Add option to edit canonical when using setI18nParams() about i18n HOT 6 OPEN

Found a workaround with @BobbieGoede help.
You can modify canonical link in a page when using setI18nParams.
You just need to define useHead AFTER setI18nParams.
Example:

setI18nParams({
  en: {
    slug: 'tests1',
  },
  lv: {
    slug: 'tests',
  },
});

useHead({
  link: [
    {
      rel: 'canonical',
      href: 'https://example.com/anything-i-want',
    },
  ],
});

StackBlitz with example: https://stackblitz.com/edit/github-orzjqc-bntta4?file=pages%2Findex.vue,pages%2F[productCategory]%2F[id].vue

from i18n.

Can you give an example of when and why it would be desirable to be able to remove route parameters from the canonical tag? As far as I know canonicals should point to duplicate/identical resources.

from i18n.

@BobbieGoede Well It seems that this package already does what i desire. and you can close this issue.
But I will describe this with an example for next person to stumble upon this.
So you have an e-commerce site with products and variations.
So product url: /product/test-product
Product variation url: /product/test-product/variation-one

I would like to say "hey google, this variation url is the same as product url, because barely anything changes (tabs opened or anything like that)". And that's why I would like to remove "/variation-one" from canonical.

But it seems that if your component under pages is named as optional page: [[variation]].vue, then canonical automatically removes it.

from i18n.

@BobbieGoede It seems that actually if the page is [[variation]].vue, it does not automatically remove it. What would be the workaround to what I have described in previous comment?

from i18n.

I wasn't sure what you meant previously as parameters (optional or not) are not removed in the canonical links as you found out.

At the moment there's no workaround for this, Google suggests using query parameters for product variants (see their recommendations here), but if using url parameters is a common pattern we could think of a way to omit parameters somehow.

from i18n.

@BobbieGoede Yes, it would be great if we could do that. I will wait for any updates regarding this :)

from i18n.