Question about construction of our sitemap URL in robots.txt file
-
Hi all,
This is a Webmaster/SEO question. This is the sitemap URL currently in our robots.txt file:
http://www.ccisolutions.com/sitemap.xml
As you can see it leads to a page with two URLs on it. Is this a problem? Wouldn't it be better to list both of those XML files as separate line items in the robots.txt file?
Thanks!
Dana
-
Hi Jarno,
Thanks so very much! I have to say I am really liking the A1 generator. How awesome of you to follow up. I really appreciate that. Yes, if you want to send me the complete sitemap via PM that would be awesome. I certainly hope I can return the favor Happy Holidays!
Dana
-
Yes, we definitely use XENU, but I think I like Screaming Frog a bit better (although our IT Director swears it's broken).
-
Hi Christopher,
Thanks for the update. Yes, I looked at it too and other than it not being "pretty" XML, the data seemed to be okay. The one thing the A! generator did that we couldn't do was assign the values for importance and frequency specific pages are modified. If that data is accurate, that's pretty cool. I'm just not sure, although it seems it did identify pages that are modified more frequently correctly. I have 30 days to play with the free trial, but so far I think I like it a lot.
Dana
-
Dana,
It just finished scanning here are the results:
Internal Sitemap URL's:
- Listed found: 5248
- Listed deduced: 5301
- Analyzed content: 3110
- Analyzed references: 3176
External URL's:
- Listed found: 700
When i look at the overview of the result i see a number of 301 redirects, canonical redirects (when tested again the get code 200 OK). But I see a lot op pages.
When i build the sitemap it generates one file (no idea why not more then one) with all the links in the document. Google's sitemap protocol states it should be like the schema at sitemaps.org which it does. The entire protocol of sitemap.org states that a sitemap can not hold over 50,000 links and should be smaller then 10 MB in filesize.
The one I just build for you is only 1 MB and contains less url's then 50,000 and thus is it allowed by Google.
http://www.sitemaps.org/protocol.html
I can send you the entire version of the sitemap if you'd like in a personal message or through e-mail?
Hope this helps you further.
kind regards
Jarno
-
i started the scan and it's still busy:
2500 analyzed references so far.
Let you know how it turns out.
Jarno
-
Thanks Jarno. I really appreciate that. Yes, I had it selected to just scan for images (as prompted when I attempted to create an image sitemap). Let me know what you see? I am wondering if it is going around in circles?
Dana
-
Dana,
sometimes that happens. Are you scanning for images or are you scanning the site?
i will check your site tomorrow with my full version and see what it does.
Sometimes with some websites you'll get things like this but it can be loads of things. 3500 pages should not take 2 hours but only a couple of minutes. I'll check it first thing tomorrow. A1 is not installed on my laptop..
Let you know tomorrow.
Kind regards
Jarno
-
A1 Sitemap does 2 things:
1 ) It builds a file names sitemap.xml which contains all files on the website (not conform the google requirements
-
It builds a number of files listed in sitemap-index.xml for every 100 pages in one sitemap. So if you're website contains 2800 pages You'll get loads of files: 28 sitemap-1.xml etc and 1 sitemap-index.xml file. Which does meet the Google standards. Afterwards you can do 2 things in Google webmasters:
-
enter the sitemap-index.xml file as a sitemap -> Google will follow everything and come to the grand total of 2800 pages.
-
Enter each sitemap separately.-> same result but you can pinpoint better where you have a 100 pages and google only indexes fewer (can happen).
Hope this helps
-
-
Hi again Jarno,
Is it normal for A1's sitemap generator's "Scan website" function for images to take over two hours? Our site is about 3,500 URLs. So far it has under "Internal 'sitemap' URLs" Listed found: 82076 (and climbing every few seconds).
I am wondering if there isn't something wrong? (I don't have any frame of reference since I've never used it before). Thanks!
