Comments on: Canonical Tag 2.0: Google To Add Cross Domain Support http://searchengineland.com/canonical-tag-2-0-google-to-add-cross-domain-support-27222 Search Engine Land: News On Search Engines, Search Engine Optimization (SEO) & Search Engine Marketing (SEM) Fri, 25 May 2012 16:06:00 -0400 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: ezaaron http://searchengineland.com/canonical-tag-2-0-google-to-add-cross-domain-support-27222/comment-page-1#comment-7253 ezaaron Tue, 06 Oct 2009 22:48:24 +0000 http://searchengineland.com/?p=27222#comment-7253 It is a good idea, but how many rss aggregators are there out there that duplicate content and nobody gets an obvious drop in rankings from it? It may become more relevant in the future, especially if google is announcing things about it, but for now I don't see a huge impact on duplicate content... and they also have to make sure the "spammy" aggregators don't use the tag to claim the original source, which sounds to me like the biggest challenge for any tag that will work across domains. Bottom line - I don't know how they will do this without it being abused. Aaron http://www.ezwebsitemonitoring.com/ It is a good idea, but how many rss aggregators are there out there that duplicate content and nobody gets an obvious drop in rankings from it? It may become more relevant in the future, especially if google is announcing things about it, but for now I don’t see a huge impact on duplicate content… and they also have to make sure the “spammy” aggregators don’t use the tag to claim the original source, which sounds to me like the biggest challenge for any tag that will work across domains.

Bottom line – I don’t know how they will do this without it being abused.

Aaron
http://www.ezwebsitemonitoring.com/

]]> By: mattinertia http://searchengineland.com/canonical-tag-2-0-google-to-add-cross-domain-support-27222/comment-page-1#comment-7237 mattinertia Tue, 06 Oct 2009 09:26:19 +0000 http://searchengineland.com/?p=27222#comment-7237 Erm, whats wrong with linking to the original source? The SEs are making the issue more complicated than it needs to be. They should just preach a little bit about link love if you steal content (or heavily quote) and that would resolve the issue right? More people know how to implement a link than a canonical and it's better for users. Erm, whats wrong with linking to the original source? The SEs are making the issue more complicated than it needs to be. They should just preach a little bit about link love if you steal content (or heavily quote) and that would resolve the issue right? More people know how to implement a link than a canonical and it’s better for users.

]]> By: dazzlindonna http://searchengineland.com/canonical-tag-2-0-google-to-add-cross-domain-support-27222/comment-page-1#comment-7228 dazzlindonna Mon, 05 Oct 2009 18:10:32 +0000 http://searchengineland.com/?p=27222#comment-7228 Cross-domain, huh? I thought the whole reason it wasn't cross-domain to begin with, was so no one could falsely claim to be the canonical version of some authority domain, thereby hijacking the domain. Can't you see it? Some dork just sets the tag on his buy-your-pills-here.com as the canonical url for google.com . :) Ok, am assuming Google has a way to ensure that hijacking can't happen, but I sure hope they make sure there are no holes in the plan. Cross-domain, huh? I thought the whole reason it wasn’t cross-domain to begin with, was so no one could falsely claim to be the canonical version of some authority domain, thereby hijacking the domain. Can’t you see it? Some dork just sets the tag on his buy-your-pills-here.com as the canonical url for google.com . :)

Ok, am assuming Google has a way to ensure that hijacking can’t happen, but I sure hope they make sure there are no holes in the plan.

]]>