Thanks for help confirming that I have the right compromise solution Dr. Pete! Yep, I am going to that as well on GWT. Only problem is that it takes those dev's months to put in the html file so I could verify it.

Hi Dr. Pete!

Sorry to confuse everyone but it is actually like this:

{What is happening right now}

(1) www.example.com > 302 redirects to > www.example.com?id=12345

{What I think I could recommend as a solution}

(2) What I intend to do is put rel=canonical on www.example.com as the developers from the client side says it is not technically feasible on their platform to remove the session id on the home page url.

Hi AnkitMaheshwari,

Reason why there's a 302 in the home page URL because the website appends session id's. The best compromise I could think of is to implement a rel=canonical on the home page URL minus the session id i.e. www.website.com

Hi SEOMoz!

Can I have the rel=canonical tag on a URL page that has a 302 redirection? Does this harm the search engine friendliness of a content page / website?

Thanks!

Steve

Hi Ryan,

Thanks for citing another source. I'm actually doing a site audit for a client and noticed that most, if not all, of their pages have the meta no cache on the script code. To be honest, it is the first time I've come across this and was unsure if it would have any SEO impact.

Thanks again!

Steve

Hi SEOMoz Guys,

Hope you guys are doing well.

I've been searching online and bumped into this archived page (http://www.seomoz.org/qa/view/34982/meta-nocache-affect-ranking). I would like to get an updated take on this issue whether or not the meta no cache code on a page bears negative/positive or no SEO impact / effect.

<meta http-equiv="Pragma" content="no-cache" />

<meta http-equiv="Cache-Control" content="no-cache"/>

Thanks!

Steve