Dana
-
I'm not familiar with the A1 Sitemap generator, but regarding the sitemap protocol, there is a limit on the size of a single sitemap.xml file, so for large sites, the sitemap must be split into multiple sitemap.xml files. And, the protocol has a method for indexing these multiple sitemap.xml files. It's sort of like an index to an index. None of my sites exceed the sitemap file limit, so I don't know which sitemap generators use this approach, but I would guess many of them do.
Sitemap generators I have used include DMXZone which is a Dreamweaver plugin, and xml-sitemaps.com which includes a video sitemap generator.
Best,
ChristopherEDIT: PS: Your current sitemap looks fine to me.
-
Thanks Christopher,
Your answer took a noment to sink in, but I think I get it (I think I am coffee deprived this morning).
So, if I am using the A1 Sitemap generator that Jarno suggested, this sitemap index should automatically be generated based on the size of my generated sitemap. Is that correct?
-
Thanks Jarno,
I have downloaded and am trying the 30-day free trial of the A1 Sitemap Generator right now. Thanks for the tip. Can you comment on Christopher's remark below concerning sitemap indexes for larger sitemaps?
Can either you or Christopher give me more clarification on that. Is this what our IT director has attempted to do with the sitemap in our robots.txt file? If so, has it been done correctly?
Thanks!
-
There is a limit on the size of a sitemap and to allow for large sitemaps to be split into smaller sitemaps, the sitemap protocol includes a sitemapindex. See "Using Sitemap index files (to group multiple sitemap files)" here http://www.sitemaps.org/protocol.html. Of course, it's also possible to include the multiple sitemaps in the robot.txt file, but automated sitemap generators will likely use the sitemapindex feature so that the robots.txt file does not have to be modified as the size of the site changes.
Best,
Christopher -
Another tool to help generate a sitemap and even check broken links is called Xenu (weird logo, but good free product).
-
Dana,
the buildup of your sitemap.xml is very strange to me. I use an external program to build my sitemap.xml for me entire website.
You now have a link in your robots.txt file pointing to a sitemap which contains 2 files (both .xml) with een map of the site?
Why not use a program (free or paid like Microsys A1 (the one I use)) to build 1 sitemap.xml en point to this file from your robots.txt?
hope this helps
if you do have any questions, please let me know.
kind regards
Jarno
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
-
Image Sitemap
I currently use a program to create our sitemap (xml). It doesn't offer creating an mage sitemaps. Can someone suggest a program that would create an image sitemap? Thanks.
Technical SEO | | Kdruckenbrod0 -
Robots File
For some reason the robots file on this site: http://rushhour.net.au/robots.txt Is giving this in Google: <cite class="_Rm">www.rushhour.net.au/bootcamp.html</cite>A description for this result is not available because of this site's robots.txtLearn moreCan anyone tell me why please?thanks.
Technical SEO | | SuitsAdmin0 -
IIS 7.5 - Duplicate Content and Totally Wrong robot.txt
Well here goes! My very first post to SEOmoz. I have two clients that are hosted by the same hosting company. Both sites have major duplicate content issues and appear to have no internal links. I have checked this both here with our awesome SEOmoz Tools and with the IIS SEO Tool Kit. After much waiting I have heard back from the hosting company and they say that they have "implemented redirects in IIS7.5 to avoid duplicate content" based on the following article: http://blog.whitesites.com/How-to-setup-301-Redirects-in-IIS-7-for-good-SEO__634569104292703828_blog.htm. In my mind this article covers things better: www.seomoz.org/blog/what-every-seo-should-know-about-iis. What do you guys think? Next issue, both clients (as well as other sites hosted by this company) have a robot.txt file that is not their own. It appears that they have taken one client's robot.txt file and used it as a template for other client sites. I could be wrong but I believe this is causing the internal links to not be indexed. There is also a site map, again not for each client, but rather for the client that the original robot.txt file was created for. Again any input on this would be great. I have asked that the files just be deleted but that has not occurred yet. Sorry for the messy post...I'm at the hospital waiting to pick up my bro and could be called to get him any minute. Thanks so much, Tiff
Technical SEO | | TiffenyPapuc0 -
Question/Concern about URL structure
Hey! I have some doubts concerning structuring a websites URL’s and what would be the best practise for this case. The site has 4 (main) categories with a maximum of 4 products in each category. For example: domain -> category (natural-stones) -> product (flooring) Which I would give the follow url: www.companysite.com//natural-stones/flooring Nothing odd so far, but here is the tricky part: the category isn’t an actual page a user wouldn’t be able to visit. The category is just an item in the mainmenu. If a user hovers over the category in the main menu they will get a dropdown in which they can select a product. E.g. flooring, wall strips etc. My question is: Is the url structure as I suggested: www.companysite.com//natural-stones/flooring the best practise. Even though the category isn’t an actually page. Or would it be better to structure the site: www.companysite.com/flooring My concern with this type of structure would be that the site would seem ‘flat’ with in-depth structure. Or would a third (and maybe best?) option be to create an actual page for the category itself. Thanks for taking the time to help me with my question/concern. If you need more information let me know.
