<?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: WWW or No WWW:  Which is Better for SEO?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.canonicalseo.com/www-or-no-www/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.canonicalseo.com/www-or-no-www/</link>
	<description>Learn SEO Free Online</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2012 13:05:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: umit</title>
		<link>http://www.canonicalseo.com/www-or-no-www/comment-page-1/#comment-503</link>
		<dc:creator>umit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:57:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonicalseo.com/?p=452#comment-503</guid>
		<description>I also prefer to use www version because it looks more professional. I agree that we should stick to any  1 version no matter it is www or withou www. Thank you for a great post!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I also prefer to use www version because it looks more professional. I agree that we should stick to any  1 version no matter it is www or withou www. Thank you for a great post!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fabio Varesano</title>
		<link>http://www.canonicalseo.com/www-or-no-www/comment-page-1/#comment-492</link>
		<dc:creator>Fabio Varesano</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Oct 2010 22:11:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonicalseo.com/?p=452#comment-492</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the clarifying article.. personally I&#039;m still with www and redirects on the no-www .. but I&#039;ll probably switch in the near future.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the clarifying article.. personally I&#8217;m still with www and redirects on the no-www .. but I&#8217;ll probably switch in the near future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Canonical SEO</title>
		<link>http://www.canonicalseo.com/www-or-no-www/comment-page-1/#comment-491</link>
		<dc:creator>Canonical SEO</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Oct 2010 14:06:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonicalseo.com/?p=452#comment-491</guid>
		<description>It doesn&#039;t matter which you choose.  Select www or non-www based on what you think sounds best or whatever you think will be easiest to remember.  It really is just a personal preference.  Once you do decide on one or the other, there are several ways to specify to the search engines which version of your domain you prefer.  

If your site is hosted on a Linux/Apache platform, you should have access to an Apache module called Mod_Rewrite.  This utility is a very robust URL rewriting/redirecting tool controlled using .htaccess files placed in various folders on your web site.  You should be able to simpy modify the .htaccess file in the root of your web to include the following RewriteRule...

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;strong&gt;NOTE:&lt;/strong&gt;  In all of the following code examples, you will have to remove the space after the opening &#039;&lt;&#039; for both the opening and closing IfModule tags.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

If you prefer the non-www version of your URLs then you would want something like this:

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;code&gt;&lt; IfModule mod_rewrite.c&gt;
RewriteEngine On
RewriteBase /
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^www.example.com$ [NC]
RewriteRule (.*) http://example.com/$1 [R=301,L]
&lt; /IfModule&gt;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

If you prefer the www version of your URLs then you would want something like this:

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;code&gt;
&lt; IfModule mod_rewrite.c&gt;
RewriteEngine On
RewriteBase /
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^example.com$ [NC]
RewriteRule (.*) http://www.example.com/$1 [R=301,L]
&lt; /IfModule&gt;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

This will work on pretty much any Linux/Apache server configuration regardless of the technology platform your site is built upon.  

I typically put this code AFTER any specific URL redirects I might have in my .htaccess. Typically specific redirect rules should appear first in the .htacces, and general rules like these should appear at the end.  

If you&#039;re running WordPress, you&#039;ll want to put the above code just before the WordPress section.  For example, on a WordPress site that prefers www you might end up with:

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;code&gt;
&lt; IfModule mod_rewrite.c&gt;
RewriteEngine On
RewriteBase /
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^example.com$ [NC]
RewriteRule (.*) http://www.example.com/$1 [R=301,L]
&lt; /IfModule&gt;&lt;/code&gt;

# BEGIN WordPress&lt;code&gt;
&lt; IfModule mod_rewrite.c&gt;
RewriteEngine On
RewriteBase /
RewriteRule ^index\.php$ - [L]
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d
RewriteRule . /index.php [L]
&lt; /IfModule&gt;

# END WordPress&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

You may be tempted to place the RewriteCond/RewriteRule for the URL canonicalization inside the WordPress block, but don&#039;t.  The next time you upgrade WordPress, the upgrade process will overwrite everything inside that block and you&#039;ll use your URL canonicalization redirect.

If you&#039;re running WordPress, you will also need to log in and go to the &lt;strong&gt;Settings -&gt; General&lt;/strong&gt; admin screen.  Once there, make sure the values in the &lt;strong&gt;WordPress Address (URL)&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;Site Address (URL)&lt;/strong&gt; reflect the choice you have made.

Google&#039;s Webmaster Tools also offers a way for you to specify your preferred domain (www or non-www).  Again, if you use this tool to indicate to Google which version of your domain you prefer, MAKE SURE that it is consistent with the other settings in your .htaccess and within the WordPress admin&#039;s general settings screen (if applicable).  

