__/ [ KimmoA ] on Saturday 09 September 2006 16:46 \__
> So... I've been using Google sitemaps for a while now, and it struck me
> that Yahoo! and MSN/Live Search also probably have something similar.
> Do they, and are they worth using?
>
> Is it bad to use puretext ones? I currently do that. I don't see why I
> should waste bandwidth with XML data. Do the other search engines use
> different formats, so you need to make one sitemap per engine, or do
> they use a common standard (be it XML or puretext)?
>
> Also, what's the current marketshare percentage between the largest
> search engines?
Kimmo,
Forget about Google Sitemap. Drop rel="nofollow" as well. They don't help
you. They are not standard either, in case you care for importance of
uniformity, which is essential for any engineering discipline. They are like
Amazon/A9's sitemap.xml, which is a selfish 'extension'. Don't fool
yourself. Companies will have you believe that these things benefit you, but
it's really about self benefit, to the inve[n/s]tor.
Site map = "give us a picture of your site, so that we spare less bandwidth,
CPU, and RAM. In terms of crawling, indexing, and cycles, nothing better is
guaranteed."
rel='follow' = "Oops. Our backlinks-based algorithms is flawed and it is
easily subverted by SPAM. Please modify your site to clean up our SERP's. To
you, let it be perceived as an elixir to SPAM rather than aimless flagging
for the benefit of SE('s)."
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Community is code, code is community
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Mem: 514480k total, 483308k used, 31172k free, 17596k buffers
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
|
|