Technical SEO | | RvG0 -
Exclude Child URLs from XML Sitemap Generator (Wordpress)
Hi all, I was recommended the XML Sitemap Generator for Wordpress by the very helpful Keith Bloemendaal and John Pring - however I can't seem to exclude child URLs. There is a section Exclude items and a subsection Exclude posts. I have tried inputting the URLs for the pages I don't want in the sitemap, however that didn't work. So I read that you have to include a list of "IDs" - not sure where on earth to find that info, tried the page name and the post= number from the URL, however neither worked. I hope somebody can point me in the right direction - and apologies, I am a Wordpress novice, and I got no answers from the Wordpress forums so turned right back to SEOmoz! Cheers.
Technical SEO | | markadoi840 -
OK to block /js/ folder using robots.txt?
I know Matt Cutts suggestions we allow bots to crawl css and javascript folders (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNEipHjsEPU) But what if you have lots and lots of JS and you dont want to waste precious crawl resources? Also, as we update and improve the javascript on our site, we iterate the version number ?v=1.1... 1.2... 1.3... etc. And the legacy versions show up in Google Webmaster Tools as 404s. For example: http://www.discoverafrica.com/js/global_functions.js?v=1.1
Technical SEO | | AndreVanKets
http://www.discoverafrica.com/js/jquery.cookie.js?v=1.1
http://www.discoverafrica.com/js/global.js?v=1.2
http://www.discoverafrica.com/js/jquery.validate.min.js?v=1.1
http://www.discoverafrica.com/js/json2.js?v=1.1 Wouldn't it just be easier to prevent Googlebot from crawling the js folder altogether? Isn't that what robots.txt was made for? Just to be clear - we are NOT doing any sneaky redirects or other dodgy javascript hacks. We're just trying to power our content and UX elegantly with javascript. What do you guys say: Obey Matt? Or run the javascript gauntlet?0 -
Robots.txt file question? NEver seen this command before
Hey Everyone! Perhaps someone can help me. I came across this command in the robots.txt file of our Canadian corporate domain. I looked around online but can't seem to find a definitive answer (slightly relevant). the command line is as follows: Disallow: /*?* I'm guessing this might have something to do with blocking php string searches on the site?. It might also have something to do with blocking sub-domains, but the "?" mark puzzles me 😞 Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks, Rob
Technical SEO | | RobMay0 -
How do I use the Robots.txt "disallow" command properly for folders I don't want indexed?
Today's sitemap webinar made me think about the disallow feature, seems opposite of sitemaps, but it also seems both are kind of ignored in varying ways by the engines. I don't need help semantically, I got that part. I just can't seem to find a contemporary answer about what should be blocked using the robots.txt file. For example, I have folders containing site comps for clients that I really don't want showing up in the SERPS. Is it better to not have these folders on the domain at all? There are also security issues I've heard of that make sense, simply look at a site's robots file to see what they are hiding. It makes it easier to hunt for files when they know the directory the files are contained in. Do I concern myself with this? Another example is a folder I have for my xml sitemap generator. I imagine google isn't going to try to index this or count it as content, so do I need to add folders like this to the disallow list?
Technical SEO | | SpringMountain0