Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Redirection chain and Javascript Redirect
-
Hi,
A redirection chain is usually defined as a page redirecting to another page which itself is another redirection.
URL1 ---(301/302)---> URL2 ---(301/302)---> URL3
But what about Javascript redirect? They seem to be a different beast:
URL1 ---(301/302)---> URL2 ---(200 then Javascript redirect)---> URL3
From what I know if the javascript redirect is instant Google counts it as a 301 permanent redirection, but I'm still not sure about if this counts as a redirection chain.
Most of the tools (such as moz) only see the first redirection.
So is that scenario a redirection chain or no?
-
It's a delicate balance between efficient routing and ensuring seamless transitions, where every decision shapes the user's path and perception. myvirtualworkplace
-
@LouisPortier said in Redirection chain and Javascript Redirect:
Hi,
A redirection chain is usually defined as a page redirecting to another page which itself is another redirection.
URL1 ---(301/302)---> URL2 ---(301/302)---> URL3
But what about Javascript redirect? They seem to be a different beast:
URL1 ---(301/302)---> URL2 ---(200 then Javascript redirect)---> URL3
From what I know if the javascript redirect is instant Google counts it as a 301 permanent redirection, but I'm still not sure about if this counts as a redirection chain.
Most of the tools (such as moz) only see the first redirection.
So is that scenario a redirection chain or no?
A JavaScript redirect, on the other hand, is a redirect that occurs using JavaScript code embedded in a webpage. Instead of relying on server-side redirects, JavaScript redirects are triggered when the page loads or when certain conditions are met, and they instruct the browser to navigate to a different URL. They can be used for various purposes, such as redirecting users after a certain amount of time, after a form submission, or based on user interactions.
-
Understanding the intricacies of redirection chains and JavaScript redirects is crucial for optimizing website performance and user experience. Proper implementation ensures smooth navigation and avoids unnecessary delays. Visit more
-
Understanding the intricacies of redirection chains and JavaScript redirects is crucial for optimizing website performance and user experience. Proper implementation ensures smooth navigation and avoids unnecessary delays. Visit more
-
Understanding the intricacies of redirection chains and JavaScript redirects is crucial for optimizing website performance and user experience. Proper implementation ensures smooth navigation and avoids unnecessary delays. Visit more
-
Understanding the intricacies of redirection chains and JavaScript redirects is crucial for optimizing website performance and user experience. Proper implementation ensures smooth navigation and avoids unnecessary delays. Visit more
-
Understanding the intricacies of redirection chains and JavaScript redirects is crucial for optimizing website performance and user experience. Proper implementation ensures smooth navigation and avoids unnecessary delays. Visit more
-
Understanding the intricacies of redirection chains and JavaScript redirects is crucial for optimizing website performance and user experience. Proper implementation ensures smooth navigation and avoids unnecessary delays. Visit more
-
I appreciate your detailed explanation. To enhance accuracy in tracing redirects, ensure a cohesive sequence. Consider using a unified approach for hash numbers, perhaps generating a unique identifier for each transition. Additionally, refine the code logic to account for different redirection techniques, ensuring a seamless and connected mapping of the entire journey from A to D. If possible, share snippets of your code for more targeted guidance. shopify website design servicee austin
-
Thank you for the valuable feedback. While the current code successfully executes, it lacks accuracy in tracing the redirect sequence. The issue stems from the disjointed nature of the captured redirects, as seen in the isolated transitions from A to B, B to C, and C to D, where randomly generated hash numbers (channel_1 and channel_2) are utilized. This disrupts the continuity of the redirect chain, resulting in an inaccurate representation of the actual progression from A through D.
