Rel=next and rel=prev meta tags
-
Hi,
We have recently implemented the rel=next and rel=prev meta tags on the
category pages of our website.Currently for example if on page 2 we have the following:
href="http://www.rococlothing.co.uk/boys/boys-suits/" />
href="http://www.rococlothing.co.uk/boys/boys-suits/?p=1" />
href="http://www.rococlothing.co.uk/boys/boys-suits/?p=3" />For each page we are using the same canonical tag which is the url for
the 1st page in the category.
Is this the correct way to impletment it or should the canonical tag for
page 2 be as follows:href="http://www.rococlothing.co.uk/boys/boys-suits/?p=2" />
I have also seen some companies ommiting the canonical tag on pages
after page 1 and just using the prev and nexts.Could anyone advise as to what the ideal implementation would be for this?
Regards
Patrick -
You can combine them, but not in the way you are actually doing.
If I take your example: page: www.rococlothing.co.uk/boys/boys-suits/?p=2=> with this set-up you are basically telling Google 2 different things:
The canonical indicates that http://www.rococlothing.co.uk/boys/boys-suits/?p=2 is in fact a duplicate of http://www.rococlothing.co.uk/boys/boys-suits/ so Google should index http://www.rococlothing.co.uk/boys/boys-suits/ instead.
With the rel next/previous you tell Google that http://www.rococlothing.co.uk/boys/boys-suits/ - http://www.rococlothing.co.uk/boys/boys-suits/?p=2 & http://www.rococlothing.co.uk/boys/boys-suits/?p=3 should be considered as one page rather than 3 pages.
As these messages are in conflict this set-up is not going to work. If you want to use both - the canonical can only be used to strip additional info from the url like sort order, number of items on page, etc. Check the link Dimitri gave for an example from Google.
An example from your site: http://www.rococlothing.co.uk/boys/boys-suits/?dir=desc&limit=24&order=price&p=2 would have this configuration:
(please not that the first url is http://www.rococlothing.co.uk/boys/boys-suits/ & not http://www.rococlothing.co.uk/boys/boys-suits/?p=1 )
Hope this clarifies
Dirk
-
Hi there.
Watch this video from Google webmasters:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njn8uXTWiGg
They explain pretty good what's what. And here is the article: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/1663744?hl=en
So, basically, pagination and canonical links are different things and can be used at the same time.
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
-
Have Your Thoughts Changed Regarding Canonical Tag Best Practice for Pagination? - Google Ignoring rel= Next/Prev Tagging
Hi there, We have a good-sized eCommerce client that is gearing up for a relaunch. At this point, the staging site follows the previous best practice for pagination (self-referencing canonical tags on each page; rel=next & prev tags referencing the last and next page within the category). Knowing that Google does not support rel=next/prev tags, does that change your thoughts for how to set up canonical tags within a paginated product category? We have some categories that have 500-600 products so creating and canonicalizing to a 'view all' page is not ideal for us. That leaves us with the following options (feel it is worth noting that we are leaving rel=next / prev tags in place): Leave canonical tags as-is, page 2 of the product category will have a canonical tag referencing ?page=2 URL Reference Page 1 of product category on all pages within the category series, page 2 of product category would have canonical tag referencing page 1 (/category/) - this is admittedly what I am leaning toward. Any and all thoughts are appreciated! If this were in relation to an existing website that is not experiencing indexing issues, I wouldn't worry about these. Given we are launching a new site, now is the time to make such a change. Thank you! Joe
Web Design | | Joe_Stoffel1 -
When rel canonical tag used, which page does Google considers for ranking and indexing? A/B test scenario!
