Sitemaps: HTML and/or XML?
-
Can someone explain sitemaps, and if you need html and/or xml?
I have a site with a few html sitemaps, one for products, one for categories. I have another site with just one xml sitemap for my entire site (which has massive pages, 600k+).
Should I be dividing the site with massive pages into html sitemaps like my other site?
-
If you have got a large website with 100's or 1000's of pages then you can prioritise which pages Google should see first in your XML sitemap. Your HTML should sit in the footer of your website and is important to have because it should increase the speed at which Google sees all your pages on the website. I always recommend having both XML and HTML
-
You mention XML sitemaps. They need to have less than 50K links in each sitemap and less than 50MB in size.
What you do is setup your main XML sitemap and then have it contain all the URLs to your sitemaps with up to 50K urls each. BFYO has a great article on this http://www.blindfiveyearold.com/optimize-your-sitemap-index
Main support doc on sitemaps
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/183668?hl=en&ref_topic=8476
Reference for Index sitemap
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/71453
as Moosa mentioned, the XML really helps Google find all your important links and crawl the site. You need to have one setup and submit to Google Webmaster Tools. Note that if you have an index sitemap pointing to others, you can just submit the index and Google can find the rest.
As far as an HTML sitemap, that is an HTML page that users can browse to find your pages. It also helps the bots. You can have an HTML sitemap, but I would limit it to your main pages and category pages that then can lead to all of your product pages etc. I would not bother with an extensive HTML sitemap to all products on your website when your paginated category pages do this and act as an extension of your main HTML sitemap.
-
XML sitemap helps Google while crawling the site, whereas HTML sitemaps are usually used to help the visitors to have a better and easier site experience.
In my opinion having a XML sitemap is great as it will help Google while crawling and indexing the site in to search engine but there is no technical use of HTML sitemap. If you think that your visitors need one, than go for it but otherwise having XML sitemap for a website is enough!
Hope this helps!
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
-
Ogranization Schema/Microformat for a content/brand website | Travel
Hi, One of our clients have a website specific to a place, for eg. California Tourism in which they publish local information related to tourism, blogs & other useful content. I want to understand how useful is to publish Organization Schema on such website mentioning the actual Organization, which in this case is a Travel Agency? Or any other schema would fit in for such websites?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ds9.tech0 -
Can anyone help me diagnose an indexing/sitemap issue on a large e-commerce site?
Hey guys. Wondering if someone can help diagnose a problem for me. Here's our site: https://www.flagandbanner.com/ We have a fairly large e-commerce site--roughly 23,000 urls according to crawls using both Moz and Screaming Frog. I have created an XML sitemap (using SF) and uploading to Webmaster Tools. WMT is only showing about 2,500 urls indexed. Further, WMT is showing that Google is indexing only about 1/2 (approx. 11,000) of the urls. Finally (to add even more confusion), when doing a site search on Google (site:) it's only showing about 5,400 urls found. The numbers are all over the place! Here's the robots.txt file: User-agent: *
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | webrocket
Allow: /
Disallow: /aspnet_client/
Disallow: /httperrors/
Disallow: /HTTPErrors/
Disallow: /temp/
Disallow: /test/ Disallow: /i_i_email_friend_request
Disallow: /i_i_narrow_your_search
Disallow: /shopping_cart
Disallow: /add_product_to_favorites
Disallow: /email_friend_request
Disallow: /searchformaction
Disallow: /search_keyword
Disallow: /page=
Disallow: /hid=
Disallow: /fab/* Sitemap: https://www.flagandbanner.com/images/sitemap.xml Anyone have any thoughts as to what our problems are?? Mike0 -
Google Bot / SEO and Cookies
Hi, I'm trying to monetise my website via a paid subscription / paid content strategy. The plan is, after the user is on the website for 1min 30secs or clicks 3 map markers or visits 3+ pages A popup will appear asking for a signup + payment Cookie will be set for 6 months, if a users returns and cookie is detected (php) they will be redirected to sign up page My site relies heavily on organic SEO, so my question is: Will google bot be presented with this sign up stuff? Does google bot set cookies? will everything be indexed properly... And what affects on SEO?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | thinkLukeSEO0 -
Sitemap into SE
Hi Moz community experts, I have a question about the sitemap into search engine like here : http://i.imgur.com/gQ0JhuH.jpg. Do you know what I need to do to get the same structure or do decide which pages we want to present into our result. We created a new page and we would like to see it into the resultat when the visitor is searching for our branded keywords. Thank in advance for your support. gQ0JhuH.jpg.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | johncurlee0 -
Is it worth creating an Image Sitemap?
