ROR-XML Sitemaps vs Google XML Sitemaps

[greeneagle]

Which is it?:
ROR Sitemaps or Google Sitemaps?

Even Matt warns us we shouldn't do anything special for "Googlebot" in his recent SEO video series. Hopefully he isn't "double talking" there!

Ken

[kgun]

It may be confusing.

1. Rumours on blogs / forums, spread like a virus.
2. Other sources.
3. GoogleGuy at WMW and Matt Cutts posting on his blog.
4. Inner circle at Google that know the formulaes.

Question: How close are GoogleGuy and Cutts to that inner circle? Are they 100 % sure when they post?

My advice:
A good sitemap is good for a site.

Whether you use Googles own generator or another tool is your choice. Personally, I would question a company that changed / downgraded a so important tool as their own sitemap generator after some months.

[greeneagle]

kgun,

Just so we are all clear here:

ROR was there first, and it spans a broader application across SE's right?

Sometimes, we really have to spell it out, in plain English!

Let's walk on down that road:

It also abides by Google's own.......OOOOOPPPP, Here we go, Matt's disclaimer, nah...

They both (Matt and Google) say not to do anything special for Googlebot on your site, don't they? Does that include Google Sitemaps and their special key in the Root Directory?

WOW!

My call: They are their own "nail in the coffin" there!

Surely we don't need to drag these condolences thru Web 2.0 ready applications including individual Site and/or page ready XML and RSS feeds, in the comparison between the two, do we?

Whew, I don't need those shackles, do you?

Ken

[kgun]

ROR was there first, and it spans a broader application across SE's right?

I do not know which, ROR or Google's own generator, is best for GoogleBOT. If they are indifferent for GoogleBOT, ROR should be the preferred generator if it is better for the other BOT'S. Nevertheless there should not be a large difference and the future may work for Google's generator.

They both (Matt and Google) say not to do anything special for Googlebot on your site, don't they? Does that include Google Sitemaps and their special key in the Root Directory?

As you pose it, the answer to your question is most probably yes.

Surely we don't need to drag these condolences thru Web 2.0 ready applications including individual Site and/or page ready XML and RSS feeds, do we?

What you mean is a little diffuse to me. Is it possible to elaborate on this last question.

[greeneagle]

You know what Kjell!

I have probably said more than enough already.... If anyone can't get off their duff and take a few minutes to check out http://www.rorweb.com/ for themselves, that's their problem, not mine!

LOL

Ken

[kgun]

You are so word rich. It is better to read what you mean, when you are minimalistic.

[greeneagle]

Kjell,

You are absolutely right. I am doing my best to get there:
http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic...=asc&start=100

Some things just take a little emphasis though:
http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic...5637&start=100

Back on topic:

What is your choice?, and why?

Ken

[kgun]

Back on topic:

What is your choice?, and why?

1. My sites are minimalistic, so most of them do not need a sitemap.

2. I make my own sitemap. I know the difference between that and a XML map.

3. Personally I like, Seoconcultants Directory Site Map.

4. I have not used my spare time to make a XML / RSS sitemap, but may use it in the future. May be, I should try both, ROR for one site and Google sitemaps for another.

[greeneagle]

I changed the title of this post because I felt it slipped through the cracks. The old Title may not have conveyed the importance of the content well.

Ken

[kgun]

Ken,

And Google sitemap changes its name to Webmaster tools.