Is this all that is needed for a 'canonical' tag?
-
Hello,
I have a Joomla site. I have put in a plugin to make the page source show: eg.
<link href="[http://www.ditalia.com.au/designer-fabrics-designer-fabric-italian-material-and-french-lace](view-source:http://www.ditalia.com.au/designer-fabrics-designer-fabric-italian-material-and-french-lace)" rel="<a class="attribute-value">canonical</a>" />
Is this all that is need to tell the search engines to ignore the any other links or indexed pages with a url which is created automatically by the system before the SEF urls are initiated?
-
Thanks Jeff, it definitely is. I guess having the "rel=" at the end and not the start doesn't really matter.
-
Carl -
I just went to the page (see screenshot), and did a view source.
It does look like the rel canonical tag is there:
screenshot-designer-fabrics-designer-fabric-italian-material-and-french-lace.jpg rel-canonical-view-source.gif
-
Thanks Jeff. It's sort of helps... now I am uncertain if the plugin is working properly though.
Can anyone clear this up for me?
-
Carl -
Yes, in order to avoid duplicate content, you can use the Rel=canonical tag.
Usually the tag comes first, and then the href after it like this:
<link rel="<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank">canonical" href="<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.ditalia.com.au/designer-fabrics-designer-fabric-italian-material-and-french-lace</a>" /></link rel="<a>
It should work the way you did it too, although some systems might throw an error if the positions are reversed. I saw this previously with an SEO tool and the img src ALT tag was in a non-usual spot.
Here are more resources on the canonical tag, here on SEO Moz:
Confused about Rel Canonical? http://moz.com/blog/rel-confused-answers-to-your-rel-canonical-questions
Moz How To Guide, http://moz.com/learn/seo/canonicalization
Finally, if you want to delve in to an article by Google's Matt Cutts, here's a link where he discusses it in detail:
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/canonical-link-tag/
Hope this helps!
-- Jeff
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
-
Need explanation of Schema
Can someone explain me what it is and what is it used for. From my understanding it is something used by computers to understand language. In other words it is what you can say about an entity. For example a person works, is born somewhere but if I write Mr X flies to as human we do understand but as a computer the computer doesn't understand. Is that what schema is for ? telling me what I can say about an entity using specific verbs so that computers can understand. Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
Site still indexed after request 'change of address' search console
Hello, A couple of weeks ago we requested a change of address in Search console. The new, correct url is already indexed. Yet when we search the old url (with site:www.) we find that the old url is still indexed. Is there another way to remove old urls?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | conversal0 -
Can 'follow' rather than 'nofollow' links be damaging partner's SEO
Hey guys and happy Monday! We run a content rich website, 12+ years old, focused on travel in a specific region, and advertisers pay for banners/content etc alongside editorial. We have never used 'nofollow' website links as they're no explicitly paid for by clients, but a partner has asked us to make all links to them 'nofollow' as they have stated the way we currently link is damaging their SEO. Could this be true in any way? I'm only assuming it would adversely affect them if our website was peanalized by Google for 'selling links', which we're not. Perhaps they're just keen to follow best practice for fear of being seen to be buying links. FYI we now plan to change to more full use of 'nofollow', but I'm trying to work out what the client is refering to without seeming ill-informed on the subject! Thank you for any advice 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SEO_Jim0 -
Do I need to remove pages that don't get any traffic from the index?
Hi, Do I need to remove pages that don't get any traffic from the index? Thanks Roy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kadut1 -
Canonical tags for duplicate listings
Hi there, We are restructuring a website. The website originally lists jobs that will have duplicate content. We have tried to ask the client not to use duplicates but apparently their industry is not something they can control. The recommendations I had is to have categories (which will have the idea description for a group of jobs), and the job listing pages. The job listing pages will then have canonical tags pointing to the category page as the primary URL to be indexed. Another opinion came from a third party that this can be seen as if we are tricking Google and would get penalised, **Is that even true? **Why would Google penalise for this if thats their recommendations in the first place? This third party suggested using nofollow on the links to these listings, or even not not index them all together. What are your thoughts? Thanks Issa
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | iQi0 -
Need help with Robots.txt
An eCommerce site built with Modx CMS. I found lots of auto generated duplicate page issue on that site. Now I need to disallow some pages from that category. Here is the actual product page url looks like
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Nahid
product_listing.php?cat=6857 And here is the auto generated url structure
product_listing.php?cat=6857&cPath=dropship&size=19 Can any one suggest how to disallow this specific category through robots.txt. I am not so familiar with Modx and this kind of link structure. Your help will be appreciated. Thanks1 -
Any issue? Redirect 100's of domains into one website's internal pages
Hi all, Imagine if you will I was the owner of many domains, say 100 demographically rich kwd domains & my plan was to redirect these into one website - each into a different relevant subfolder. e.g. www.dewsburytilers..com > www.brandname.com/dewsbury/tilers.html www.hammersmith-tilers.com > www.brandname.com/hammersmith/tilers.html www.tilers-horsforth.com > www.brandname.com/horsforth/tilers.html another hundred or so 301 redirects...the backlinks to these domains were slim but relevant (the majority of the domains do not have any backlinks at all - can anyone see a problem with this practice? If so, what would your recommendations be?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Fergclaw0 -
Rel Canonical Syntax
My IT department is getting ready to setup the rel canonical tag, finally. I took a look at the code on our test server and see that they are using a single quote in the tag syntax (see code block below). Should I be concerned? Will Google read those lines the same? <link rel='canonical' href='[http://www.wholesalecostumeclub.com/easter-costumes/bunny-suits](view-source:http://www.wholesalecostumeclub.com/easter-costumes/bunny-suits)' />VS. **versus** <link rel="canonical" href="[http://www.wholesalecostumeclub.com/easter-costumes/bunny-suits](view-source:http://www.wholesalecostumeclub.com/easter-costumes/bunny-suits)" />
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | costume0