Search Results

Search found 660 results on 27 pages for 'canonical'.

Page 2/27 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Will rel=canonical break site: queries ?

    - by Justin Grant
    Our company publishes our software product's documentation using a custom-built content management system using a dynamic URL namespace like this: http://ourproduct.com/documentation/version/pageid Where "version" is the version number to which the documentation applies, and "pageid" is a unique string which identifies that page in our back-end content management system. For example, if content (e.g. a page about configuration best practices) is unchanged from version 3.0 and 4.0 of our product, it'd be reachable by two different URLs: http://ourproduct.com/documentation/3.0/configuration-best-practices http://ourproduct.com/documentation/4.0/configuration-best-practices This URL scheme allows us to scope Google search results to see only documentaiton for a particular product version, like this: configuration site:ourproduct.com/documentation/4.0 But when the user is searching across all versions, we don't want Google to arbitrarily choose one of the URLs to show in results. Instead, we always want the latest version to show up. Hence our planned use of rel=canonical so we can proscriptively tell Google which URL we want to show up if multiple versions are being searched. (Users who do oddball things like searching 2 versions but not all of them are a corner case, so we don't care which version(s) show up in that case-- the primary use-cases we care about is searching one version or searching all versions) But what will happen to scoped searches if we do this? If my rel=canonical URL points to version 4.0, but my search is scoped to 3.0, will Google return a result? Even if you don't know the answer offhand, do you know a site which uses rel=canonical to redirect across folders in a URL namespace. If so, I could run a few Google searches and figure out the answer.

    Read the article

  • Is it relatively safe to install kernel from "Canonical Kernel Team ppa" than "Mainline"

    - by tijybba
    I already referred most of the questions stating Upgrade from Mainline Builds or Compiling from latest source or PPA and also concluded that it can cause breakage to Current stable installed system. My question is regarding the kernel builds from Canonical Kernel Team which i have subscribed in Ubuntu 12.04 64-bit , states This is the core kernel team as hired by Canonical. Do not use this team, use ubuntu-kernel-team instead. My stable kernel states 3.2.0-27.42 from Ubuntu repository , also i consider Canonical Kernel Team to be Official ,currently urging me to Upgrade 3.2.0-27.43 , so from the Odd numbered and through the PPA description it is categorized as Unstable. From this ,it can be said next stable release would be 3.2.0-27.44. Is upgrading to .43 version is stable enough to continue , since .44 will be provide by Ubuntu itself based on .43 version and so on. Though i can't expect a lot of Changes ,but does it provide new Improvements or just Bug Fixes since it is just a preceding Release. Also , apart from Ubuntu mainline kernel , is Canonical Kernel Team different. If so , in what development or contribution terms. Is the Ubuntu kernel developed by Two different teams or same team. P.S.: Just noticed that sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade provides me upgrade to .43 kernel , which normally requires sudo apt-get dist-upgrade to upgrade to newer kernel available , unless it normally provides message like " Following packages were not upgraded..." , is it an error or an exception to this Canonical Kernel PPA.

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to use canonical tag in Blogger posts?

    - by John Sanjay
    I found one of my blog post was cached by Google (www.example.com/post.html). I found that comment page of the post was also cached (www.example.com/post.html?showComment=1372054729698). These two pages are showing in Google SERP when I checked cached posts of my blog. Is it possible to use canonical tag on the post www.example.com/post.html?showComment=1372054729698 so that Google won't penalize my original post? Is there any other ways to redirect a blog post?

    Read the article

  • Program to find canonical cover or minimum number of functional dependencies

    - by Sev
    I would like to know if there is a program or algorithm to find canonical cover or minimum number of functional dependencies? For example: If you have: R = (A,B,C) <-- these are tables: A,B,C And dependencies: A ? BC B ? C A ? B AB ? C The canonical cover (or minimum number of dependencies) is: A ? B B ? C Is there a program that can accomplish this? If not, any code/pseudocode to help me write one would be appreciated. Prefer in Python or Java.

    Read the article

  • Best SEO practices for mobile URLs: 301, rel=canonical, or something else?