The objective is to effectively track the entire journey, encompassing transitions from A to B to C to D, across various redirection techniques such as meta-refresh, JavaScript, and HTTP redirects. I would greatly appreciate your guidance on refining the code to maintain the integrity of the redirect sequence, ensuring a connected and sequential mapping of the redirection process. Liteblue
-
Thank you for the valuable feedback. While the current code successfully executes, it lacks accuracy in tracing the redirect sequence. The issue stems from the disjointed nature of the captured redirects, as seen in the isolated transitions from A to B, B to C, and C to D, where randomly generated hash numbers (channel_1 and channel_2) are utilized. This disrupts the continuity of the redirect chain, resulting in an inaccurate representation of the actual progression from A through D.
The objective is to effectively track the entire journey, encompassing transitions from A to B to C to D, across various redirection techniques such as meta-refresh, JavaScript, and HTTP redirects. I would greatly appreciate your guidance on refining the code to maintain the integrity of the redirect sequence, ensuring a connected and sequential mapping of the redirection process. Liteblue
-
In the scenario you described, where there is a sequence of redirects involving both HTTP redirects (301/302) and a JavaScript redirect, it can be considered a redirection chain. The key point is that each step in the sequence contributes to the final destination of the URL.
In your example:
- URL1 redirects to URL2 using an HTTP 301/302 status code.
- URL2, after an HTTP 200 response, triggers a JavaScript redirect to URL3.
From Google's perspective, if the JavaScript redirect is instantaneous and does not introduce a delay, it might treat it similarly to a traditional 301 permanent redirect. However, it's important to note that search engines may interpret JavaScript redirects differently, and their behavior may evolve over time.
Tools like Moz may sometimes focus on the initial HTTP redirect and not delve into subsequent steps, potentially overlooking the complete redirection chain. Therefore, discrepancies in what different tools report could occur.
For a more comprehensive understanding, you might consider using tools or methods that specifically analyze JavaScript-based redirects or inspect the network requests in a browser's developer tools to see the entire redirection sequence. This way, you can get a clearer picture of how search engines and various tools interpret the entire redirection chain, including both HTTP and JavaScript redirects.
-
Thank you for the insightful feedback. While the current code executes successfully, it falls short in accurately tracing the redirect sequence. The issue lies in the disjoint nature of the captured redirects, exemplified by the isolated transitions A->B, B->C, and C->D, where the hash numbers (channel_1 and channel_2) are generated randomly. This disrupts the continuity of the redirect chain, failing to reflect the actual progression from A through D. The goal is to effectively track the entire journey, A->B->C->D, across different redirection techniques such as meta-refresh, JavaScript, and HTTP redirects. Could you provide guidance on how to refine the code to maintain the integrity of the redirect sequence, ensuring a connected and sequential mapping of the redirection process?
-
Thank you for the insightful feedback. While the current code executes successfully, it falls short in accurately tracing the redirect sequence. The issue lies in the disjoint nature of the captured redirects, exemplified by the isolated transitions A->B, B->C, and C->D, where the hash numbers (channel_1 and channel_2) are generated randomly. This disrupts the continuity of the redirect chain, failing to reflect the actual progression from A through D. The goal is to effectively track the entire journey, A->B->C->D, across different redirection techniques such as meta-refresh, JavaScript, and HTTP redirects. Could you provide guidance on how to refine the code to maintain the integrity of the redirect sequence, ensuring a connected and sequential mapping of the redirection process? Liteblue
-
Thank you for your feedback. While the code is currently functional, it doesn't yield the expected outcome. The recorded redirect chain appears disjointed, capturing transitions like A->B (channel_1 -> channel_2), B->C (channel_1 -> channel_2), and C->D (channel_1 -> channel_2). The issue lies in the randomly generated hash numbers (channel_1 and channel_2), preventing the proper linkage of the redirect chain. The goal is to accurately capture sequential events such as A->B->C->D, considering various redirection methods like meta-refresh, JavaScript, and HTTP. How can I modify the code to implement this strategy and ensure the redirection chain is connected as intended?
