Video XML Sitemap
-
I've been recently been information by our dev team that we are not allowed legally to make our raw video files available in a video XML sitemap...This is one of the required tags. Has anyone run into a similar situation and has figured out a way around it?
Any ideas would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
Margarita
-
This is exactly what I needed! Thank you!!!!
-
Thank you so much, Phil. That's correct, the files are already in .mp4 format. Your answer below is perfect. I provided examples of big publishers who have no problem sharing their video locations. We will see how it goes! Just another battle as an in-house SEO. Thanks again!
-Margarita
-
I don't think Margarita means the "unrendered" files, but rather the video files used within the embedded player - which will be .mp4 or .flv or .mov etc. References to these files are required as part of a video sitemap as a video:content_locelement. </video:content_loc>
-
Hi Margarita,
So - firstly, I can't quite understand the logic behind your Dev teams concerns here - as anyone knowledgable enough to find your video sitemap and pull the file URL from there will also be knowledgeable enough to look through your source code and rip the video file through the embedded player. If somebody really wants to download your content, they will - and a video sitemap listing the URLs of the mp4/mov files isn't going to be advertisment for people to do this.
If, in another attempt to prevent piracy, the dev teams are delivering the video content dynamically via JS - you're going to face another issue as the videos may not get indexed.
However, all that said... there is a way round this which may pacify your dev teams and still get the rich snippet results you're after - and that is including a video:player_locelement in the sitemap, rather than a video:content_locelement. video:player_locshould point to a specific embedded player for a specific video -e.g. an .swf flash file or a dynamic HTML5 player e.g. http://player.vimeo.com/video/36862925.</video:player_loc></video:content_loc></video:player_loc>
This will prevent users from finding the original video files outside the context of the embedded player, but i should add that it's not an effective block against piracy.
I hope that's useful, let me know if you have any more questions.
Cheers,
Phil.
-
" raw video files" as in pre- rendered?
- Illegal? No
- Impractical? Yes
Sounds like your dev team is lazy. Tell them to convert to videos to .mp4 and go from there.
-
nope, those raw files exist. They don't want to share them with the public. Legally is the only answer I got...I think it has to do in part with them being afraid of people trying to download the videos.
-
What do they mean legally? Maybe they mean technically can't generate them, or they are over the 50mrg limit or something like that according to Google's rules?
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
-
Pending Sitemaps
Hi, all Wondering if someone could give me a pointer or two, please. I cannot seem to get Google or Bing to crawl my sitemap. If I submit the sitemap in WMT and test it I get a report saying 44,322urls found. However, if I then submit that same sitemap it either says Pending (in old WMT) or Couldn't fetch in the new version. This couldn't fetch is very puzzling as it had no issue fetching the map to test it. My other domains on the same server are fine, the problem is limited to this one site. I have tried several pages on the site using the Fetch as Google tool and they load without issue, however, try as I may, it will not fetch my sitemap. The sitemapindex.xml file won't even submit. I can confirm my sitemaps, although large, work fine, please see the following as an example (minus the spaces, of course, didn't want to submit and make it look like I was just trying to get a link) https:// digitalcatwalk .co.uk/sitemap.xml https:// digitalcatwalk .co.uk/sitemapindex.xml I would welcome any feedback anyone could offer on this, please. It's driving me mad trying to work out what is up. Many thanks, Jeff
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | wonkydogadmin0 -
Video and text article on same topic but on two separate pages...
we are creating a video based off the content on one of our web pages. i know it's probably better for the video to be embedded on the same page as the article but if they aren't, what should we do to make sure that we aren't diluting our ranking power? Both pages will be going after the same key phrase...
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | yaelslater0 -
Why do people put xml sitemaps in subfolders? Why not just the root? What's the best solution?
Just read this: "The location of a Sitemap file determines the set of URLs that can be included in that Sitemap. A Sitemap file located at http://example.com/catalog/sitemap.xml can include any URLs starting with http://example.com/catalog/ but can not include URLs starting with http://example.com/images/." here: http://www.sitemaps.org/protocol.html#location Yet surely it's better to put the sitemaps at the root so you have:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart
(a) http://example.com/sitemap.xml
http://example.com/sitemap-chocolatecakes.xml
http://example.com/sitemap-spongecakes.xml
and so on... OR this kind of approach -
(b) http://example/com/sitemap.xml
http://example.com/sitemap/chocolatecakes.xml and
http://example.com/sitemap/spongecakes.xml I would tend towards (a) rather than (b) - which is the best option? Also, can I keep the structure the same for sitemaps that are subcategories of other sitemaps - for example - for a subcategory of http://example.com/sitemap-chocolatecakes.xml I might create http://example.com/sitemap-chocolatecakes-cherryicing.xml - or should I add a sub folder to turn it into http://example.com/sitemap-chocolatecakes/cherryicing.xml Look forward to reading your comments - Luke0 -
<loc>tag empty in sitemap, is this ok?</loc>
Hi - our website's sitemap is pretty huge, and I'm trying to generate it with the hreflang= information in it, because we have 11 different language sites all under the .com. I used the Media Flow generator for this purpose, but it returned a lot of entries with a blank tag. Our U.S. website by far has the most pages, so an example of what I'm getting is: Does this look correct???? Doesn't to me but I'm unsure.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jenny10 -
Is it worth putting images in your sitemap?
I am always trying to optimize our website and have came across adding images to the sitemap. Has anyone done this? Did it make a big difference?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EcommerceSite0 -
Schema.org and YouTube Videos
Hi, Does anyone know how to implement schema.org markup with YouTube embedded videos? Thanks Carlos
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Carlos-R0 -
Submitting sitemaps every 7 days
Question, if you had a site with more than 10 million pages (that you wanted indexed) and you considered each page to be equal in value how would you submit sitemaps to Google? Would you submit them all at once: 200 sitemaps 50K each in a sitemap index? Or Would you submit them slowly? For example, would it be a good idea to submit 300,000 at a time (in 6 sitemaps 50k each). Leave those those 6 sitemaps available for Google to crawl for 7 days then delete them and add 6 more with 300,000 new links? Then repeat this process until Google has crawled all the links? If you implemented this process you would never at one time have more than 300,000 links available for Google to crawl in sitemaps. I read somewhere that eBay does something like this, it could be bogus info though. Thanks David
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | zAutos0 -
Looking for re-assurance on this one: Sitemap approach for multi-subdomains
Hi All: Just looking for a bit of "yeah it'll be fine" reassurance on this before we go ahead and implement: We've got a main accommodation listing website under www.* and a separate travel content site using a completely different platform on blog.* (same domain - diffn't sub-domain). We pull in snippets of content from blog.* > www.* using a feed and we have cross-links going both ways, e.g. links to find accommodation in blog articles and links to blog articles from accommodation listings. Look-and-feel wise they're fully integrated. The blog.* site is a tab under the main nav. What i'd like to do is get Google (and others) to view this whole thing as one site - and attribute any SEO benefit of content on blog.* pages to the www.* domain. Make sense? So, done a bit of reading - and here's what i've come up with: Seperate sitemaps for each, both located in the root of www site www.example.com/sitemap-www www.example.com/sitemap-blog robots.txt in root of www site to have single sitemap entry: sitemap : www.example.com/sitemap-www robots.txt in root of blog site to have single sitemap entry: sitemap: www.example.com/sitemap-blog Submit both sitemaps to Webmaster tools. Does this sound reasonable? Any better approaches? Anything I'm missing? All input appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AABAB0