Is Canonicalization done/adviced by only Google?

Does it matter anyway

[AjiNIMC]

I was involved with the HR for sometime (so sorry if I have missed some later discussions on this topic). We always were concerned about Canonicalization (domain and URL).

Here is a strange thing

1. [google.com...] works but [google.com...] (the last letter "L" is in uppercase) doesn't work. (same with WebmasterWorld , [webmasterworld.com...] works but [webmasterworld.com...] doesn't)
   
2. [yahoo.com...] and [yahoo.com...] both works (and that is a case with most of the websites)
   
3. Forget about MSN, don't even dare to do [msn.com...] (I did and showed me *********** ). See yourself :).
   

My Question is that does it matter at all when Yahoo itself is not doing it?

Thanks,
AjiNIMC

[g1smd]

Content served by an Apache webserver is case-sensitive. This means that each page has only one URL that can access it. This is good.

Content served by IIS is not case sensitive, so each page of content has multiple URLs that can access it, and that is very very bad.

URLs should be all in lower case. Never use spaces or underscores in a URL. When linking to an index page always omit the index file filename itself, finishing the URL with just a trailing / on the end.

[tedster]

Yahoo may not be making a big buzz about canonical issues, but they still can hurt you on that engine too, in my experience. This is an Internet techology issue altogether, and not just a Google issue. My advice is to be informed and be exacting -- your site will benefit from your precision,.

[AjiNIMC]

Thanks

[AjiNIMC]

I am sure SEs much be doing all possible things to do canonicalization at their own level. Google is using webmaster section for that, example preferred domain.

[wheelie34]

if you erradicate the canonical issues first you wont have to worry about "preffered domain" on any engine in the future, less worries and above all less work