Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Sitemaps Protocol Established
Posted 16 November 2006 - 03:04 PM
Is there any response to be taken at this time by webmasters and the SEO-interested community?
Posted 16 November 2006 - 03:07 PM
Posted 16 November 2006 - 07:10 PM
But other than that *yawn*
Posted 16 November 2006 - 09:02 PM
I just don't get it I guess. I've never submitted a sitemap to a search engine.
But then again I put a lot of work into making sure all of my sites can be fully spidered. So have never needed one.
Posted 16 November 2006 - 11:35 PM
Everybody knows it can take up to an hour
Posted 17 November 2006 - 01:48 AM
However, over time the Google sitemap development team have added additional information that to my mind make it worth subscribing to because it is simple, free and gives peace of mind information but more importantly because it is a facility that is continually being developed.
For new websites sitemaps ensures that the website is being regularly and properly crawled and that there is nothing blocking the search engine or any robots.txt file that is inadvertently preventing the website from being indexed. Sure any SEO professional can confirm that without sitemaps but why not get it confirmed from the horses mouth?
The statistics range from the quite useful, (Query Stats), Geeky info (Page Analysis), Nothing new (Index stats) to the mildly interesting for a few minutes (crawl rate).
Now there is an agreement by the major Search Engines to conform to a standard - hurrah - I can see that over time more and more useful functionality is going to be added that will be more useful to the webmasters and SEO consultants.
When sitemaps was first launched like others I wasn't particularly interested in what was on offer since the websites I looked after were mature websites, however I took the time to take a look and I can see that even for the well established websites it does now provide some useful information that granted, in most cases can be obtained from sources, but it does provide it in a centralised and easy to use way.
My feeling is that Google sitemaps development team are a bit of a dark horse, I imagine they even within Google they are seen as major geeks, but they seem to have a healthy enthusiam and passion for what they are doing (just read their blog) and I predict they will continue to develop webmaster tools that are going to become more and more useful. At the end of the day they have source information that many of us would love to get our hands on, they just need to work out how much of that information they are prepared to share.
I don't ever expect sitemaps will ever be about improved rankings in the sense that it will in anyway give an artificial boost to a website because it is registered with sitemaps, but it will help indirectly by highlighting any errors early and as time goes on produce more and more useful tools and data.
I personally wouldn't yawn at the announcement but would instead recommend that sitemaps is something worth doing and/or keeping a close eye on. The common format will make it even more worthwhile and opens up a bit of competition for the Google sitemap development team as to who can come up with the coolest tool.
As people have previously mentioned on this forum, you don't need to submit a sitemap to get some of the analysis that is on offer.
Posted 17 November 2006 - 05:21 AM
But other than that *yawn*
I wouldnt yawn Jill I find them very usefull espesaily if you take over some moster of a site developed over several years.
Quickly showed me that the site was blocking its self it also gives you longtail saerch terms that you can add content to target.
Posted 17 November 2006 - 09:02 AM
Posted 17 November 2006 - 10:40 AM
Only thing is, you don't actually have to submit a sitemap to Google to take advantage of all the stats and tools. But "submitting a sitemap" is what this new "sitemap standard" is all about... and Google's Webmaster Tools has nothing to do with Yahoo or MSN and submitting sitemaps to them...
So I guess I'm a little confused as to what exactly this new "standard" is supposed to do for me and why everyone's so excited. I guess if I were going through the excruciating hassle of autogenerating three different XML files to submit to the three SEs and now I only have to do one, that would be a benefit. But frankly I've never submitted a sitemap to start with, and I don't plan to start any time soon because the sites I work with are indexed just fine without one.
For people like me, an agreement among the "big 3" on a format for sitemaps is -- at best -- mildly interesting. I'll file it away in my databank just in case I run across a situation where I need it in the future, but for the moment it doesn't make any difference one way or the other.
I'm with Jill and Randy on the at the moment.
Posted 28 November 2006 - 01:23 PM
Posted 28 November 2006 - 07:42 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users