Canonical vs 301 - Web Development
-
So I'm having a conversation with the development team at my work and I'm a little tired today so I thought I would ask for other opinions. The currently the site duplicates it's full site by having a 200 show with or without a trailing slash. I have asked for a 301 redirect to with the trailing slash. They countered with having all the rel=canonical be the trailing slash, which I know is acceptable. My issue is that while a rel=canonical is acceptable, since my site has a very high level of competition and a very aggressive link building strategy, I believe that it may be beneficial to have the 301 redirect. BUT, I may be wrong. When we're talking hundreds of thousands of links, I would love to have them directly linked instead of possibly splitting them up between a duplicate page that has a correct canonical. I'm curious to what everyone thinks though....
-
+1 for Egol here. A canonical is just a request to Google - a 301 is a directive Google has to respect. I don't really understand why your technical team is making such a fuzz about it - enforcing the trailing slash (or not) is just 1/2 lines in your .htacess file. Check Stackoverflow
Dirk
-
Going straight to the root. There are two versions, with and without slash, because someone started using them. So the first thing that needs to be done is to decide which one is dominant today and go with it. Immediately thereafter, development team, bloggers, everyone is to be informed of the new form of your URL and be expected to use it. Clean them up, get them off of the site. It's time to stop being sloppy. People who don't go with the company's method need to be reminded.
You will find disagreements on if you should use 301 or if you should use rel=canonical.
The advantage of a 301 is that it takes control and forces the URL that you want to the browser and bot. In contrast rel=canonical is a "hint" to Google. We know for a fact that google changes their mind about how they handle things and they will ignore variants of URLs for an awful long time. This same problem exists with parameters. Google provides parameter controls in your Search Console, however, if you have experience with them you will know that they are highly unreliable and take a long time to be picked up and partially obeyed. So you can take control with 301 or use rel=canonical in combination with prayer.
I use 301s because I don't trust Google to do things my way and because once you start using 301s your problems will immediately be reduced in size because the versions of the URLs that you don't want to see will be permanently eliminated from the address window of the browser. I am also pretty luck that the staff here knows how the URLs on our websites are standardized.
-
When it comes to the trailing slash on website URLs, the proper way is to use a 301 Permanent Redirect. However, you can help minimize this problem by fixing all of the internal links on the site so that you always link internally to the version that you prefer.
-
In some cases, implementing a self-referring 301 redirect may cause an infinite loop in which your homepage would not be accessible at all, so I can understand your dev team's reluctance.
A canonical tag and a 301 redirect pass the same amount of link authority, so in this case, they serve the same purpose and provide the same benefit. I'd stick with the canonical tag and pick a different, more valuable battle to fight.
-
301 Redirects are primarily designed for more permanent complicated jobs.
- Expired content
- Multiple versions of homepage
- Change of site
Canonical tags are a better way of telling Google that a query or slash is serving the exact same page content and is just a variation of the URL. Neither if done correctly will have a negative effect on the SEO, however using the canonical tag is far easier and appropriate.
https://mza.bundledseo.com/blog/301-redirect-or-relcanonical-which-one-should-you-use
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
-
301 Redirect in breadcrumb. How bad is it?
Hi all, How bad is it to have a link in the breadcrumb that 301 redirects? We had to create some hidden category pages in our ecommerce platform bigcommerce to create a display on our category pages in a certain format. Though whilst the category page was set to not visable in bigcommerce admin the URL still showed in the live site bread crumb. SO, we set a 301 redirect on it so it didnt produce a 404. However we have lost a lot of SEO ground the past few months. could this be why? is it bad to have a 301 redirect in the breadrcrumb.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | oceanstorm0 -
Migration developer question
Hi Guys, We are in the process of migrating our website and are moving to: AWS/Elastic Beanstalk hosting and the only way to do a custom domain with a third-party (not Amazon) DNS Service is by setting up a CNAME that points to the EBS Instance. Do you think this will impact SEO performance in any way? Cheers.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cerednicenko0 -
301 redirect with DNS?
Quick question. Is it possible to 301 redirect a non-www to www. (properly in terms of SEO) with DNS (C Name, A name, or other) ..have searched around and found conflicting information. Would like to know a definite answer. I usually implement all 301 redirects with htaccess. However have a client situation where we only have access to the CMS, but which does have DNS settings. thanks in advance, Greg
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GregDixson0 -
Adventurous 301 redirection chain
Picture this - if you have a spirit for adventure! Client builds Alpha****Domain.com Then builds a number of backlinks to Alpha****Domain.com Client also creates a number of 301 redirects from several older domains to AlphaDomain.com Client then changes Alpha****Domain.com to Beta****Domain.com They create 301 redirects from Alpha****Domain.com to Beta****Domain.com But then... they 'park' Alpha****Domain.com (ie. no longer accessible)! About one year later, client changes a whole bunch of URLs on Beta****Domain.com without keeping track of changes. Thankfully, the hosting service (Shopify) automatically creates some redirects, but it's more by accident than design! Questions: After step 6 above, are the 301 redirects created in steps 3 and 5 now totally redundant and broken? If AlphaDomain.com no longer exists, surely all redirects to and from this domain are broken? Or can they be recovered? What happens to all the backlinks originally created in step 2? Finally, can anything be done to recover lost URLs in step 7? Yes. What a mess!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | muzzmoz0 -
Rel=canonical
My website is built around a template, the hosting site say I can only add code into the body of the webpage not the header, will this be ok for rel=canonical If it is my next question is redundant but as there is only one place to put it which urls do I need to place in the code http://domain.com, www.domain.com or http://www.domain.com the /default.asp option for my website does not seem to exist, so I guess is not relevant thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | singingtelegramsuk0 -
One Site vs. Many
This is a question that I am not sure has a "right" answer. I am just wondering what everyone's thoughts are on this. I can see benefit of both sides of the coin. In your opinion, is it better to have one large e-commerce site with all of your content on the same domain or is it better to have multiple more targeted domains with your content broken up into smaller chunks? The reason I ask is, I feel like while multiple more targeted sites certainly have the benefit of focus, aren't you taking all your traffic and content, splitting it up and leaving you with several sites that most likely are getting less traffic than one large site would. All opinions welcome.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | unikey0 -
Scanning For Duplicate Canonical Tags
I'm looking for a solution for identifying pages on a site that have either empty/undefined canonical tags, or duplicate canonical tags (meaning the tag occurs twice within the same page). I've used Screaming Frog to view sitewide canonical values, but the tool cannot identify when pages use the tag twice, nor can it differentiate between pages that have an empty canonical tag and pages that have no canonical tag at all. Any help finding a tool of some sort that can assist me in doing this would be much appreciated, as I'm working with tens of thousands of pages and can't do this manually.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | edmundsseo0 -
Is 301 redirect suggested on pagination pages
Hi - Due to pagination the default page of site is coming in 2 url with - ?page=1/ sub-url and /sub-url is 301 a recommended solution due to this pagination urls Also - is it required to create separate title and meta description of every pagination page We are taking specifically in context of our discounts and offer section http://www.mycarhelpline.com/index.php?option=com_offers&view=list&Itemid=9
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Modi0