Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Best XML Sitemap generator
-
Do you guys have any suggestions on a good XML Sitemaps generator? hopefully free, but if it's good i'd consider paying
I am using a MAC so would prefer a online or mac version
-
Hi James - i saw your reply on this thread and a quick question - i was running Gsitecrawler, after selecting all the suitable options , it opens up a "Crawl watch" page. While I am assuming it is crawling the site, as per the online instruction it says to select the "Generate" tab at the main application window (I did not opt for auto ftp).
When should I select the Generate option, immediately or wait for crawl to complete?
suparno
-
The only way to find out is to shoot them an e-mail. Either way you will discover the answer
-
I am wondering if they are talking about the paid version cus I run it on my site. www.psbspeakers.com and it comes up with all kinds of dup content.
<loc>http://www.psbspeakers.com/products/image/Image-B6-Bookshelf</loc>
<loc>http://www.psbspeakers.com/products/bookshelf-speakers/Image-B6-Bookshelf</loc>with this code siteing on both pages:
<link rel="canonical" href="http://www.psbspeakers.com/products/image/Image-B6-Bookshelf"/> -
I am wondering if they are talking about the paid version cus I run it on my site. www.psbspeakers.com and it comes up with all kinds of dup content.
<loc>http://www.psbspeakers.com/products/image/Image-B6-Bookshelf</loc>
<loc>http://www.psbspeakers.com/products/bookshelf-speakers/Image-B6-Bookshelf</loc>with this code siteing on both pages:
<link rel="canonical" href="http://www.psbspeakers.com/products/image/Image-B6-Bookshelf"/> -
I e-mailed their support and they shared it does support canonical tags. Below is the response I received:
Hi,
The script will detect canonical tags. If you can provide a live example we can look into for you.Regards,PhilipXML-Sitemaps.com-----------------------------I would suggest ensuring your tags are valid. If they are, contact the site support and they can provide specific feedback.
-
Thanks Ryan.
That's the one I already use, but it does not take canonical's into account so i end up with 2-3 links for the same page.
-
A popular sitemap generator: http://www.xml-sitemaps.com/
I cannot say it is the best but rather it works fine. The free online version will scan 500 pages. For $20, you can then have unlimited number of pages.
-
Sorry I should have said... I am on a mac ;(
is there any online ones around that don't have a cap of 500 pages? -
GsiteCrawler every time. It's free and It's an awesome awesome tool http://gsitecrawler.com/
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Best Practice for www and non www
How is the best way to handle all the different variations of a website in terms of www | non www | http | https? In Google Search Console, I have all 4 versions and I have selected a preference. In Open Site Explorer I can see that the www and non www versions are treated differently with one group of links pointing to each version of the same page. This gives a different PA score. eg. http://mydomain.com DA 25 PA 35 http://www.mydomain.com DA 19 PA 21 Each version of the home page having it's only set of links and scores. Should I try and "consolidate" all the scores into one page? Should I set up redirects to my preferred version of the website? Thanks in advance
Technical SEO | | I.AM.Strategist0 -
Include or exclude noindex urls in sitemap?
We just added tags to our pages with thin content. Should we include or exclude those urls from our sitemap.xml file? I've read conflicting recommendations.
Technical SEO | | vcj0 -
Will an XML sitemap override a robots.txt
I have a client that has a robots.txt file that is blocking an entire subdomain, entirely by accident. Their original solution, not realizing the robots.txt error, was to submit an xml sitemap to get their pages indexed. I did not think this tactic would work, as the robots.txt would take precedent over the xmls sitemap. But it worked... I have no explanation as to how or why. Does anyone have an answer to this? or any experience with a website that has had a clear Disallow: / for months , that somehow has pages in the index?
Technical SEO | | KCBackofen0 -
Auto generated meta description tag in Drupal
Was having issues on Drupal not autogenerating a meta description tag, but I think I have figured it out. Just to verify, would this piece of code be the meta description tag (reason I ask is b/c it looks a little different than the usual tag I have seen):
Technical SEO | | kevgrand0 -
Best Practices for adding Dynamic URL's to XML Sitemap
Hi Guys, I'm working on an ecommerce website with all the product pages using dynamic URL's (we also have a few static pages but there is no issue with them). The products are updated on the site every couple of hours (because we sell out or the special offer expires) and as a result I keep seeing heaps of 404 errors in Google Webmaster tools and am trying to avoid this (if possible). I have already created an XML sitemap for the static pages and am now looking at incorporating the dynamic product pages but am not sure what is the best approach. The URL structure for the products are as follows: http://www.xyz.com/products/product1-is-really-cool
Technical SEO | | seekjobs
http://www.xyz.com/products/product2-is-even-cooler
http://www.xyz.com/products/product3-is-the-coolest Here are 2 approaches I was considering: 1. To just include the dynamic product URLS within the same sitemap as the static URLs using just the following http://www.xyz.com/products/ - This is so spiders have access to the folder the products are in and I don't have to create an automated sitemap for all product OR 2. Create a separate automated sitemap that updates when ever a product is updated and include the change frequency to be hourly - This is so spiders always have as close to be up to date sitemap when they crawl the sitemap I look forward to hearing your thoughts, opinions, suggestions and/or previous experiences with this. Thanks heaps, LW0 -
Sitemap for dynamic website with over 10,000 pages
If I have a website with thousands of products, is it a good idea to create a sitemap for this website for the search engines where you show maybe 250 products on a page so it makes it easy for the search engine to find the part and also puts that part closer to the home page? Seems like google likes pages that are the closest to the home page (less clicks the better)
Technical SEO | | roundbrix0 -
Which is the best wordpress sitemap plugin
Does anyone have a recommendation for the best xml sitemap plugin for wordpress sites or do you steer clear of plugins and use a sitemap generator then load it up to the root manually?
Technical SEO | | simoncmason0 -
Double byte characters in the URL - best avoided?
We are doing some optimisation on sites in the APAC region, namely China, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Japan. We have set the url generator to automatically use the heading of the page in the URL which works fine for countries using Latin characters, but is causing problems, particularly in IE, when it comes to the double byte countries. For some reason, IE struggles with double byte and displays URLs in their rather ugly, coded form. Anybody got any suggestions on whether we should persist with the keyword URLs or revert to the non-descriptive URLs for the double byte countries? The reason I ask is it's a balance of SEO benefit vs not scaring IE users off with ugly URLs that look dreadful and spammy.
Technical SEO | | Red_Mud_Rookie0