<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Canonical URLs and Faceted Search</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/02/13/canonical-urls-and-faceted-search/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/02/13/canonical-urls-and-faceted-search/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 00:39:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jaimie Sirovich</title>
		<link>http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/02/13/canonical-urls-and-faceted-search/comment-page-1/#comment-9856</link>
		<dc:creator>Jaimie Sirovich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2011 00:44:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=1420#comment-9856</guid>
		<description>I just noticed this blog post years later, and I&#039;m not sure it tells the whole story.

Isn&#039;t canonicalization not good enough?  Even if you canonicalize a spider trap, a robot can&#039;t (or won&#039;t -- if you&#039;re not important enough) spider a spider trap.

Implicit selection is also only going to happen if it&#039;s a single selection interface.  Along those lines, it&#039;s probably best just to exclude multiple selection entirely from the view of search engines.  It&#039;s just too huge a space.

Canonicalizing a spider trap is like saying &quot;see all this stuff you spidered?  Yeah, it&#039;s useless.&quot;  Isn&#039;t it?  I&#039;m assuming Endeca sorts the filters when they beautify URLs. 

Canonicalizing solves small duplicate content problems -- like deduping a product in N categories.  Facets introduce powersets and factorials, and that&#039;s a bigger challenge to throw at it.  Perhaps too big, no?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just noticed this blog post years later, and I&#8217;m not sure it tells the whole story.</p>
<p>Isn&#8217;t canonicalization not good enough?  Even if you canonicalize a spider trap, a robot can&#8217;t (or won&#8217;t &#8212; if you&#8217;re not important enough) spider a spider trap.</p>
<p>Implicit selection is also only going to happen if it&#8217;s a single selection interface.  Along those lines, it&#8217;s probably best just to exclude multiple selection entirely from the view of search engines.  It&#8217;s just too huge a space.</p>
<p>Canonicalizing a spider trap is like saying &#8220;see all this stuff you spidered?  Yeah, it&#8217;s useless.&#8221;  Isn&#8217;t it?  I&#8217;m assuming Endeca sorts the filters when they beautify URLs. </p>
<p>Canonicalizing solves small duplicate content problems &#8212; like deduping a product in N categories.  Facets introduce powersets and factorials, and that&#8217;s a bigger challenge to throw at it.  Perhaps too big, no?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

