Comments on: Google vs. Duplicate Content – The rel=”canonical” Tag http://www.sagerock.com/blog/google-duplicate-content-rel-canonical/ The SageRock Team Web Marketing Blog Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:39:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: sdefrawihttp://www.sagerock.com/blog/google-duplicate-content-rel-canonical/comment-page-1/#comment-268 sdefrawi Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:45:16 +0000 http://www.sagerock.com/blog/?p=284#comment-268 What about canonicalization in sitemap.xml? Any tips on how to handle http://www.yoursite.com vs http://www.yoursite.com/index.html? Should you redirect the latter to the former and remove /index.html from sitemap.xml? What about canonicalization in sitemap.xml? Any tips on how to handle http://www.yoursite.com vs http://www.yoursite.com/index.html? Should you redirect the latter to the former and remove /index.html from sitemap.xml?

]]> By: 5ubliminalhttp://www.sagerock.com/blog/google-duplicate-content-rel-canonical/comment-page-1/#comment-81 5ubliminal Thu, 26 Mar 2009 12:44:14 +0000 http://www.sagerock.com/blog/?p=284#comment-81 Try this Wp.Plugin: <a href="http://blog.5ubliminal.com/59" rel="nofollow">Canonical URL Wordpress Plugin</a>. Try this Wp.Plugin: Canonical URL Wordpress Plugin.

]]> By: greghttp://www.sagerock.com/blog/google-duplicate-content-rel-canonical/comment-page-1/#comment-18 greg Mon, 02 Mar 2009 15:16:51 +0000 http://www.sagerock.com/blog/?p=284#comment-18 Hey guys, thanks for the comments! I'm right there with you Dino. There are already ways to fix canonical issues on websites. The people who don't know about those methods aren't any more likely to learn about this method either so I can't see how it improves things for most site owners. Hey guys, thanks for the comments! I’m right there with you Dino. There are already ways to fix canonical issues on websites. The people who don’t know about those methods aren’t any more likely to learn about this method either so I can’t see how it improves things for most site owners.

]]> By: Tylerhttp://www.sagerock.com/blog/google-duplicate-content-rel-canonical/comment-page-1/#comment-17 Tyler Mon, 02 Mar 2009 14:36:50 +0000 http://www.sagerock.com/blog/?p=284#comment-17 Thanks for highlighting this. Thanks for highlighting this.

]]> By: Dino Baskovichttp://www.sagerock.com/blog/google-duplicate-content-rel-canonical/comment-page-1/#comment-16 Dino Baskovic Mon, 02 Mar 2009 14:28:26 +0000 http://www.sagerock.com/blog/?p=284#comment-16 Webmasters will argue over which canonical URL format (e.g. "Should it be example.com or www.example.com) until they're blue in the face -- myself included. There are solid arguments for and against, which I won't cover here.I will say that the best means of dealing with SEs when it comes to this is to avoid needless markup altogther, even if it is a teensy-tiny rel="canonical" attribute/value pair. Either have your webmaster fire up mod_rewrite on the *nix side or an IIS ASAPI filter (or other module as there are several) on the Windows side to force friendly, unobtrusive URL rewriting consistently across the board.I hope that made a shred of sense... :) Webmasters will argue over which canonical URL format (e.g. “Should it be example.com or http://www.example.com) until they’re blue in the face — myself included. There are solid arguments for and against, which I won’t cover here.

I will say that the best means of dealing with SEs when it comes to this is to avoid needless markup altogther, even if it is a teensy-tiny rel=”canonical” attribute/value pair. Either have your webmaster fire up mod_rewrite on the *nix side or an IIS ASAPI filter (or other module as there are several) on the Windows side to force friendly, unobtrusive URL rewriting consistently across the board.

I hope that made a shred of sense… :)

]]>