We've just installed the server side script 'XML Sitemaps' on our eCommerce site. The script gives us the option of (easily) creating an image sitemap but I'm debating whether there is any reason for us to do so. We sell printer cartridges and so all the images will be pretty dry (brand name printer cartridge in front of a box being a favourite). I can't see any potential customers to search for an image as a route in to the site and Google appears to be picking up our images on it's own accord so wonder if we'll just be crawling the site and submitting this information for no real reason. From a quality perspective would Google give us any kind of kudos for providing an Image Sitemap? Would it potentially increase their crawl frequency or, indeed, reduce the load on our servers as they wouldn't have to crawl for all the images themselves?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ChrisHolgate
I can't stress how little of a hardship it will be to create one of these automatically daily but am wondering if, like Meta Keywords, there is any benefit to doing so?1 -
Indexing/Sitemap - I must be wrong
Hi All, I would guess that a great number of us new to SEO (or not) share some simple beliefs in relation to Google indexing and Sitemaps, and as such get confused by what Web master tools shows us. It would be great if somone with experience/knowledge could clear this up for once and all 🙂 Common beliefs: Google will crawl your site from the top down, following each link and recursively repeating the process until it bottoms out/becomes cyclic. A Sitemap can be provided that outlines the definitive structure of the site, and is especially useful for links that may not be easily discovered via crawling. In Google’s webmaster tools in the sitemap section the number of pages indexed shows the number of pages in your sitemap that Google considers to be worthwhile indexing. If you place a rel="canonical" tag on every page pointing to the definitive version you will avoid duplicate content and aid Google in its indexing endeavour. These preconceptions seem fair, but must be flawed. Our site has 1,417 pages as listed in our Sitemap. Google’s tools tell us there are no issues with this sitemap but a mere 44 are indexed! We submit 2,716 images (because we create all our own images for products) and a disappointing zero are indexed. Under Health->Index status in WM tools, we apparently have 4,169 pages indexed. I tend to assume these are old pages that now yield a 404 if they are visited. It could be that Google’s Indexed quotient of 44 could mean “Pages indexed by virtue of your sitemap, i.e. we didn’t find them by crawling – so thanks for that”, but despite trawling through Google’s help, I don’t really get that feeling. This is basic stuff, but I suspect a great number of us struggle to understand the disparity between our expectations and what WM Tools yields, and we go on to either ignore an important problem, or waste time on non-issues. Can anyone shine a light on this for once and all? If you are interested, our map looks like this : http://www.1010direct.com/Sitemap.xml Many thanks Paul
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fretts0 -
Internal Search / Faceted Navigation
Hi there, I'm working on an e-learning site with the following content pages: main page, category pages, course pages, author pages, tag pages. We will also have an internal search for users to search by keyword for courses & authors & categories. Is it still recommend to "noindex, follow" and disallow in robots.txt internal search results? Or for a site like this, is it better to use faceted navigation? It seems that faceted navigation is mostly for e-commerce sites. What is the latest thinking on SEO best practices for internal search result pages?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mindflash0 -
Should HTML Heading Tags ALWAYS be in Hierarchical Order?
The question is in the title: Should HTML Heading Tags ALWAYS be in Hierarchical Order? For example, using them in order: H1, H2, H3... etc. Or is it OK to have H2 tags before the main H1 tag on a page? - for example sidebar content with H2 headings before the main content H1 tag? Your thoughts are greatly appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Peter2640