简体繁体 English

锚定/跳转链接的规范URL？

[英]Canonical URLs for anchor / jump links?

原文 2016-03-03 12:20:12 5 1 html/ hyperlink/ seo/ anchor/ canonical-link

When using 'Jump to' aka 'Anchor' links to jump to a different part of a webpage should I use canonical URL or a 'no-follow' link for the purposes of SEO? 当使用“跳至”（又称为“锚定”链接）跳转到网页的其他部分时，我是否应该出于SEO的目的使用规范的URL或“不关注”链接？ Does it even matter? 有关系吗 If so, which is better? 如果是这样，哪个更好？

Basically, I don't want to have spiders look at http://www.example.com/examplepage/ and http://www.example.com/examplepage/#jumptolink and index them as 'duplicate content'. 基本上，我不想让蜘蛛浏览http://www.example.com/examplepage/和http://www.example.com/examplepage/#jumptolink并将它们编入“重复内容”。

Given they have different URLs should they have different meta-descriptions and titles? 假设它们具有不同的URL，是否应该具有不同的元描述和标题？ Not sure. 不确定。

I have checked on multiple sites, forums and blogs and this was pretty close ( Dynamic Url & Canonical meta tag issue ) but it doesn't seem to relate to 'jump to' links. 我已经检查了多个站点，论坛和博客，这非常接近（ Dynamic Url和Canonical meta标签问题），但它似乎与“跳转至”链接无关。

1 个解决方案

Handling of anchor links is done entirely on the client side. 锚链接的处理完全在客户端完成。 They are not even sent to the server. 它们甚至都不会发送到服务器。 Google ignores them entirely while crawling. Google在搜寻时会完全忽略它们。 Google just loads the page and indexes it as if it hadn't had a anchor link in the first place. Google只是加载该页面并对其进行索引，就好像它最初没有锚链接一样。