    - by Chris
    I am developing a site with a mobile version and am trying to figure the appropriate way to manage the URLs for search engines. So far I've considered: Having a mobile site with rel="canonical" links to the regular site. Putting both the mobile site and full site on one URL, and doing user agent sniffing. Another opinion: Spencer: "If you have a mobile site at a separate location or URL, you should 301 redirect each and every mobile page to its corresponding page on your main website. Employ user agent detection so that the mobile optimized version is served up if someone's coming in from a hand-held. - http://developer.practicalecommerce.com/articles/1722-Mobile-site-Development-Best-Practices-for-SEO-Usability Both 2 and 3 make it hard for a user who wants to switch to the full site or mobile site manually, but I'm not sure 1 is the best alternative. What's the best way to write URLs for a mobile site?

    Read the article

  • Best SEO practices for mobile URLs: 301, rel=canonical, or something else?

    - by Chris
    I am developing a site with a mobile version and am trying to figure the appropriate way to manage the URLs for search engines. So far I've considered: Having a separate mobile site (m.example.com) with rel="canonical" links to the regular site. Putting both the mobile site and full site on one URL (example.com), and doing user agent sniffing. Another opinion: Spencer: "If you have a mobile site at a separate location or URL, you should 301 redirect each and every mobile page to its corresponding page on your main website. Employ user agent detection so that the mobile optimized version is served up if someone's coming in from a hand-held. - http://developer.practicalecommerce.com/articles/1722-Mobile-site-Development-Best-Practices-for-SEO-Usability Both 2 and 3 make it hard for a user who wants to switch to the full site or mobile site manually, but I'm not sure 1 is the best alternative. What's the best way to write URLs for a mobile site?

    Read the article

  • Can I Use A Canonical Tag Instead of a Redirect for Updated Content?

    - by Ewan Heming
    I have some old articles on my blog that get quite a bit of traffic, but are very outdated. I want to remove them from Google's index using the noindex tag, but I'm not sure what the best approach will be to send the same traffic to my new article on the subject without using a redirect (as I want to keep them in my blog archives). I was intending to just put a link at the top of the article pointing to the new one, but was wondering if it was appropriate to use a canonical tag instead; the new article is on the same subject but doesn't contain the same content, so isn't really a copy.

    Read the article

  • 1 bug to kill... Letting PHP Generate The Canonical.

    - by Sam
    Hi folks, for building a clean canonical url, that always returns 1 base URL, im stuck in following case: <?php # every page $extensions = $_SERVER['REQUEST_URI']; # path like: /en/home.ast?ln=ja $qsIndex = strpos($extensions, '?'); # removes the ?ln=de part $pageclean = $qsIndex !== FALSE ? substr($extensions, 0, $qsIndex) : $extensions; $canonical = "http://website.com" . $pageclean; # basic canonical url ?> <html><head><link rel="canonical" href="<?=$canonical?>"></head> when URL : http://website.com/de/home.ext?ln=de canonical: http://website.com/de/home.ext BUT I want to remove the file extension aswell, whether its .php, .ext .inc or whatever two or three char extension .[xx] or .[xxx] so the base url becomes: http://website.com/en/home Aaah much nicer! but How do i achieve that in current code? Any hints are much appreciated +! (other advices for proper canonical usage in this multi-lingual environment are welcome as well)

    Read the article

  • Generating a canonical path

    - by Joel
    Does any one know of any Java libraries I could use to generate canonical paths (basically remove back-references). I need something that will do the following: Raw Path - Canonical Path /../foo/ -> /foo /foo/ -> /foo /../../../ -> / /./foo/./ -> /foo //foo//bar -> /foo/bar //foo/../bar -> /bar etc... At the moment I lazily rely on using: new File("/", path).getCanonicalPath(); But this resolves the path against the actual file system, and is synchronised. java.lang.Thread.State: BLOCKED (on object monitor) at java.io.ExpiringCache.get(ExpiringCache.java:55) - waiting to lock <0x93a0d180> (a java.io.ExpiringCache) at java.io.UnixFileSystem.canonicalize(UnixFileSystem.java:137) at java.io.File.getCanonicalPath(File.java:559) The paths that I am canonicalising do not exist on my file system, so just the logic of the method will do me fine, thus not requiring any synchronisation. I'm hoping for a well tested library rather than having to write my own.

    Read the article

  • SEO Canonical Issue resolution on iis

    - by kacalapy
    i have a site running on IIS that i have Canonical Issue with. the error is: The page with URL "http://www.site.org/images/join_forum.gif" can also be accessed by using URL "https://www.site.org/images/join_forum.gif".Search engines identify unique pages by using URLs. When a single page can be accessed by using any one of multiple URLs, a search engine assumes that there are multiple unique pages. Use a single URL to reference a page to prevent dilution of page relevance. You can prevent dilution by following a standard URL format. how can i resolve this?

