Crawl Budget vs Canonical
-
Got a debate raging here and I figured I'd ask for opinions. We have our websites structured as
site/category/product
This is fine for URL keywords, etc. We also use this for breadcrumbs. The problem is that we have multiple categories into which a category fits. So "product" could also be at
site/cat1/product
site/cat2/product
site/cat3/productObviously this produces duplicate content. There's no reason why it couldn't live under 1 URL but it would take some time and effort to do so (time we don't necessarily have). As such, we're applying the canonical band-aid and calling it good. My problem is that I think this will still kill our crawl budget (this is not an insignificant number of pages we're talking about). In some cases the duplicate pages are bloating a site by 500%.
So what say you all? Do we just simply do canonical and call it good or do we need to take into account the crawl budget and actually remove the duplicate pages. Or am I totally off base and canonical solves the crawl budget issue as well?
-
agreed! we ran into the same problem with content (articles, etc). if you think of it in the same way as blog posts, they each have a unique URL, but with tags (i.e. categories) you are able to get them posted to the appropriate category landing pages.
have a somewhat related issue that i posted here
-
Another great way to go is to not put the category in the product URL. That was usually the best solution when I work on e-commerce sites.
-
Hi Highland,
I would defiantly work on making sure that your product only lives in one category. The canonical tag is a nice little band-aid but it still fix the root of the problem. I would suggest you can have it listed in many different categories but it only lives in one category at the product level. So for instance:
It's displayed here
site/cat1
site/cat2
site/cat3But it only displays product details at a url like this
site/category/product
I'm not a huge fan of having Google crawl 4 or 5 extra pages per product just to find a canonical tag when you could just spend the extra programming time to make it work correctly.
Casey
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 -
Help with 302 Temporary Redirect warning via MOZ crawl
Hi Guys, This is my first post so hopefully I'm using the forum correctly. MOZ crawl tells me that I have 35 pages with a temporary redirect The URL column displays 302 Found along with the http:// URL Redirection Location column shows the corresponding https:// URL This all seems pretty self explanatory. However, I’ve checked my .htaccess file and I can’t see any 302 references in it. I'm trying to figure out where the 302 redirects are from and how I can make them permanent Please can anyone help me out? My .htaccess looks like it needs a little tidy (there are 2 if blocks) <ifmodule mod_rewrite.c="">RewriteEngine On
Web Design | | ianalannash
RewriteCond %{SERVER_PORT} 80
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ https://www.mysite.com/$1 [R,L]</ifmodule> BEGIN WordPress <ifmodule mod_rewrite.c="">RewriteEngine On
RewriteBase /
RewriteRule ^index.php$ - [L]
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d
RewriteRule . /index.php [L]
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^mysite.com$ [NC]
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.mysite.com/$1 [R=301,L]</ifmodule> END WordPress0 -
Hi, I have a doubt. If we want to hide unwanted text in a web page its possible with "" tag. And my question "does a search engine crawl those text? help me.
I want to hide a lot of text behind my site page. I know its possible with that tag. But in what way a search engine looks at those text? Hidden or they are crawled and indexed.
Web Design | | FhyzicsBCPL0 -
For a real estate website, is a different mobile site warranted vs a responsive site?
I researched the major real estate websites: Zillow, Trulia, Remax, Keller Williams, Century 21, etc. They all have a separate mobile site and not a responsive one. The client wants it to be easy to search for properties from a smartphone. Is it possible to get a responsive version of a real estate website on a smartphone?
Web Design | | MassMedia0 -
Blog vs. News/Editorial Layout?
We're in the coupon blogging space & saw that one of the larger coupon sites move away from the more traditional blog layout: http://thekrazycouponlady.com they now have more of an editorial type layout. Here is another site which is more similar to our layout: http://hip2save.com. So here are my questions: Which layout type do you feel better serves their visitors & why? How does the affect the SEO of the site? How does it affect the advertising revenues? Which layout do you prefer? Is there strategy in this move for the coupon blog, or is this just a preference on how they now display their content? We're making some updates to our design soon & I wanted to get some feedback on the overall direction we take.
Web Design | | seointern0 -
CSS vs Javascript vs JQuery drop down navigation
For a user / seo perspective, what is the best way to code a drop down menu nav bar? Is it best to use css, javascript or a scripting library like jquery? I am thinking about overall best practice that will not have a negative impact on serps. I am also thinking about what will work best on all types of devices i.e. desk tops, lap tops, smart phones and tablets. What are the Pro's & Cons of Using CSS for Drop Down Menus. What are the Pro's & cons of using Javascript for drop down menus. And the same question for jquery. Thank you all in advance for your ideas.
Web Design | | bronxpad0 -
I've set up my own site which is still fairly new but I'm a bit concerned that there is a bloackage SEO wise somewhere because when I try to crawl the site on SEOmoz it only crawls one page.
I'm really baffled and none of my research has shed much light on it. My url is www.emporiumofmanliness.co.uk I'd really appreciate any help! Thanks
Web Design | | JoshED0