Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Best XML Sitemap generator
-
Do you guys have any suggestions on a good XML Sitemaps generator? hopefully free, but if it's good i'd consider paying
I am using a MAC so would prefer a online or mac version
-
Hi James - i saw your reply on this thread and a quick question - i was running Gsitecrawler, after selecting all the suitable options , it opens up a "Crawl watch" page. While I am assuming it is crawling the site, as per the online instruction it says to select the "Generate" tab at the main application window (I did not opt for auto ftp).
When should I select the Generate option, immediately or wait for crawl to complete?
suparno
-
The only way to find out is to shoot them an e-mail. Either way you will discover the answer
-
I am wondering if they are talking about the paid version cus I run it on my site. www.psbspeakers.com and it comes up with all kinds of dup content.
<loc>http://www.psbspeakers.com/products/image/Image-B6-Bookshelf</loc>
<loc>http://www.psbspeakers.com/products/bookshelf-speakers/Image-B6-Bookshelf</loc>with this code siteing on both pages:
<link rel="canonical" href="http://www.psbspeakers.com/products/image/Image-B6-Bookshelf"/> -
I am wondering if they are talking about the paid version cus I run it on my site. www.psbspeakers.com and it comes up with all kinds of dup content.
<loc>http://www.psbspeakers.com/products/image/Image-B6-Bookshelf</loc>
<loc>http://www.psbspeakers.com/products/bookshelf-speakers/Image-B6-Bookshelf</loc>with this code siteing on both pages:
<link rel="canonical" href="http://www.psbspeakers.com/products/image/Image-B6-Bookshelf"/> -
I e-mailed their support and they shared it does support canonical tags. Below is the response I received:
Hi,
The script will detect canonical tags. If you can provide a live example we can look into for you.Regards,PhilipXML-Sitemaps.com-----------------------------I would suggest ensuring your tags are valid. If they are, contact the site support and they can provide specific feedback.
-
Thanks Ryan.
That's the one I already use, but it does not take canonical's into account so i end up with 2-3 links for the same page.
-
A popular sitemap generator: http://www.xml-sitemaps.com/
I cannot say it is the best but rather it works fine. The free online version will scan 500 pages. For $20, you can then have unlimited number of pages.
-
Sorry I should have said... I am on a mac ;(
is there any online ones around that don't have a cap of 500 pages? -
GsiteCrawler every time. It's free and It's an awesome awesome tool http://gsitecrawler.com/
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
-
Sitemap.xml strategy for site with thousands of pages
I have a client that has a HUGE website with thousands of product pages. We don't currently have a sitemap.xml because it would take so much power to map the sitemap. I have thought about creating a sitemap for the key pages on the website - but didn't want to hurt the SEO on the thousands of product pages. If you have a sitemap.xml that only has some of the pages on your site - will it negatively impact the other pages, that Google has indexed - but are not listed on the sitemap.xml.
Technical SEO | | jerrico10 -
Best Practice for www and non www
How is the best way to handle all the different variations of a website in terms of www | non www | http | https? In Google Search Console, I have all 4 versions and I have selected a preference. In Open Site Explorer I can see that the www and non www versions are treated differently with one group of links pointing to each version of the same page. This gives a different PA score. eg. http://mydomain.com DA 25 PA 35 http://www.mydomain.com DA 19 PA 21 Each version of the home page having it's only set of links and scores. Should I try and "consolidate" all the scores into one page? Should I set up redirects to my preferred version of the website? Thanks in advance
Technical SEO | | I.AM.Strategist0 -
Should Sitemaps be placed in the sub folder they reference?
I have a sitemap-index.xml file in the root. I then have several sitemaps linked to from the index in example.com/sitemaps/sitemap1.xml, example.com/sitemaps/sitemap2.xml, etc. I have seen on other sites that for example a sitemap containing blogs where the blogs are located at example.com/blog/blog1/ would be located at example.com/blog/sitemap.xml. Is it necessary to have the sitemap located in the same folder like this? I would like to have all sitemaps in a single sitemap folder for convenience but not if it will confuse search engines. My index count for URLs in some sitemaps has dropped dramatically in Google Webmaster Tools over the past month or so and I'm not sure if this is having an effect. If it matters, I have all sitemap files, including the index, listed in the robots.txt file.
Technical SEO | | Giovatto0 -
Which Sitemap to keep - Http or https (or both)
Hi, Just finished upgrading my site to the ssl version (like so many other webmasters now that it may be a ranking factor). FIxed all links, CDN links are now secure, etc and 301 Redirected all pages from http to https. Changed property in Google Analytics from http to https and added https version in Webmaster Tools. So far, so good. Now the question is should I add the https version of the sitemap in the new HTTPS site in webmasters or retain the existing http one? Ideally switching over completely to https version by adding a new sitemap would make more sense as the http version of the sitemap would anyways now be re-directed to HTTPS. But the last thing i can is to get penalized for duplicate content. Could you please suggest as I am still a rookie in this department. If I should add the https sitemap version in the new site, should i delete the old http one or no harm retaining it.
Technical SEO | | ashishb010 -
Disallow: /404/ - Best Practice?
Hello Moz Community, My developer has added this to my robots.txt file: Disallow: /404/ Is this considered good practice in the world of SEO? Would you do it with your clients? I feel he has great development knowledge but isn't too well versed in SEO. Thank you in advanced, Nico.
Technical SEO | | niconico1011 -
Best URL format for pagination
We're currently changing the URL format of our website search, we have been discussing a lot and cannot decide the past way to pass the pagination parameter for SEO. We narrowed down to the options. www.website.com/apples/p2 - www.website.com/apples?page=2 - www.website.com/apples/page/2 What would give us best ranking returns? What do you think?
Technical SEO | | HelpSaude0 -
Sitemap for dynamic website with over 10,000 pages
If I have a website with thousands of products, is it a good idea to create a sitemap for this website for the search engines where you show maybe 250 products on a page so it makes it easy for the search engine to find the part and also puts that part closer to the home page? Seems like google likes pages that are the closest to the home page (less clicks the better)
Technical SEO | | roundbrix0 -
Should XML sitemaps include *all* pages or just the deeper ones?
Hi guys, Ok this is a bit of a sitemap 101 question but I cant find a definitive answer: When we're running out XML sitemaps for google to chew on (we're talking ecommerce and directory sites with many pages inside sub-categories here) is there any point in mentioning the homepage or even the second level pages? We know google is crawling and indexing those and we're thinking we should trim the fat and just send a map of the bottom level pages. What do you think?
Technical SEO | | timwills0