    Read the article

  • How to update Adobe's software unattendedly?

    - by jubel
    I would like to use unattended-upgrade to update the Adobe Reader, Flash Player and everything else of the Canonical partners. There fore, I added in /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/50unattended-upgrades Unattended-Upgrade::Allowed-Origins { "${distro_id} ${distro_codename}-security"; "${distro_id} ${distro_codename}-updates"; "Canonical ${distro_codename}"; // "${distro_id} ${distro_codename}-proposed"; // "${distro_id} ${distro_codename}-backports"; }; sudo unattended-upgrade --dry-run -d says Initial blacklisted packages: Starting unattended upgrades script Allowed origins are: ['o=Ubuntu,a=oneiric-security', 'o=Ubuntu,a=oneiric-updates', 'o=Canonical,a=oneiric'] Checking: acroread-common (["<Origin component:'partner' archive:'' origin:'' label:'' site:'archive.canonical.com' isTrusted:False>"]) Checking: adobe-flash-properties-gtk (["<Origin component:'partner' archive:'' origin:'' label:'' site:'archive.canonical.com' isTrusted:False>"]) Checking: adobe-flashplugin (["<Origin component:'partner' archive:'' origin:'' label:'' site:'archive.canonical.com' isTrusted:False>"]) Checking: adobereader-deu (["<Origin component:'partner' archive:'' origin:'' label:'' site:'archive.canonical.com' isTrusted:False>"]) Checking: handbrake-cli (["<Origin component:'main' archive:'oneiric' origin:'LP-PPA-stebbins-handbrake-snapshots' label:'HandBrake Snapshots' site:'ppa.launchpad.net' isTrusted:True>"]) Checking: handbrake-gtk (["<Origin component:'main' archive:'oneiric' origin:'LP-PPA-stebbins-handbrake-snapshots' label:'HandBrake Snapshots' site:'ppa.launchpad.net' isTrusted:True>"]) Checking: sopcast-player (["<Origin component:'main' archive:'oneiric' origin:'LP-PPA-ferramroberto-sopcast' label:'LffL Sopcast' site:'ppa.launchpad.net' isTrusted:True>"]) pkgs that look like they should be upgraded: Fetched 0 B in 0s (0 B/s) blacklist: [] InstCount=0 DelCount=0 BrokenCout=0 No packages found that can be upgraded unattended And it won't update. How can I update the third-party software automatically?

    Read the article

  • Is there a canonical resource on multi-tenancy web applications using ruby + rails

    - by AlexC
    Is there a canonical resource on multi-tenancy web applications using ruby + rails. There are a number of ways to develop rails apps using cloud capabilities with real elastic properties but there seems to be a lack of clarity with how to achieve multitenancy, specifically at the model / data level. Is there a canonical resource on options to developing multitenancy rails applications with the required characteristics of data seperation, security, concurrency and contention required by an enterprise level cloud application.

    Read the article

  • What is the canonical resource on multi-tenancy web applications using ruby + rails

    - by AlexC
    What is the canonical resource on multi-tenancy web applications using ruby + rails. There are a number of ways to develop rails apps using cloud capabilities with real elastic properties but there seems to be a lack of clarity with how to achieve multitenancy, specifically at the model / data level. Is there a canonical resource on options to developing multitenancy rails applications with the required characteristics of data seperation, security, concurrency and contention required by an enterprise level cloud application.

    Read the article

  • How to use rel=canonical with Sitecore aliases?

    - by Mike G
    I have inherited a Sitecore architecture that is a mess from an SEO duplicate content POV. There are multiple aliases that have been created (and indexed by the search engines) for many of the 2nd tier pages of the site. Due to server issues, I am not able to 301 redirect these duped pages, so I would like to use the rel=canonical tag in an attempt to try and get Google/Bing to recognize the correct pages I would like to appear in the index. I have blocked the most extraneous duped pages with a robots.txt file, however, since Google/Bing have already spidered many of the duped pages, I need to keep them accessible to the spiders, BUT removed from the index. The catch is, since the duped pages are aliases (and don't really physically exist in Sitecore that I can find), I am not sure how to go about using rel=canonical - or if I even can in this situation..?

