Canonical sitemap URL different to website URL architecture
-
Hi,
This may or may not be be an issue, but would like some SEO advice from someone who has a deeper understanding. I'm currently working on a clients site that has a bespoke CMS built by another development agency.
The website currently has a sitemap with one link - EG: www.example.com/category/page. This is obviously the page that is indexed in search engines. However the website structure uses www.example.com/page, this isn't indexed in search engines as the links are canonical. The client is also using the second URL structure in all it's off and online advertising, internal links and it's also been picked up by referral sites. I suspect this is not good practice... however I'd like to understand whether there are any negative SEO effectives from this structure? Does Google look at both pages with regard to visits, pageviews, bounce rate, etc. and combine the data OR just use the indexed version?
www.example.com/category/page - 63.5% of total pageviews
www.example.com/page - 34.31% of total pageviewsThanks
Mike -
Hi Mike,
Ideally, yes, you'd just have the one URL. If you were setting up a site from scratch, I would tell you to avoid having the same content on those two different pages, because we don't want to create any duplication where it isn't strictly necessary. An example of when it is strictly necessary would be something like a ?sort_products parameter which changes the order products are displayed on a page. There's no way to do that without some duplication, so the canonical tag is useful. It's good practice to avoid having more versions of the page than you need because it reduces the number of ways things can go wrong.
But as this structure is already in place and seems to be working OK -- only one version of the page is indexed -- I would leave it as it is. Messing around with the canonical now will likely do more harm than good. There aren't any definite negative effects for your SEO by leaving things as they are.
As for your question about aggregation, I assume you mean in Google Analytics? No metrics will be aggregated there -- the two pages will appear as separate URLs in your reports. The aggregation that matters for indexation is link equity. When you get links to example.com/page, it will help the rankings of the example.com/category/page URL because that's the canonical version.
-
Hey Mike,
No as you're describing it it should cause issues for you as what you're doing is the right way to pick this up with the canonical.
Martijn.
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
-
Canonical
i have some static webpages in root and wordpress installed in subdirectory , Canonical tag for the whole website was with trailing slash , i stripped the HTML extensions for static webpages but i can't force to add trailing slash to the static webpages so i changed the canonical for html webpages from http://ghadaalsaman.com/articles.html/ to http://ghadaalsaman.com/articles but the Wordpress" http://ghadaalsaman.com/blog/ " still with trailing slash , when i've checked my google webmasters i found that my indexed pages dropped down 100 page ! what should i put in the canonical for the static pages? i tried to strip the slash from wordpress but i failed , so my static webpages canonical with no trailing slash and wordpress with trailing slash .
Technical SEO | | NeatIT0 -
I have multiple URLs that redirect to the same website. Is this an issue?
I have multiple URLs that all lead to the same website. Years ago they were purchased and were sitting dormant. Currently they are 301 redirects and each of the URLs feed to different areas of my website. Should I be worried about losing authority? And if so, is there a better way to do this?
Technical SEO | | undrdog990 -
How to point a framework to your website
Hi, my client use the NJOYN framework to insert all of the new job post on his website. The problem is that this framework is not hosted at the same place that his website is hosted. This create 2 domain name. First: Example.com second: example.njoyn.com How can I tell google that example.noyn.com link with the site example.com? Can I do this by simply 301 redirect the domain from example.njoyn.com to example.com? I know that this is a framework, is there a way to have access to their htaccess file? Finally, is there a way to rewrite example.njoyn.com/job1 to example.com/job1? Thanks alot
Technical SEO | | bigrat950 -
Sitemap international websites
Hey Mozzers,Here is the case that I would appreciate your reply for: I will build a sitemap for .com domain which has multiple domains for other countries (like Italy, Germany etc.). The question is can I put the hreflang annotations in sitemap1 only and have a sitemap 2 with all URLs for EN/default version of the website .COM. Then put 2 sitemaps in a sitemap index. The issue is that there are pages that go away quickly (like in 1-2 days), they are localised, but I prefer not to give annotations for them, I want to keep clear lang annotations in sitemap 1. In this way, I will replace only sitemap 2 and keep sitemap 1 intact. Would it work? Or I better put everything in one sitemap?The second question is whether you recommend to do the same exercise for all subdomains and other domains? I have read much on the topic, but not sure whether it worth the effort.The third question is if I have www.example.it and it.example.com, should I include both in my sitemap with hreflang annotations (the sitemap on www.example.com) and put there it for subdomain and it-it for the .it domain (to specify lang and lang + country).Thanks a lot for your time and have a great day,Ani
Technical SEO | | SBTech0 -
Canonical & rel=prev / next changes to website a good idea or not?
Hi all, I decided yesterday to make a load of changes to my website, and today i woke thinking, should i have done that! So below is an example of what i have done (i will try to explain clearly anyway), can you let me know if you think what i have done would harm or help my website in search results etc... ok, so lets take just one category - Cameras And it has the sub categories - box dome bullet it also has other sub categories (which are actually features, but the only way i can show them on my site is by having them as a sub-category with its own static page, and adding the products to these as secondary categories) vandal proof high resolution night vision previously i have it set up so that every single category / sub category / feature had its own static page, with a canonical tag to itself (i.e cameras.html canonical was to cameras.html, vandalproof.html canonical was to vandalproof.html). Any of the categories / sub cats / features that had more than one page were simply not in search results due to the canonical pointing to "Page 1"... What i have now done: Last night i decided to change all this, now for all categories / sub cats / features i have add rel=prev / next where applicable, and removed the canonical from second / third / fourth pages etc, but left the canonical on "page 1". I also removed any keywords from page 2,3,4 etc and changed descriptions to just page "X" + category name. So for example, page one looks like: and page two looks like: I also went a little further (maybe too far) and decided that the features pages would canonicalize back to cameras so for those i now have: Page 1: Page 2: Any advice is welcome on the above, in regards to which way may be better and why, and obviously if anything jumps out as a mistake... Please advise James
Technical SEO | | isntworkdull0 -
How does a sitemap affect the definition of canonical URLs?
We are having some difficulty generating a sitemap that includes our SEO-friendly URLs (the ones we want to set as canonical), and I was wondering if we might be able to simply use the non-SEO-friendly, non-canonical URLs that the sitemap generator has been producing and then use 301 redirects to send them to the canonical. Is there a reason why we should not be doing this? We don't want search engines to think that the sitemap URLs are more important than the pages to which they redirect. How important is it that the sitemap URLs match the canonical URLs? We would like to find a solution outside of the generation of the sitemap itself as we are locked into using a vendor’s product in order to generate the sitemap. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | emilyburns0 -
Our Development team is planning to make our website nearly 100% AJAX and JavaScript. My concern is crawlability or lack thereof. Their contention is that Google can read the pages using the new #! URL string. What do you recommend?
Discussion around AJAX implementations and if anybody has achieved high rankings with a full AJAX website or even a partial AJAX website.
Technical SEO | | DavidChase0 -
Did I implement the Canonical Correctly?
Hello, I am trying for the first time to implement a canonical redirect on a page and would really appreciate it if someone could tell me if this was done correctly. I am trying to do a canonical redirect: -from http://www.diamondtours.com/default.aspx -to http://www.diamondtours.com/ As you will see in the source code of the default.aspx page, the line of code written is: <link rel="canonical" href="http://www.diamondtours.com" /> Is this correct? Any guidance is greatly appreciated. Jeffrey Ferraro
Technical SEO | | JeffFerraro0