Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
At least Google supports the <link rel="canonical"> tag and the Link HTTP Header to canonicalize URLs and help prevent duplicate content.
Is there a preference to using the HTML tag over the HTTP header when it is available? On my site I’d like to create a simple function that lets you set the canonical URL, but for non-HTML pages this can only be done by the header of course.
So is it okay to only depend on the HTTP header for setting canonical URLs?
Using the meta tag is useful when your page is completely out of context (an HTML file on an FTP server (which Google can also index)). The header is best for anything transported over HTTP (as you don’t have to parse the body and rely on the ~validity of the document).