It should be noted that Google&#039;s Webmaster Tools preferred domain setting will ONLY fix this for Google.  Implementing 301 redirects to specify a preferred domain works for ALL search engines.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It doesn&#8217;t matter which you choose.  Select www or non-www based on what you think sounds best or whatever you think will be easiest to remember.  It really is just a personal preference.  Once you do decide on one or the other, there are several ways to specify to the search engines which version of your domain you prefer.  </p>
<p>If your site is hosted on a Linux/Apache platform, you should have access to an Apache module called Mod_Rewrite.  This utility is a very robust URL rewriting/redirecting tool controlled using .htaccess files placed in various folders on your web site.  You should be able to simpy modify the .htaccess file in the root of your web to include the following RewriteRule&#8230;</p>
<blockquote><p><strong>NOTE:</strong>  In all of the following code examples, you will have to remove the space after the opening &#8216;< ' for both the opening and closing IfModule tags.</p></blockquote>
<p>If you prefer the non-www version of your URLs then you would want something like this:</p>
<blockquote><p><code>< IfModule mod_rewrite.c><br />
RewriteEngine On<br />
RewriteBase /<br />
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^www.example.com$ [NC]<br />
RewriteRule (.*) <a href="http://example.com/$1" rel="nofollow">http://example.com/$1</a> [R=301,L]<br />
< /IfModule></code></p></blockquote>
<p>If you prefer the www version of your URLs then you would want something like this:</p>
<blockquote><p><code><br />
< IfModule mod_rewrite.c><br />
RewriteEngine On<br />
RewriteBase /<br />
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^example.com$ [NC]<br />
RewriteRule (.*) <a href="http://www.example.com/$1" rel="nofollow">http://www.example.com/$1</a> [R=301,L]<br />
< /IfModule></code></p></blockquote>
<p>This will work on pretty much any Linux/Apache server configuration regardless of the technology platform your site is built upon.  </p>
<p>I typically put this code AFTER any specific URL redirects I might have in my .htaccess. Typically specific redirect rules should appear first in the .htacces, and general rules like these should appear at the end.  </p>
<p>If you&#8217;re running WordPress, you&#8217;ll want to put the above code just before the WordPress section.  For example, on a WordPress site that prefers www you might end up with:</p>
<blockquote><p><code><br />
< IfModule mod_rewrite.c><br />
RewriteEngine On<br />
RewriteBase /<br />
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^example.com$ [NC]<br />
RewriteRule (.*) <a href="http://www.example.com/$1" rel="nofollow">http://www.example.com/$1</a> [R=301,L]<br />
< /IfModule></code></p>
<p># BEGIN WordPress<code><br />
< IfModule mod_rewrite.c><br />
RewriteEngine On<br />
RewriteBase /<br />
RewriteRule ^index\.php$ - [L]<br />
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f<br />
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d<br />
RewriteRule . /index.php [L]<br />
< /IfModule></p>
<p># END WordPress</code></p></blockquote>
<p>You may be tempted to place the RewriteCond/RewriteRule for the URL canonicalization inside the WordPress block, but don&#8217;t.  The next time you upgrade WordPress, the upgrade process will overwrite everything inside that block and you&#8217;ll use your URL canonicalization redirect.</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re running WordPress, you will also need to log in and go to the <strong>Settings -&gt; General</strong> admin screen.  Once there, make sure the values in the <strong>WordPress Address (URL)</strong> and <strong>Site Address (URL)</strong> reflect the choice you have made.</p>
<p>Google&#8217;s Webmaster Tools also offers a way for you to specify your preferred domain (www or non-www).  Again, if you use this tool to indicate to Google which version of your domain you prefer, MAKE SURE that it is consistent with the other settings in your .htaccess and within the WordPress admin&#8217;s general settings screen (if applicable).  </p>
<p>It should be noted that Google&#8217;s Webmaster Tools preferred domain setting will ONLY fix this for Google.  Implementing 301 redirects to specify a preferred domain works for ALL search engines.</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chas</title>
		<link>http://www.canonicalseo.com/www-or-no-www/comment-page-1/#comment-486</link>
		<dc:creator>Chas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Oct 2010 07:03:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonicalseo.com/?p=452#comment-486</guid>
		<description>Great info...I&#039;ve been trying to figure this out for awhile now.  My question is this...how do you choose one or the other?  I had an seo guy before that was linking to my site without the www and over the past months we have been doing so using the www.  Do I need to change something in my wordpress settings or host settings? or in google webmaster tools?  I want to include the www but it isn&#039;t showing up in search result pages.   thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great info&#8230;I&#8217;ve been trying to figure this out for awhile now.  My question is this&#8230;how do you choose one or the other?  I had an seo guy before that was linking to my site without the www and over the past months we have been doing so using the www.  Do I need to change something in my wordpress settings or host settings? or in google webmaster tools?  I want to include the www but it isn&#8217;t showing up in search result pages.   thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ruslan</title>
		<link>http://www.canonicalseo.com/www-or-no-www/comment-page-1/#comment-280</link>
		<dc:creator>Ruslan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 08:53:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonicalseo.com/?p=452#comment-280</guid>
		<description>Very useful information. I’ve recently released a new web site and I’m struggling with ranking. I’ve read a few other posts about canonicalization but this one is easier to understand. Thanks for sharing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very useful information. I’ve recently released a new web site and I’m struggling with ranking. I’ve read a few other posts about canonicalization but this one is easier to understand. Thanks for sharing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick</title>
		<link>http://www.canonicalseo.com/www-or-no-www/comment-page-1/#comment-269</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 23:58:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonicalseo.com/?p=452#comment-269</guid>
		<description>I agree with you. I also prefer to choose the www just for the fact that our visitors and the general public expect to see it. Especially true in print. It is very rare to see a domain being listed in print such as magazines and books without the www. 