    Read the article

  • Getting a double slash when redirecting for a canonical hostname on Firefox only

    - by Brian Neal
    I have a Django powered website, and I'm trying to solve the "canonical hostname" problem. I want www.example.com to redirect to example.com. I have tried both techniques found in the Apache documentation here (scroll down to Canonical hostnames). I'm currently trying the mod_rewrite method, and I have this in a virtual host container: RewriteEngine on RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^www\.example\.com$ [NC] RewriteRule ^/?(.*)$ http://example.com/$1 [L,R=301,NE] This works for me, except for one case. In Firefox only, if I type www.example.com in a browser, it redirects and I see this in the URL bar: example.com// (note the 2 trailing slashes). However, something like this will work correctly: www.example.com/news/ gets redirected to example.com/news/. I only see this on the root URL in Firefox. It seems to work fine on Windows under Chrome, IE9, and Opera (maybe those browsers eat the double slash?). My Mac using friend says it is fine in Safari, but he also sees the problem in Firefox. As far as Django settings go, I am using the default value of APPEND_SLASH=True. I don't know if Django has anything to do with it, but I've tried mod_rewrite rules like the above on static HTML sites before and it always seems to work.

    Read the article

  • How to Avoid Duplicate Content in Wordpress Ecommerce Store

    - by Bhanuprakash Moturu
    hi i run a word press eCommerce store powered by woo commerce . i have a large inventory of products most of the product description is same for all products and its mandatory to include it. its creating a large duplicate content on site each category have 6 products i thought of a solution can you suggest which one is good 1 no index and follow product page and link it to categories page using canonical tag 2 index and nofollow product page and link it to categories page using canonical tag which is the best solution and is it a good practice to use canonical tag to link to categories page

    Read the article

  • Using rel=next and rel=prev with multiple sets of paginated content on the same page

    - by jakejgordon
    We are running into issues with trying to figure out how to implement rel="next" and rel="prev" -- coupled with rel="canonical" -- with multiple sets of paginated content on the same page, with pages in multiple cultures. In other words, how do we implement these when we have a pager for both Product Reviews and Questions and Answers (aka "Q&A") on the same page, with duplicate content across culture-specific URLs (e.g. /us/en/my-product vs. /ca/en/my-product)? Our current implementation will actually do a full postback when you click Page 2, and will add something to the query string (e.g. website.com/ca/en/my-product?previewpage=2 or website.com/ca/en/my-product?questionpage=2). If we only had one set of paginated content then the implementation would certainly be more straightforward. Adding a second set of paginated content (i.e. Q&A) complicates things. Let's assume that we want the United States English page to be the canonical target (i.e. /us/en/my-product) based on culture. If you go to the /ca/en/my-product page you'll have a rel="canonical" href="/us/en/my-product". So far so good. Let's also assume that we are not implementing a page that lists ALL Product Reviews and Q&A. This would likely solve a number of our problems by using rel="canonical" to this page, but is not an option for reasons that are out of scope for this discussion. Now if you click on page 2 of Product Reviews, it will reload the page with /ca/en/my-product?reviewpage=2 as the URL. Given this scenario, here are my questions: On page 2 of the my-product page on the Canadian site, should there be a rel="canonical" to /us/en/my-product?reviewpage=2 (assuming the content is identical in the United States and Canada)? Should the rel="prev" go to /ca/en/my-product?reviewpage=1 or should it go to /ca/en/my-product ? The query-string version would really only be accessible if using the pager and shows the exact same content as the base page. The following two questions are closely related to this one. Should the /ca/en/my-product?reviewpage=1 have a rel canonical directly to /us/en/my-product (United States page with nothing in query string) since the content is identical)? Given that Q&A content is also paginated, should there be a rel="next" on the base page without query string? In other words, should the /ca/en/my-product page have a rel="next" to /ca/en/my-product?reviewpage=2 AND rel="next" to /ca/en/my-product?questionpage=2 . So far as I can tell it doesn't make sense to have multiple rel="next" implementations on the same page. I suspect that the pages with query string values should have rel="next" and rel="prev" that only point to other pages with query strings and not to the base page. The ?reviewpage=1 and ?questionpage=1 pages would then just have a rel="canonical" to /us/en/my-product . Thoughts? I know this is a tough one -- that's why I brought it to this community. Thanks so much for your help in advance!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >