Stacey wrote:
>> Webmasters for whom creating a comprehensive XML sitemap is laborious
>> will not like Google sitemap. It is easy to do it when a single content
>> management system is used, but not if several different CMS's (or none)
>> reside on the same domain. In that case, extra scripts need to be
>> composed or manual mergers be involved. Then, as well as keeping HTML
>> site maps up-to-date (for visitors and other crawlers), the Webmaster
>> needs to also handle XML to make Google happy. It is a site map /fork/.
>
>
> I know, so was the text one, I start making one and decided to change to
> the text file. They will take 3 other type files beside the XML.
>
> Stacey
Text files?! Are they in any way hierarchical? Without the artificial
introduction of a tree structures like XML?
If not, then I might as well tell Google my site map address (although I am
sure they can interpret the English title which reads "Site Map"). Then,
they can simply strip off anything not between "href=" and """ and
/there/... they have my sitemap. Only the depth is then limited.
On a more general note, I know how valuable these sitemaps are to Google.
They give them more available rosources. Yet, many people ask "how does it
help /me/"? Unless Google reward people for doing it (e.g. ranks, crawling
frequency), what is the point?
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com
|
|