You could even say media has somewhat programmed us to expect it. Even today when we type in a web address without the www we expect to see the www appended to the URL. 

But it all comes down to choosing one or the other and sticking to it. If you choose one over the other it is always a good idea to 301 redirect. Just for the simple fact you can not control how other sites link to you. They may choose to use the opposite of what you have chosen.  Just helps to reduce the chance of duplicate content and beats a split page rank/link juice issues.

Thumbs up on this very informative post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with you. I also prefer to choose the www just for the fact that our visitors and the general public expect to see it. Especially true in print. It is very rare to see a domain being listed in print such as magazines and books without the www. </p>
<p>You could even say media has somewhat programmed us to expect it. Even today when we type in a web address without the www we expect to see the www appended to the URL. </p>
<p>But it all comes down to choosing one or the other and sticking to it. If you choose one over the other it is always a good idea to 301 redirect. Just for the simple fact you can not control how other sites link to you. They may choose to use the opposite of what you have chosen.  Just helps to reduce the chance of duplicate content and beats a split page rank/link juice issues.</p>
<p>Thumbs up on this very informative post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Search</title>
		<link>http://www.canonicalseo.com/www-or-no-www/comment-page-1/#comment-264</link>
		<dc:creator>Search</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 12:24:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonicalseo.com/?p=452#comment-264</guid>
		<description>Really good information about www or no www site. This information is very useful for me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Really good information about www or no www site. This information is very useful for me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jhnsmith978</title>
		<link>http://www.canonicalseo.com/www-or-no-www/comment-page-1/#comment-246</link>
		<dc:creator>jhnsmith978</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 12:28:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonicalseo.com/?p=452#comment-246</guid>
		<description>Great post and it&#039;s definitely a very good guide on optimisation for beginners. I will have to bookmark this post for some tips. Thanks for sharing this information.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post and it&#8217;s definitely a very good guide on optimisation for beginners. I will have to bookmark this post for some tips. Thanks for sharing this information.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin</title>
		<link>http://www.canonicalseo.com/www-or-no-www/comment-page-1/#comment-236</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Jan 2010 15:34:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonicalseo.com/?p=452#comment-236</guid>
		<description>I checked it with Web Sniffer and it is 301 redirecting.  Many thanks for your help!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I checked it with Web Sniffer and it is 301 redirecting.  Many thanks for your help!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Canonical SEO</title>
		<link>http://www.canonicalseo.com/www-or-no-www/comment-page-1/#comment-235</link>
		<dc:creator>Canonical SEO</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:27:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonicalseo.com/?p=452#comment-235</guid>
		<description>As long as you actually are 301 redirecting from the www version of your domain back to the non-www version of your domain then the non-www version of your URLs will get credit for inbound links to the www version of your URLs.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.canonicalseo.com/redirecting-web-pages/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;301 redirecting web pages&lt;/a&gt; like this eliminates the URL canonicalization issues you&#039;re worried about.

If you&#039;re not 100% sure of whether a 301 redirect is actually occuring, there are many tools on the web that will show you the browser/web server interaction including the status codes being returned.  You can use the Firebug plugin for Firefox... or you can simply enter a www URL into this &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.seoconsultants.com/tools/headers.asp&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;web page based http header tool&lt;/a&gt; and it will show you the interaction between the browser/crawler and your web server.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As long as you actually are 301 redirecting from the www version of your domain back to the non-www version of your domain then the non-www version of your URLs will get credit for inbound links to the www version of your URLs.  <a href="http://www.canonicalseo.com/redirecting-web-pages/" rel="nofollow">301 redirecting web pages</a> like this eliminates the URL canonicalization issues you&#8217;re worried about.</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re not 100% sure of whether a 301 redirect is actually occuring, there are many tools on the web that will show you the browser/web server interaction including the status codes being returned.  You can use the Firebug plugin for Firefox&#8230; or you can simply enter a www URL into this <a href="http://www.seoconsultants.com/tools/headers.asp" rel="nofollow">web page based http header tool</a> and it will show you the interaction between the browser/crawler and your web server.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

