301 to trailing slash version then canonical

[Chammy]

Hi Mozzers

I'm just doing an audit for a client and see that all non-trailing-slash URLs are 301'd to trailing-slash URLS. So far so good.

But then all the trailing-slash URLs are canonicalled back to the non-trailing-slash URLs.

This feels wrong to me, but is it? Never come across this before. Should the canonicals just be removed?

Any help much appreciated

[Chammy]

Many thanks guys

[MickEdwards]

As I see it, even if it wasn't wrong it's good housekeeping to keep the same format throughout all possible URLs.

In your case the canonical is saying that that URL is the original.  Google won't crawl to it and is just concerned in the filename/main URL  - and if it did the 301 kicks in but there is no link value issue.   I would prefer to keep it tidy by matching the structure you want.

[ajfried]

Basically you are saying a page is canonicaling to a page that is being redirected...

As far as the search engine is concerned, in this specific scenario, the canonical tag is probably not needed.

(if you want to private message me a link I can double check to make sure I am not crazy... but its for a client, so I understand if you don't want to :)).