Hi Alex

Ah, crisis of confidence again!

I didn't think that this was the case though for the index page. I thought normalisation meant they were treated as the same page. As Marcus said, I can't 301 the example.com page to example.com/ .

Hi Marcus

I agree out outside of the home page it's an issue (& good answer btw) but it's only the index page I'm worried about.

It's that crisis of confidence that I'm sure we all get from time to time as to whether something rather simple/fundamental is actually as we believe it to be.

I've been re-reading this document http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986 and I think it's section 3.2.6 (if I remember right) that covers normalization of the root URL's.

I do not think I have a problem here, but a second opinion would be welcomed...

I have a site which has a the rel=canonical tag with the trailing slash displayed. ie www.example.com/

The sitemap has it without the trailing slash. www.example.com

Google has it's cached copy with the trailing slash but the browser displays it without.

I want to say it's perfectly fine (for the home page) as I tend to think they are treated (with/without trailing slashes) as the same canonical URL.

Thanks Guys

I've got some developers to help me with the tech side so they'll be using the servers etc that they're used too.

Just wanted to check I wasn't dropping a massively obvious clanger on the SEO side.

Cheers for your help.

Alex.

I'm taking the following from http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/rules.html

"Splitting components allows you to maximize parallel downloads. Make sure you're using not more than 2-4 domains because of the DNS lookup penalty. For example, you can host your HTML and dynamic content on www.example.org and split static components between static1.example.org and static2.example.org"

What I want to do is load page images (it's an eCommerce site) from multiple sub domains to reduce load times.

I'm assuming that this is perfectly OK to do - I cannot think of any reason that this wouldn't be a good tactic to go with.

Does anyone know of (or can think of) a reason why taking this approach could be in any way detrimental.

Cheers mozzers.