-
Thank you for your feedback. Although the code is functional, it does not produce the expected result. Currently, the recorded redirect chain is disjointed, capturing transitions like A->B (channel_1 -> channel_2), B->C (channel_1 -> channel_2), and C->D (channel_1 -> channel_2). In this case, the hash numbers (channel_1 and channel_2) are randomly generated, preventing the proper linking of the redirect chain. The objective is to accurately capture the sequential events of A->B->C->D, considering various redirection methods such as meta-refresh, JavaScript, and HTTP. How can I modify the code to achieve this strategy and ensure the redirection chain is connected as intended? Liteblue
-
thx, the code works, but not as expected: A->B->C->D (channel_1 -> channel_2 -> channel_3 -> channel_4).
In my case it will record a redirect chain of A->B->C->D like:
A->B (channel_1 -> channel_2), than B->C (channel_1 -> channel_2), C->D (channel_1 -> channel_2); where channel_1 & channel_2 are random hash numbers.
So I can not link the chain together. that would be the strategy to capture the chain of events (while the pages redirect using, meta-refresh, javascript, http...)? Liteblue USPS
-
window.location.replace('http://example.com');
It's better than using window.location.href = 'http://example.com';
Using replace() is better because it does not keep the originating page in the session history, meaning the user won't get stuck in a never-ending back-button fiasco.
If you want to simulate someone clicking on a link, use window.location.href
If you want to simulate an HTTP redirect, use window.location.replace
You can use assign() and replace methods also to javascript redirect to other pages like the following:
location.assign("http://example.com");
The difference between replace() method and assign() method(), is that replace() removes the URL of the current document from the document history, means it is not possible to use the "back" button to navigate back to the original document. So Use the assign() method if you want to load a new document, andwant to give the option to navigate back to the original document.
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
-
Cant find source of redirect
Hey guys, I have a bizarre situation on my hands. I have a URL that is being wonky. The url is redirecting to another url and the 301 redirect is not in my htaccess. There is a 301 redirect in my htaccess but is being overwritten by something else, i.e. whatever is happening in above. So basically URL A should be redirecting to URL B but instead its going to URL C. I know we were not hacked, it's not redirecting to a strange bizarre domain. I have also disabled all of our plugins that redirect (to my knowledge) Any thoughts would be great!
Technical SEO | | HashtagHustler0 -
301 Redirects, Sitemaps and Indexing - How to hide redirected urls from search engines?
We have several pages in our site like this one, http://www.spectralink.com/solutions, which redirect to deeper page, http://www.spectralink.com/solutions/work-smarter-not-harder. Both urls are listed in the sitemap and both pages are being indexed. Should we remove those redirecting pages from the site map? Should we prevent the redirecting url from being indexed? If so, what's the best way to do that?
Technical SEO | | HeroDesignStudio0 -
DNS vs IIS redirection
I'm working on a project where a site has gone through a rebrand and is therefore also moving to a new domain name. Some pages have been merged on the new site so it's not a lift and shift job and so I'm writing up a redirect plan. Their IT dept have asked if we want redirects done by DNS redirect or IIS redirect. Which one will allow us to have redirects on a page level and not a domain level? I think IIS may be the right route but would love your thoughts on this please.
Technical SEO | | Marketing_Today1 -
CNAME vs 301 redirect
Hi all, Recently I created a website for a new client and my next job is trying to get them higher in Google. I added them in OSE and noticed some strange backlinks. To my surprise the client has about 20 domain names. All automatically poiting to (showing) the same new mainsite now. www.maindomain.nl www.maindomain.be
Technical SEO | | Houdoe
www.maindomain.eu
www.maindomain.com
www.otherdomain.nl
www.otherdomain.com
... Some of these domains have backlinks too (but not so much). I suggested to 301 redirect them all to the main site. Just to avoid duplicate content. But now the webhoster comes into play: "It's a problem, client has only 1 hosting account, blablabla...". They told me they could CNAME the 20 domains to the main domain. Or A-record them to an IP address. This is too technical stuff for me. So my concrete questions are: Is it smart to do anything at all or am I just harming my client? The main site is ranking pretty well now. And some backlinks are from their copy sites (probably because everywhere the logo links to the full mainsite url). Does the CNAME or A-record solution has the same effect as a 301 redirect, from SEO perspective? Many thanks,
Hans0 -
Increase 404 errors or 301 redirects?
