4 replies to this topic

[geoinct]

What is the importance of a site map’s file name?

I have a site that includes a page of links to many topics on the site. I’m suggesting they expand it to be a more complete site map and include a “site map” link too in the navigation scheme for visitors.

The file is named similar to xxxlst.htm. It is at the root level. It has been indexed and the links appear to be getting followed (at the moment the site’s main navigation is a cascading menu system. It looks like search engines are having a problem following the links to deeper pages. This listing page is the clean path to deeper pages at the moment).

Do search engines give some significance to the file name of a site map?
Would it make sense to change the file name?

I have seen a post somewhere suggesting this file name site_map.html (or .htm). Is this true and better than say sitemap.htm?

[Randy]

No difference at all. Name it what you want to.

[Jill]

I've never tested it, but I can't imagine why it would make any difference what it's named. The engines basically do most things automatically and just crawl and follow links and index regardless of file names.

[projectphp]

Personally, I have found that naming a file with sitemap in the name does help. I had to redo several framed sites (long, boring story, so don't ask) and each and every time the first two pages crawled (by Google) were:
1. Home page.
2. Sitemap.XXXX

I have said this before, but IMHO that makes sense, as the hardest part of a crawler is scheduling all pages to be crawled. If a page is linked 3 levels deep, an SE may never get around to crawling it. Any short cuts crawlers can take to find all a site's URLs quicker (which a sitemap is ideal for) they would (and should) take. Looking for the words sitemap in the link to a file and the filename is certainly an easy, and relatively trivial short cut to implement and utilise.

YMMV of course, but it certainly can't hurt!

[Jill]

Guess that does make sense, Mike!