Hi Moz community, We have redesigned our website and launched for A/B testing using canonical tags from old website to new website pages, so there will be no duplicate content issues and new website will be shown to the half of the website visitors successfully to calculate the metrics. However I wonder how actually Google considers it? Which pages Google will crawl and index to consider for ranking? Please share your views on this for better optimisation. Thanks
Web Design | | vtmoz0 -
Duplicate Title Issues using # anchor tags
Our homepage navigation uses anchor tags (?TabNumb=1#, ?TabNumb=1# etc) rather than directly linking to different pages to decrease load time (and simplify the build process I owuld imagine). These anchor links are showing up as duplicate titles in Moz. I am pretty sure if I were to use noindex or rel tags, that could have a negative affect on my search results. Any way to tackle this outside of a complete redesign of the structure? http://www.dedoose.com/about-us/?TabNum=2# as an example
Web Design | | sbnjl0 -
Google result showing old Meta Title / Description even though page view source shows new info.
Hey guys! I'm struggling with why Google is ignoring my Meta Title / Description. I made a pretty drastic change to both about a week ago and on the results it hasn't changed. I'm on first page with several keywords and I think this weird caching is hurting me on where I'm at on the page. Thoughts / Ideas?
Web Design | | curtis_williams0 -
Other tags inside an H1 tag
So I have a situation with the website I'm currently redesigning where the H1 titles are supposed to mix colors per the current brand strategy. The branding crew is adamant that this has to be done so there is no use in saying "just don't do it". To accomplish this I'm wrapping the words that need to be the other color in a . Additionally, some pages have a "sub text" as part of the title, floated to the right and in a smaller font but with the same multi color treatment. I'm wondering if the sub text should be in an H2 and positioned to the right or if it would be beneficial to have the text in the H1 as well. An example of what I'm talking about would be something like this: "Big Shoes for Big Guys - Nike Shoes" In that, the "Big Shoes" and "Nike" would be one color and the "for Big Guys" and "Shoes" would be another. I can imagine having the "Nike Shoes" as part of the H1 would be a good idea in some respect but I'm not certain of that. In order to make that happen I can only think of one way to do it: -H1-
Web Design | | EscaladeSports
Big Shoes
-span- for Big Guys -/span-
-div- Nike
-span- Shoes -/span-
-/div-
-/H1- So that brings me back to the original concern, do search engines care about tags inside the H1? The only other way to accomplish the color changes that I can think of would be to have a fairly large chunk of javascript setup to go through H1's to colorize them using the span tags. That is unless GoogleBot has started to execute javascript while crawling the sites now...1 -
Title tag on Google starts with company name then :
Can someone help me and tell me why Google picks up and shows the title tag as for example: SEOmoz**: SEO Software. Simplified.** Then if you click through and look at the cache version of the page it shows the title tags as just SEO Software. Simplified. So without the SEOmoz: at the start. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Awww.seomoz.org%2F&aq=f&oq=cache%3Awww.seomoz.org%2F&aqs=chrome.0.57j58.3052&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 Its probably something really easy and I'm going to kick myself when someone tells me but I can't figure out why?
Web Design | | i3MEDIA1 -
Using More Info javascript:toggleDisplay tag for More info text
Is there any harm in using javascript so a user can "toggle" open or closed additional text on a website? For example, if a user wants to read more about something, they can click on "More Info" and the text would then appear. Google is able to read the text, because I chose a random 8 word section of the text within the More Info and pasted it into a Google Search and the website showed up in search results. Just wondering if using this technique would have any negative impact. Here's what the code would look like:
Web Design | | EEE3
<a <span="">title</a><a <span="">="Show Tables" href="</a><a class=" " target="_blank">javascript:toggleDisplay('table1')</a>">More Info style="display: none;" id="table1"> this is where the text would be, and from this section was where I grabbed text to search with in google. Then in the footer, here is the script needed so the more info will work: I am by no means an expert in coding/html/javascript. Thanks!0 -
How do I properly implement rel=me?
Is there a primer anywhere that will help me understand how rel=me works and how to implement it properly? I do NOT have a blog but I do have a Google+ account. I want to put my mug into my SERPs so I need to understand both the concept and the technical details of implementing this. I am very comfortable with markup so I will be able to do this if I understand WHAT I am doing and HOW it is done. Thanks for your help! Chris Streeter
Web Design | | DVRSystems190