Is this structure valid for a canonical tag?
-
Working on a site, and noticed their canonical tags follow the structure:
They cited their reason for this as http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt. Does anyone know if Google will recognize this as a valid canonical? Are there any issues with using this as a the canonical?
-
looks weird and i would fix personally, but if you leave off http: a URL does resolve.
look at the indexing on the site and see if the canonical rules are being followed since they are already implemented on the site.
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
-
Pages canonicaled to another appearing before the canonical on google searches
Hello, When I do this google search, this page(amandine roses category) appears before the one it is canonical-ed to(this multi-product version of amandine roses). This happens often with this multi-product template, where they don't rank as well as their category version(that are canonical to the multi-product version). Can someone maybe point us in the right direction on what the issue may be? What can be improved?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | globalrose.com0 -
URL structure for new product launch
Hello, I work for a company (let's call it companyX) that is about to launch a new product, lets call it ProductY. www.CompanyX.com is an old domain with a good domain authority. The market in which ProductY is being launched is extremely competitive. The marketing department want's to launch ProductY on a new website at www.ProductY.com.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Lvet
My opinion is that we should instead create a subfolder with product information at www.CompanyX.com/ProductY. By doing this we could leverage on the existing domain authority of CompanyX.com Additionally for campaigns, and in order to have a more memorable URL we could use ProductY.com with a 301 redirect to www.CompanyX.com/ProductY What do you think is the best strategy from an SEO point of view? Cheers
Luca0 -
URL structure - which one is better?
We are creating a new website and got stuck while deciding the URL structure. Our concern is which url is better in terms of SEO i.e. pune.fabogo.com/spa or fabogo.com/pune/spa and why. Also which one would rank faster if someone searches for **spas in pune if both **pages are same.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fabogo_marketing0 -
Whats the best way to structure my site?
Hi All, Hope everyone is well. I have a hypothetical and would love some experts advice. For a product like a corporate credit card what's the best URL structure to get the most out of SEO. Assuming the Page Title is Corporate Credit Card (unless this isnt the best idea? However the product is called the "corporate credit card" ). The reason this is trickier than I thought is because they say the rule of thumb is to use the plural of everything for best SEO. However I have pluralized the sub page "credit cards". www.website.com.au/products/credit-cards/corporate 2) www.website.com.au/products/credit-cards/corporate-credit-card 3) www.website.com.au/products/credit-cards/corporate-credit-cards If someone were to search for corporate credit cards would option 1&2 show up correctly? Would moz rank this as an "F" ? Thanks everyone! Dave
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CFCU0 -
Adding a Canonical Tag to each page referencing itself?
Hey Mozers! I've noticed that on www.Zappos.com they have a Canonical tag on each page referencing it self. I have heard that this is a popular method but I dont see the point in canon tagging a page to its self. Any thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rpaiva0 -
Rel=Canonical to Longer Page?
We've got a series of articles on the same topic and we consolidated the content and pasted it altogether on a single page. We linked from each individual article to the consolidated page. We put a noindex on the consolidated page. The problem: Inbound links to individual articles in the series will only count toward the authority of those individual pages, and inbound links to the full article will be worthless. I am considering removing the noindex from the consolidated article and putting rel=canonicals on each individual post pointing to the consolidated article. That should consolidate the PageRank. But I am concerned about pointing****a rel=canonical to an article that is not an exact duplicate (although it does contain the full text of the original--it's just that it contains quite a bit of additional text). An alternative would be not to use rel=canonicals, nor to place a noindex on the consolidated article. But then my concern would be duplicate content and unconsolidated PageRank. Any thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TheEspresseo0 -
Hreflang many to one relationship (And canonical)
I have a question about the use of hreflang. In country one i have for instance web.one/BlueWidget web.one/YellowWidgetIn country (and language) two I have web.two/Widget In other words, the distinction between yellow and blue isn't there in country two. My best try would beweb.one/BlueWidget two" href="<a>http://</a>web.two/Widget" />web.one/YellowWidget <link rel="<a>alternate" hreflang="two" href="<a>http://</a>web.two/Widget" /></link rel="<a> <link rel="<a>canonical" href="web.one/BlueWidget"/></link rel="<a>web.two/Widget <link rel="<a>alternate" hreflang="one" href="web.one/BlueWidget" /> </link rel="<a> <link rel="<a>canonical" href="web.two/Widget "/></link rel="<a>So pointing both blue and yellow to the Widget in country two, and pointing widget in country two to Blue widget in country one, as BlueWidget is what I would prefer to promote if I had to choose.What do people think? Is this the way to go? If so, why? If not, why?And is it actually worth bothering with? Will country two get a boost because I get links to country one? Regards
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Peekabo0 -
No index, follow vs. canonical url
We have a site that consists almost entirely as a directory of videos. Example here: http://realtree.tv/channels/realtreeoutdoorsclassics We're trying to figure out the best way to handle pagination and utility features such as sort for most recent, most viewed, etc. We've been reading countless articles on this topic, but so far have been unable to determine what might be considered the industry standard. Two solutions seem to stand out... Using the canonical url on all the sorted and paginated pages. However, after reading many blog posts, it seems that you should NEVER use the canonical url to solve the issue of paginated, and thus duplicated content because the search bots will never crawl past the first page leaving many results not in the index. (We are considering ruling this method out.) Another solution seems to be using the meta tag for noindex, follow so that a search engine like Google will crawl your directory pages but not add them to the index themselves. All links are followed so content is crawled and any passing link juice remains unchanged. However, I did see a few articles skeptical of this solution as well saying that there are always better alternatives, or that there is no verification that search engines obey this meta tag. This has placed some doubt in our minds. I was hoping to get some expert advice on these methods as it would pertain to our site. Thank you.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | grayloon0