On 22/11/07 (00:32) Lea said:
But some people prefer to have a quick squiz at the sitemap to see the
totality of what the site contains.
People are all different. Your navigation can be fine, and their
mindset just wants to look at things differently.
I agree.
I am a user who quite likes site
On Nov 20, 2007 7:04 PM, Jermayn Parker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In coming in late to the discussion:
Do we really need a sitemap? I recently read an article were it talked
that if all the seo was done properly and it was smallish, you
probably do not need a sitemap.
I remember that article
. Does anyone think that is overkill?
Chris
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christian Montoya
Sent: 21 November 2007 14:26
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] SIte Maps?
On Nov 20, 2007 7:04 PM, Jermayn Parker [EMAIL PROTECTED
Chris Taylor wrote:
But even for a relatively small site having a sitemap will help some
users find what they want quickly. Those people are the same ones who
will scan the index of a book before flicking through the pages.
I've done that on this site: http://www.2plan.com/ despite it only
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Chris Taylor
Sent: 21 November 2007 14:44
To: 'wsg@webstandardsgroup.org'
Subject: RE: [WSG] SIte Maps?
But even for a relatively small site having a sitemap will help some users
find what they want quickly. Those people are the same ones who
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 14:44:15 +, Chris Taylor wrote:
But even for a relatively small site having a sitemap will help some
users find what they want quickly. Those people are the same ones who
will scan the index of a book before flicking through the pages.
Yes, its got to be total
[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 1:44 AM
To: 'wsg@webstandardsgroup.org'
Subject: RE: [WSG] SIte Maps?
But even for a relatively small site having a sitemap will help some users find
what they want quickly. Those people are the same ones who will scan the index
of a book before
Managment and Technology
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Chris Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 1:44 AM
To: 'wsg@webstandardsgroup.org'
Subject: RE: [WSG] SIte Maps?
But even for a relatively small site having
Consulting, People and Technology
P Please consider the environment before printing this email
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jermayn Parker
Sent: Thursday, 22 November 2007 11:07 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: [WSG] SIte Maps
On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 09:07:16 +0900, Jermayn Parker wrote:
The way I personally do sitemaps (if i decide to do them) is use the
google sitemaps tool and keep it as a xml document and just make sure
that your navigation is easy enough so people can access the content
without getting lost.
XML
Andrew wrote:
Jermayn,
That one person may find the sitemap useful does not mean that the
site
navigation is broken - all that we do know for sure is that one person
likes to use the sitemap.
If everyone uses the sitemap, then the navigation could well use some
work.
Similarly - if
Just to say: Thanks for the responses. All interesting.
Bob
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
In coming in late to the discussion:
Do we really need a sitemap? I recently read an article were it talked
that if all the seo was done properly and it was smallish, you
probably do not need a sitemap.
On Nov 21, 2007 3:28 AM, Designer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just to say: Thanks for the
For the sake of clarity; can you please confirm whether you are referring to
machine-readable site-maps for the benefit of Google etc.; or to
human-readable site-maps for the benefit of your human visitors?
Mike
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Designer
Sent:
]
On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 November 2007 11:21
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: [WSG] SIte Maps?
For the sake of clarity; can you please confirm whether you are
referring to machine-readable site-maps for the benefit of Google etc.;
or to human-readable site-maps for the benefit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For the sake of clarity; can you please confirm whether you are referring to
machine-readable site-maps for the benefit of Google etc.; or to
human-readable site-maps for the benefit of your human visitors?
Mike
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on
There is a small desktop app called Xenu Link Sleuth, a google search
should find it.
This checks all links on your site and gives you a range of reports on
which ones are not working etc. It goes indepth and even provides links
of items such as images etc. It can also give you a list of all
Bob,
I usually just make my sitemap UL and LI driven as seen here:
http://www.stmarysgvl.org/sitemap/ or here:
http://www.woodcreekdental.com/sitemap/
Both of those sites are database driven and I've written a PHP script to
automatically produce the UL LI structure; if your site is not database
As far as should obscure site link A be included?, the answer is yes.
Sitemaps should generally have a link to each and every link on your
website. I typically use just a standard unordered list (ul), and nest
it if appropriate.
Designer wrote:
I have never done a site map/index. I have
Designer wrote:
Any links or pointers to creating such an index/map would be most
welcome. Needless to say, standards and accessibility are important
. . .
I split them up in section-maps - table of contents - and produce them
manually. An automated process is probably the only practical
20 matches
Mail list logo
