Yes, you are using canonical links correctly.
Google and other search engines use your canonical tags.
To resolve cases of where duplicate content exist ... Allow me to explain the correct usage before getting into cases of why.
www.mywebsite.example?page=1 are the same because of the content management system I'm using. And I want to use the friendly URLs. This tag tells Google to use
www.mywebsite.example/page1 as the URL for this content; so if Google finds
www.mywebsite.example?page=1 it will know that is not the best URL for this content ... use
<link rel="canonical" href="https://www.mywebsite.example/page1" />
Some software does not recognize dynamic content (they should!)
www.website.example/ are not the same. IE it wants me to put a canonical to
www.mywebsite.example?page1 Let them know as their program is not looking to see if the pages have the same content or different content.
Dynamic content creates different pages using a
www.example.com?tag=value which are completely valid, and not the same as the
www.example.com so a canonical to the
www.example.com is not wanted on ?tag=value for a CMS system.
www.example.com?theme=dark would be the same as
www.example.com (except for CSS) in which case a canonical would point towards the
www.example.com page. But that is not the case here.
Cases of duplicate content that can be resolved by canonical
mysite.example.com publicly available online and
mysite.example ... because that is the setup of the example hosting company so I can access the site before I register the domain mysite.
www.example.com both providing the same content.
www.example.com on http and HTTPS both providing the same content. As the content does not require logging in but I want to use HTTPS for privacy of the user. So the HTTPS content is mapped to the same HTTP content on my host.
I have a CMS system where
www.mydomain.example/canonical are the same because the CMS system is designed not to require friendly URL but to be configured to use them if desired.
I have an option for users to see pages in different languages via machine translation ... This duplication may happen using Google's own tool? ...
I have a custom meme generator which passes the text via the URL but the page is the same,
www.example.com/meme?text=this+shows+on+the+image. I want Google and other search engines use canonical tag
<link rel="canonical" href="https://www.example.com/meme" />
.htaccess redirect can be used to prevent duplicate content being exposed in some cases.
In the first 4 cases a redirect could also solve the problem although the first one exists for a very good reason. Cases 5 and 6 would not be resolvable using a redirect. Case 4 may have very compelling reasons to exist. It may need to do so for editing the content for example.
Regardless canonical is a needed tool because cases do exist.
example.com/page2... The canonical tag tells Google which is the correct URL to use for said content ... The correct URL you want Google to use is the URL "you" want. Hence you are telling Google which one is correct, not Google telling you. Both pages should agree that say ?page=2 or
/tag/2is the one that should appear in Google.
<link rel="canonical" href="https://www.example.com" />for my home page and go to page 2 e.g
https://www.example.com?page=2, some SEO inspector tools giving me warning of
Canonical and page URL are differentshould I ignore this warning even though content on page one is not same from page 2. I don't want Google to get confused from home page and paginated pages
myWebsite.examplehas unique content and the content of
myWebsite.example?page=2is unique and not the same content as
myWebsite.examplethen the canonical should not be the same, (in other words), like you are saying. The inspector appears to be unaware they are not the same content, the inspector does not understand dynamic content. ... I would advise the people who made the SEO inspector and see what they say. Have you considered making the URLs more friendly IE
example.com/page2/and can access the URL from
example.com?page=2then the duplicate content which results can be resolved using
<link rel="canonical" href="https://www.example.com/page2/" />... so that you don't have duplicate content, (or to say you do but not intentionally and you want the friendly URL indexed). If you don't have duplicate content exposed then you don't need to use the tag.