no <base> link or just an issue with Roger? Best regards, Peter
Technical SEO | | peeveezee0