On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 9:10 AM, Phil Boswell phil.boswell@gmail.com wrote:
Isn't this what the new "rel=canonical" facility is designed to cover?
I seem to recall we're using that for REDIRECT pages, why not for this kind of situation?
Matt Cutts of Google has stressed that rel="canonical" should only be used where redirects aren't feasible:
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/02/canonical-link-element-pr... Slide 8: "* Far better to avoid dupes and normalize urls in the first place * If you're a power user, exhaust alternatives first"
Besides, duplicate URLs are just kind of icky. It seems nicer on the basis of general web principles to have a single URL where possible, unless there are specific good reasons not to.