Confused about Site Maps :/

L

Lothlorien

New Member
Hi there folks :)

I am new to this forum and I have some questions regarding site maps. I have researched them as much as I could as I have 2 site maps to do to start off with. However, there are some things that I haven't been able to find out the answer for. Perhaps some of you far more knowledgeable people could take some time to answer my post . . .

Some of the research (google, www, etc.) I have done states that a site map should be an XML (darn something else to start learning) document and is not for visual display. Other research I have done tells you how to make the text only display (visual) site map.

So my first question is should I do 2 site map documents - 1. an XML document that is not meant for display and 2. a HTML/PHP text only document that is for display?

If this is correct what would be the naming conventions? e.g. sitemap.xml and sitemap.php?

My next question is that I have noticed some web sites include a site map on every page at the bottom (e.g. footer.php) - e.g. www.joomla.org - and would this be a better way to go?

My last question is a recap of the above. The crux of the matter is should there be 2 versions of the sitemap - an XML document purely for search engines and a visual display sitemap?

Thank you all!!
 
L

Lothlorien

New Member
katehsu888 said:
You may have both or either of them. On the SEO side, XML sitemap is better. HTML sitemap is visible for real visitors.
Click to expand...

Thank you Kateshu! So it is good to have both. So the remaining question is - is it better to have have the visible (HTML/PHP) version on every page e.g. www.joomla.org or have it as a separate standalone page - or even both?
 
L

Lothlorien

New Member
seopower said:
what is site maps? and how u used ?
Click to expand...

My first understanding of a site map was the "Site Map" link on a few websites. Then i found the 2nd component - that they were useful for SEO. So site maps provide a two fold function - ease of use and SEO. Hence, I got confused :) Especially when researching the SEO side of site maps and finding out they were non-visual XML pages!

The first component - making your website user friendly.

The links were simple, text based pages that listed virtually all webpages on the particular site. As far as I know, they were provided to allow a user to quickly find "something" and were user orientated. As home page real estate is fairly limited - they provide general headings only - a site map lists just about everything in the website thus allowing that "something" to be easily found - especially if it is obscure.

The design of a user orientated site map adheres almost strictly to the plan a webmaster does for a site before the site is put together.

Here are some site maps I collected links for - they appeared with a google search "sitemap.html" and were in the first 20 to be shown:

1 - 10
http://www.apa.org/sitemap.aspx
http://foundationcenter.org/sitemap.html

11 - 20
http://www.apple.com/sitemap/
http://www.quirksmode.org/sitemap.html
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/sitemap.html

The second component - sitemaps for SEO

Recently, here and there, I had read that site maps were an important component in SEO. How important? I am not sure, all I know is that they are important now. There are sitemap generators available, google gives a complete breakdown of sitemaps, there are lots of tutorials on the net about them and there is even a protocol for them.

So, in my mind, it is better to have this covered for SEO than not.

Hope this helps! :)
 
J

johny.12

New Member
Some of the research (google, www, etc.) I have done states that a site map should be an XML (darn something else to start learning) document and is not for visual display. Other research I have done tells you how to make the text only display (visual) site map. So, in my mind, it is better to have this covered for SEO than not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top