Hi all, I'm working on an e-commerce site that sells products that may only be available for a certain period of time. Eg. A product may only be selling for 1 year and then be permanently out of stock. When a product goes out of stock, the page is removed from the site regardless of any links it may have gotten over time. I am trying to figure out the best way to handle these permanently out of stock pages. At the moment, the site is set up to return a 404 page for each of these products. There are currently 600 (and increasing) instances of this appearing on Google Webmasters. I have read that too many 404 errors may have a negative impact on your site, and so thought I might 301 redirect these URLs to a more appropriate page. However I've also read that too many 301 redirects may have a negative impact on your site. I foresee this to be an issue several years down the road when the site has thousands of expired products which will result in thousands of 404 errors or 301 redirects depending on which route I take. Which would be the better route? Is there a better solution?
Technical SEO | | Oxfordcomma0 -
What to do with 302 redirects being indexed
Hi there, Our site's forums include permalinks that for some reason uses an intermediary URL that 302 redirects to the URL with the permalink anchor. For example: http://en.tradimo.com/learn/chart-analysis/time-frames/ In the comments, there is a permalink to the following URL; en.tradimo.com/co/50c450005f2b949e3200001b/ (there is no content here, and never has been). This URL 302 redirects to the following final URL: http://en.tradimo.com/learn/chart-analysis/time-frames/?offset=0&limit=20#50c450005f2b949e3200001b The problem is, Google is indexing the redirect URL (en.tradimo.com/co/50c450005f2b949e3200001b/) and showing duplicate content even though we are using the nofollow tag on these links. Ideally, we would directly use the last link rather than redirecting. Alternatively, I'd say a 301 redirect would be preferable. But if both aren't available, is there a way to get these pages out of the index? Is the canonical tag the best way? I really wish I could just add /co/ to the robots.txt file, but I think they would still be in the index, right? Thanks for your help!
Technical SEO | | etruvian0 -
301 Redirect on a PDF, DOCX files?
Hi, I have to rename many pdf and docx files. How can I implement 301 redirect on them as they are linked from 'n' number of places? Regards, Shailendra Sial
Technical SEO | | IM_Learner1 -
Do search engines treat 307 redirects differently from 302 redirects?
We will need to send our users to an alternate version of our homepage for a few hours for a certain event. The SEO task at hand is to minimize the chance of the special homepage getting crawled and cached in the search engines in place of our normal homepage. (This has happened in the past so the concern is not imaginary.) Among other options, 302 and 307 redirects are being discussed. IE, redirecting www.domain.com to www.domain.com/specialpage. Having used 302s and 301s in the past, I am well aware of how search engines treat them. A 302 effectively says "Hey, Google! Please get rid of the old content on www.domain.com and replace it with the content on /specialpage!" Which is exactly what we don't want. My question is: do the search engines handle 307s any differently? I am hearing that the 307 does NOT result in the content of the second page being cached with the first URL. But I don't see that in the definition below (from w3.org). Then again, why differentiate it from the 302? 307 Temporary Redirect The requested resource resides temporarily under a different URI. Since the redirection MAY be altered on occasion, the client SHOULD continue to use the Request-URI for future requests. This response is only cacheable if indicated by a Cache-Control or Expires header field. The temporary URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the response. Unless the request method was HEAD, the entity of the response SHOULD contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink to the new URI(s) , since many pre-HTTP/1.1 user agents do not understand the 307 status. Therefore, the note SHOULD contain the information necessary for a user to repeat the original request on the new URI. If the 307 status code is received in response to a request other than GET or HEAD, the user agent MUST NOT automatically redirect the request unless it can be confirmed by the user, since this might change the conditions under which the request was issued.
Technical SEO | | CarsProduction0