| From: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
|---|---|
| To: | Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, Mike Ellsworth <younicycle(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SEO |
| Date: | 2009-09-05 13:23:01 |
| Message-ID: | 4AA26635.20107@kaltenbrunner.cc |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-www |
Guillaume Smet wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Magnus Hagander<magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> Hmm, it would be good if somebody who knows more about it than me
>> could confirm this, but it looks like the sitemap needs to contain
>> *every URL in the docs* to be effective. The one we have now just
>> contains the root path of each version, but it seems it doesn't apply
>> to subpages?
>
> That's what the customer we have who knows SEO very well does: they
> even generate several sitemaps as they have too much pages for one
> sitemap.
so we would have to include all urls in the docs to make it effective?
>
> Note that the google webmaster tools let you upload sitemaps directly
> so that you can check they are well formed and taken into account.
well it is well formed though I guess google cannot magically guess on
what we really want to get as a result :)
Stefan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Guillaume Smet | 2009-09-05 13:45:30 | Re: SEO |
| Previous Message | Guillaume Smet | 2009-09-05 10:08:39 | Re: SEO |