3 ms·
I like it, but I'm afraid companies would just change the way it is currently done: from query parameters to encoded urls. Example: Before https://example.com
by sdevonoes 5y ago
I like it, but I'm afraid companies would just change the way it is currently done: from query parameters to encoded urls. Example:
Before
https://example.com/item/4000336900709?spm=a2g01.126 https://example.com/item/4000336900709?spm=a2g01.126...
After:
https://example.com/item/4000336900709000044323234 https://example.com/item/4000336900709000044323234
Now the tracking parameters are all encoded in the last segment of the url. The backend just has to decode it accordingly and it will have both the item id and the bag of tracking parameters.
- contravariant 5y agoThat and in cases where they link to third parties they now apparently use such a tracking link but with the orignal URL as name. So something would look like: https://externalwebsite.example/some-article https://externalwebsite.example/some-article but would link to https://example.com/someone-clicked-on-link-id-123456 https://example.com/someone-clicked-on-link-id-123456
- Seirdy 5y agoThis, AMP, and a thousand other things are making it hard to share canonical URLs. Two workarounds: 1. Find "rel=canonical" in the page's source. 2. Look up the page/article title on your favorite search engine.
- contravariant 5y agoI'd also support just showing a warning when the apparent URI and the actual URI differ. Though a tool to automatically pick the canonical URL from the page source would also be neat.