Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Add to cart redirect using 302
-
I am getting a list of crawl errors in Moz because I am using a 302 redirect when people click on an item using the quickview add to cart eg:http://copyfaxes.com/cart/quickadd?partno=4061 will redirect them to the viewshoppingcart page. Is this wrong should this be a 301 redirect? There is no link juice to pass.
Thanks
-
I think in this case you're fine using a 302 since you don't need to pass any pagerank onto the shopping cart. It can be considered a "temporary" redirect in some ways because you're redirecting the user to their own shopping cart, which changes for each user.
-
Sounds like it should be a 301. 302s should be used when the redirect is temporary. I'm assuming the way you're using it is permanent, hence it should be a 301.
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
-
How long for authority to transfer form an old page to a new page via a 301 redirect? (& Moz PA score update?)
Hi How long aproximately does G take to pass authority via a 301 from an old page to its new replacement page ? Does Moz Page Authority reflect this in its score once G has passed it ? All Best
Moz Pro | | Dan-Lawrence
Dan3 -
What is the logarithmic scale used for domain authority?
I want to quantify how much better a score of 80 is compared to 60. Or 60 compared to 30 etc.... What is the logarithm base? Thanks, Rik
Moz Pro | | garypropellernet0 -
In alt tag of a image can we use #hashtag or domain.com ? Is that good SEO or not allowed ?
Some of the Google Search shows a title has a hashtag of an article, which contain keyword and while tweeting them, the title which has a hashtag automatically very good used for getting traffic to the blog. And other one, can we use the hash tag inside the alt attribute ? Or our domain name with .com in it. Like Google.com or #Google ?
Moz Pro | | Esaky0 -
HTC access 301 redirect rules regarding pagination and striped category base (wp)
I am an admin of a wordpress.org blog and I used to use "Yoast All in one SEO" plugin. While I was using this plugin it stripped the category base from my blog post URL's. With yoast all in one seo: Site.com/topic/subtpoic/page/#
Moz Pro | | notgwenevere
Without yoast all in one seo: Site.com/category/topic/subtopic/page/# Now, that I have switched to another plugin, I am trying to manage the page crawl errors which are tremendous somewhere around 1800, mostly due to pagination. Rather than redirecting each URL individually I would like to develop HTC access 301 redirects rules. However all instructions on how to create these HTC access 301 redirect rules are regarding the suffix rather than the category base. So my question is, can HTC access 301 redirects rules work to fix this problem? Including pagination? And if so, what would this particular HTC access 301 redirect look like? Especially regarding pagination? And do I really have to write a 301 redirect for each pagination page?0 -
What user agent is used by SEOMOZ crawler?
We have a pretty tight robots.txt file in place to only allow the major search engines. I do not want to block SEOMOZ.ORG from being able to crawl the site so I want to make sure the user agent is open.
Moz Pro | | eseider0 -
Meta keywords no longer in use
Can someone point me to the official article explaining why meta keywords are no longer taken into account by search engines please? I know Moz has indicated that search engines ignore them, but I would like to read a bit more about it - what was the reason behind it and since when.
Moz Pro | | coremediadesign0 -
Some questions on Canonical tag AND 301 redirect
Hi everyone, I'm new here - always loved SEOMoz and glad to be part of the Pro community now. I have 2 questions regarding the Canonical URL tag. Some background info: We used to run an OsCommerce store, and recently migrated to Magento. In doing so, we right away created 301 redirects of the old category pages (OsCommerce) to the new category pages (Magento) via the Magento admin. Example: www.example.com/old-widget-category.html
Moz Pro | | yacpro13
301 redicrected to
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html In Magento admin, we have enabled the Canonical tag for all product and category pages. Here's how Magento sets up the Canonical tag: The URL of interest which we want to rank is:
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html However Magento sets up the canonical tag on this page to point to:
www.example.com/old-widget-category.html When using the SEOMoz On Page Report Card, it pick this up as an error because the Canonical tag is pointing to a different URL. However, if we dig a little deeper, we see that the URL being pointed to
www.example.com/old-widget-category.html
has a 301 redirect to
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html
which is the URL we wan to rank. So because we set up a 301 redirect of the old-page to the new-page, on the new-page the canonical tag points to the old-page. Question 1)
What are you opinions on this? Do you think this method of setting up the Canonical tag is acceptable? Second question... We use pagination for category pages, so if we have 50 products in one category, we would have 5 pages of 10 products. The URL's would be: www.example.com/new-widget-category.html (which is the SAME as ?p=1)
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=1
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=2
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=3
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=4
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=5 Now ALL the URLs above have the canonical tag set as:
<link rel="canonical" href="http://www.example.com/new-widget-category" /> However, the content of each page (page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) is different because different products are displayed. So far most what I read regarding the Canonical tag is that it is used for pages that have the same content but different URLs. I would hope that Google would combine the content of all 5 pages and view the result as a single URL www.example.com/new-widget-category Question 2) Is using the canonical tag appropriate in the case described above? Thanks !0
