Postponed (maintainer needs more info)
Project:
XML sitemap
Version:
7.x-2.0-beta3
Component:
Code
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Bug report
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
7 Dec 2011 at 17:14 UTC
Updated:
11 Apr 2022 at 14:10 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent
Comments
Comment #1
rt_davies commentedAfter a bit more investigating:
Most crawlers, I assume, are expected to use the xml file as is (not bothering to do the xsl transformation to generate the html). This module properly adds the http header, "X-Robots-Tag noindex, follow" to the xml file, telling crawlers to follow urls found in the xml.
So this just seems reconfirm my suspicion of rel="nofollow" in the html version. If the html is meant only for human consumption, then including the nofollow relationship is meaningless. But if we assume that some crawlers might use the html somehow, then wouldn't we want them to follow links?
Comment #2
dave reidYou're seeing the HTML generated pretty output. The search engines and crawlers *should* only be seeing the XML raw output which does not have any tags and follows the sitemap standard.
Comment #3
dave reidComment #4
rt_davies commentedThanks for the reply Dave. I think question number one still stands. AFAIK, there is no "ref" attribute in an html anchor tag.
Comment #5
gomez_in_the_south commentedApologies for digging up a 10 year old discussion, but this question came up for a website I work with.
This
ref='nofollow'entry from the xmlsitemap.xsl is still present in the D9 version of this module.I agree with rt_davies in that:
a. 'ref' is meaningless, and this was meant to be 'rel'.
b. I don't see the value in having 'rel=nofollow' present, even if only in the XSL transformed version.
I'd be happy to push a patch to remove this, if a maintainer agrees. The nofollow comes from this line:
in /xsl/xmlsitemap.xsl