Google Webmaster Guideline Change: Human-Readable list of links
-
In the revised webmaster guidelines, google says "[...] Provide a sitemap file with links that point to the important pages on your site. Also provide a page with a human-readable list of links to these pages (sometimes called a site index or site map page)." (Source: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/35769?hl=en)
I guess what they mean by this is something like this: http://www.ziolko.de/sitemap.html
Still, I wonder why they say that. Just to ensure that every page on a site is linked and consequently findable by humans (and crawlers - but isn't the XML sitemap for those and gives even better information)? Should not a good navigation already lead to every page? What is the benefit of a link-list-page, assuming you have an XML sitemap? For a big site, a link-list is bound to look somewhat cluttered and its usefulness is outclassed by a good navigation, which I assume as a given. Or isn't it?
TL;DR: Can anybody tell me what exactly is the benefit of a human-readable list of all links?
Regards,
Nico
-
Hi Netkernz_ag,
It is just good practice to have those types of pages available. While I wouldn't say it is an absolute requirement, it should be something you do for your users. The page you pointed to is a general checklist of things to do, and not to do for your users. Creating a Site Index maybe a bit dated, but I still tend to do them as they are fairly easy to create. (example).
Hope this helps,
Don -
Hi there,
Remember that google always seeks to serve the a better user experience.
Technically, the XML sitemap is the one needed for crawlers. And the "human-readable" sitemap is focused on users.
I might be saiyng something obvious, that's the way i've understood it.The benefit of the "human-readable" sitemap shuld be in the part of user experience, Google might see it that way.
As a visitor, I find usefull that kind of sitemap, it gives you a quick overview of the siite and make your way to the final page faster.Hope it helps.
GR.
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
-
Onpage Optimisation Changes
Hi Guys, I love the SEO world I really do, but sometimes it can be quite confusing and even after 11 years and a few clients under my belt, I still have head-scratching days and this week has been one of them. It seem the rules surrounding onpage optimisation of keywords have changed quite a lot this year. Whilst, I understand blatantly sticking to a 3% keyword density rate for your keywords, hasn't been good practice for a while, and with RankBrain and machine learning, we have to pay attention to semantic words and phrases but it seems there is a new set of rules I haven't learnt yet. For example I had a client I was working on and we we noticed although they were ranking quite high for a keyword phrase, it wasn't actually mentioned in the text at all and so by adding it in a place it made sense, we should lift this and other keywords. Here is what happened, within a week their main keyword moved down from 1 to about 6 and the keyword that wasn't added moved from 4th to 23rd. After scratching my head and then going to full panic mode, I calmed down and looked at competitors, they didn't mention the word in the content either and so I decided to remove the one word we added to the text. The rankings came back overnight (well after doing a fetch as Google and getting to reindex). So if keyword density now is clearly NOT a metric to go on, how do we know the sweet spot? Do we use something like Ryte and make sure we using semantics and keywords within the average of the top ten? Does what Google deems important depend on the niche? Not a right or wrong answer here, just interested in your thoughts Regards Neil
On-Page Optimization | | nezona2 -
Google cache tool help
This link is for the Ebay Google cache - http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:www.ebay.com&strip=1 I wanted to do the same for my homepage so I switched out the urls and it worked. When I try to get a different link in there such as mysite.com/category it wont work. I know my pages are indexed. Any ideas why it wont work for other pages?
On-Page Optimization | | EcommerceSite0 -
Are Back Links King
We have worked as closely as possible to the guidelines and advice on this forum, if we compare our on page Analsis with other companies in the same field as ours we have a far better site as far as SEO is concerned, our DA authority is higher and most of our page authority is higher but we just cannot seem to get up to their level in the search engines, one site that is in competiton with us do not use Facebook and also they do not use Twitter very much, I looked at some of their backlinks and their top one which was a blog had not been updated since 2011, over the years we have amassed far more what I would call worthless links as this was the done thing then, how can I get on the right track, are there any companies who could assess our site for a reasonable cost to point us in the right direction, we are doing our own blog, Facebook, Twitter, Onlywire?
On-Page Optimization | | Palmbourne0 -
Webmaster tools
Hi there, I have access to my sebsite writeing www.piensapiensa.es or www.piensapiensa.com. What domain should I add to the webmasters tools? Should I have to do some kind of 301 direction from piensapiensa.com to piensapiensa.com as the main market is in Spain? Thanks.
On-Page Optimization | | juanmiguelcr0 -
Impact of nofollow links
Does anyone know what the impact of a nofollowed link is on the ranking value any given page has to distribute? For example, if I have 2 links on a page, both followed, I know those links each distribute nearly 50% of the total ranking value the current page has to offer. However, if one of those links is nofollowed, does that automatically mean the other link gets the ranking value cast off by the nofollowed link? In other words, the single followed link now distributes nearly 100% of the ranking value the page has to offer? It seems to me I remember hearing this was not the case and that the ranking value a nofollowed link would have if it were followed just evaporates. This would mean the single followed link still only passes on around 50%...not 100%. Is the effect different if the links are internal vs. external? If any citations are available to justify knowledge here, that would be great. I know a lot of people have opinions about this subject, but I'm not sure anyone knows Google's position. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | RyanOD0 -
Too many links on a page?
On my blog posts, I have links to all the categories and months, dating back 5-6 years. This make the number of links on each blog page well over 100, which I understand might decrease the value of each page. Is there a problem with having more than 100 links on a page?
On-Page Optimization | | rdreich492 -
Breadcrumb links
Hello. Are the breadcrumb links valued more over other links ? (google searches for them specificaly to display them in the results)
On-Page Optimization | | seo.academy0 -
Internal Links - more the merrier?
I have just recently spoken to an SEO consultant who is pushing the opinion that more internal links would be better for me. They are particularly focused oin aligning a large number of content articles that I have developed over the years, and getting more keyword focus, and more links (inpage within site) onto these pages. I have to agree on a certain level that maybe this large base of unique content is unedr utilised. What is the general opinon, more internal links are better?
On-Page Optimization | | Jurnii0