Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
I tend to agree putting the new <link rel="canonical" href="[permalink]">
propounded by the search engine
giants into the header is both a good idea and should be handled by the theme.
AFAIK, it goes along way
towards defusing duplicate content issue, among them those created by WP's
paginated comments and
paginated posts functions. This should be a rather simple modification of
thematic_head(), I think?
FYI, Joost de Walk's original post, referenced above, is found here:
http://yoast.com/canonical-url-links/
Original comment by martin.k...@gmail.com
on 16 Feb 2009 at 7:16
Having taken a look at Joost's plugin code, I must revise my first judgement:
obtaining a canonical URL no matter
from where is not so trivial, However, Joost's plugin is GPL'ed, so there
should be no objection to integrating its
code into Thematic.
Original comment by martin.k...@gmail.com
on 17 Feb 2009 at 1:43
Seems as if the canonical tags will make it into the core .. Maybe we'll have a
first
proposal 'til next week.
Cheers,
Chris
Original comment by chris.gossmann@googlemail.com
on 17 Feb 2009 at 6:31
Discussion on WP-Hackers is going on .. I installed the plugin today on my blog
to
see how it behaves in a real world environment.
Original comment by chris.gossmann@googlemail.com
on 18 Feb 2009 at 1:21
I have installed Joost's plugin on Rheta's blog, and it seems to produce a
consistent canonical URL no matter
what, as far as I can judge.
Original comment by martin.k...@gmail.com
on 18 Feb 2009 at 1:57
I'd like to see how this plays out in the WP community first.
Original comment by ian%them...@gtempaccount.com
on 22 Feb 2009 at 11:02
http://wpengineer.com/relcanonical-url-for-wordpress-theme/
Original comment by mur...@gmail.com
on 24 Feb 2009 at 7:02
I saw that post this morning. Is that it? Does that 1 line of code take care of
all
the instances where a canonical URL is required? If that's it I'll make that a
filterable function in version 0.9.
Original comment by ian%them...@gtempaccount.com
on 24 Feb 2009 at 9:23
… unless there's already a patch for that in 2.8.
[checks]
Well if the fuss has been generated solely by the comments paging, that's fixed
in
2.8. Anyone else have an opinion on this?
Original comment by ian%them...@gtempaccount.com
on 24 Feb 2009 at 9:28
Ian, comment paging is not the only situation where duplicate URLs point to the
same content, creating a
deuplicate content problem (although it certainly is the one that has received
the most attention on WP lately).
Joost de Walk imself provided analytics campaign URLs as an example in his
original post on this – see http://yoast.com/canonical-url-links/. Others
certainly will crop up, if they haven’t already, hence the proposal
to address this once and for all, independently of the content providing
platform, through a link in the header.
I’m pretty creatin Google, Xahoo! and company would not have felt complled to
propound a new standard by
WP’s paged comment implementation :).
As to the adequacy of the aforementioned code one-liner,all I can say is
Joost's plugin is a lot more complex,
though some of it might be due to it trying to cater to bugs and deficiencies
of older Wordpress versions (it’s
bakcwards compatible at least to 1.2, judging from the comments). It also tries
to produce useful canonical links
for archives, paged posts and more (bascially anything but error and search
pages), all of which the one-liner
does not. I’m not PHP and WP savvy enough to judge the merits of his approach
; I would however argue that
supporting rel=canonical *as such* does make a lot more sense than rolling out
a new fix to each duplicate
content issue cropping up, forever and ever.
Original comment by martin.k...@gmail.com
on 25 Feb 2009 at 1:20
(And I hate how Google code won’t let me edit my typos :P. Or maybe I should
just hate my sloppy proof reading
Anyway:
* deuplicate = duplicate
* pretty creatin = pretty certain
* Xahoo! = Yahoo!
* bakcwards = backwards
Apologies)
Original comment by martin.k...@gmail.com
on 25 Feb 2009 at 1:23
For completeness' sake some more typos – no, just kidding, in fact, the
original Google post on this, somewhat
biased towards web shops and similar (refer to Joost’s aforementioned post
for usage cases on blogs that have
nothing to do with WP paging):
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/02/specify-your-canonical.html
Original comment by martin.k...@gmail.com
on 25 Feb 2009 at 1:28
Well, how about we add this (filtered, of course) to the head for version 0.9:
<?php if ( is_singular() ) echo '<link rel="canonical" href="' .
get_permalink() . '"
/>'; ?>
and see how it goes.
Original comment by ian%them...@gtempaccount.com
on 25 Feb 2009 at 10:39
Original comment by ian%them...@gtempaccount.com
on 25 Feb 2009 at 10:40
Original comment by ian%them...@gtempaccount.com
on 26 Feb 2009 at 3:24
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
mur...@gmail.com
on 12 Feb 2009 at 11:05