We have a brand new look! Take a tour with us and explore the latest updates on Adobe Support Community.
I have for some time suspected that I have some problems with the sitemap.xml created by Muse. After reading a lot of posts here the other night I still think it is like that but I would like to have some further information. One problem seems like it´s quite easy to solve. I very seldom upload all files. Just altered files. Some post said I should upload all files always due to the sitemap. Many posts also say that the quality of the Muse sitemap.xml isn't too good. But those posts are quite old. Is the quality of the Muse sitemap.xml still poor and do you recommend to use another sitemap, for instance XML-sitemaps.com? I use a lot of pictures in my websites, and pictures appeared to be one of the problems with the Muse sitemap.xml.
What are the problems, you encounter by using the Muse-generated sitemap?
Coders tend to bash Muse‘s sitemaps (just as they dislike all not hand-coded sites), but I never encoutered any problems with it.
If you think, there are issues, why not replacing this Muse-sitemap with an externally generated one, for example by using this onlne tool: https://www.xml-sitemaps.com
How do you replace the sitemap in Adobe Muse?
You don’t want to use the Muse generated sitemap, but a different one? Then
A sitemap in XML format is merely to help search engine robots crawl the HTML pages within your website. That's all it does. It serves no other purpose.
If you want to improve your website's SEO, that's simple. Make it mobile friendly. And ensure all pages contain plenty of keyword-rich content inside real text (not images of text). Place your most important content above the fold inside heading tags <h1>, <h2>, <h3> and paragraphs.
Also page descriptions and page titles are very important. Maybe even more important than keywords. Watch this, if you need some SEO details: 5 Essential SEO Tips for Adobe Muse Sites | MuseThemes.com - YouTube
Of course all of the above posts are correct, too.
Seems you think it doesn't matter weather I use Muse sitemap.xml or xml-sitemaps.com. Better to uses Muse´s then. It´s a bit easier.
I've read quite a bit about SEO, especially the last few weeks, but those were great links, Nancy and fotoroeder. I got a lot of new and helpful information. Thanks.
The Google-link confirms, as far as I understand, that I should use the Muse sitemap.xml. Google says it is very important to have your pictures included in the sitemap. According to some on this forum the Muse sitemap does and the xml-sitemaps.com doesn't.
The problem I have had is that Google takes very long to index new sites och changed pages, or doesn't at all. If they do, Goggle Search Console very often say the pageis not included in the sitemap. One problem may be that, as I mentioned earlier, that I don't very often upload the whole site, just changed files, thus not upload a new sitemap. Another fault I think I may have done is that I have always uploaded the sites without http://www (due to some manual years ago).
The big thing about SEO I have neglected until later is the importance af page-titles. I have always used page-title-suffix (page characteristics on the master page), but according to MuseThemes in the link it is better to fully control this in the side characteristics on every page, which seem better. Do you agree? MuseThemes also use page-title- suffix but writes them in the page title of every page. Do you recommend that?