Hi Katharina, Thanks for the update. When you say "please me sure to make a change to your Sitemap", do you mean minor changes such as adding / removing a URL will suffice or should the last modified date for every URL in the sitemap be updated?
Thanks, Krishna On Apr 9, 12:32 am, Katharina Probst <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi again, > > we found a problem in the way some of the #! in Sitemaps were processed. > This problem has now been fixed. Please note that we don't reparse Sitemaps > unless they have changed, so please me sure to make a change to your > Sitemap to force it to get reparsed. > > Thanks, > kathrin > > > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Katharina Probst <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > we're looking into this, I'll update this thread once I know more. > > > Thanks, > > kathrin > > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Sripathi Krishnan < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > >> When someone hits your site with a url containing _escaped_fragment_ , do > >> you - > > >> - Redirect to a HTML page > >> OR > >> - Forward to a HTML page > > >> You should be forwarding to the html version, and not redirecting. > > >> Open a http sniffer (firebug would do) and see if the server responds to a > >> _escaped_fragment_ request with a 301 or 302 status. If it does, then > >> that's > >> your problem. Make sure that the html is returned directly in response to > >> the _escaped_fragment_ request. > > >> --Sri > > >> On 4 April 2010 23:56, masterbeat <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> Various blogs say this is the place to post questions regarding > >>> Google's new AJAX specs... > > >>> We have successfully (almost) implemented the steps detailed in the > >>> new guide "Making AJAX Applications Crawlable" at > >>>http://code.google.com/web/ajaxcrawling/docs/specification.html > > >>> Google has started indexing our pages and is following links with the > >>> #! and calling our HTML snapshot successfully with _escaped_fragment. > > >>> Our question is regarding the newly submitted sitemaps. In following > >>> the sitemap question in the FAQ, it says that sitemaps should be > >>> submitted with URL's like this: > > >>> Your Sitemap should include the version you prefer to have displayed > >>> in search results, so it should > >>> behttp://example.com/ajax.html#!foo=123<http://example.com/ajax.html#%21foo=123> > > >>> (as opposed to using _escaped_fragment in the sitemap). > > >>> We have done this and submitted sitemaps which have been accepted into > >>> webmaster tools. After a couple of days, webmaster tools is reporting > >>> errors/warnings that say: > > >>> URLs not followed > >>> When we tested a sample of URLs from your Sitemap, we found that some > >>> URLs redirect to other locations. We recommend that your Sitemap > >>> contain URLs that point to the final destination (the redirect target) > >>> instead of redirecting to another URL. > > >>> And the example shown as the error is "http://www.yoursite.com/"; - > >>> however this URL does not exist anywhere in our sitemap - our sitemap > >>> is full of correct URL's (similar to what are already showing up in > >>> the index as being crawled) - that look like this: > > >>>http://www.yoursite.com/#!artist/madonna<http://www.yoursite.com/#%21artist/madonna> > >>>http://www.yoursite.com/#1release/milesaway > > >>> and so on. > > >>> These are valid and unique URL's that adhere to the standard in the > >>> guide above, they can be followed, and they generate the correct AJAX > >>> display when called with #! and the correct html snapshot when called > >>> with _escaped_fragment. > > >>> So why does webmaster tools think these URL's have errors or are > >>> redirecting? They DO redirect only to the html snapshot, of > >>> course... and following the URL's in the sitemap with Google's fetch > >>> as googlebot (replacing the #! with _escaped_fragment) says the pages > >>> are fine. > > >>> So what do we need to do with the sitemap? Is the issue that there > >>> isn't a page in the sitemap? > > >>> Example: > >>>http://www.yoursite.com/default.html#!artist/madonna<http://www.yoursite.com/default.html#%21artist/madonna> > >>> should be the same as > >>>http://www.yoursite.com/#!artist/madonna<http://www.yoursite.com/#%21artist/madonna> > > >>> we just don't like to put the default.html in all our URL's, as this > >>> is a dynamic site, all the pages of course exist on the same page. > > >>> Any advice on the above would be appreciated. > > >>> 1 - does google's sitemap verifier not yet understand that google is > >>> supposed to be checking for #! and following them (allowing redirect) > >>> instead of dropping everything after the # (which seems like is > >>> happening) or... > >>> 2 - does the sitemap verifier want to see the actual page > >>> (default.html) in the URL before the dynamic values (#! and so on.) > > >>> Thank you, > > >>> -- > >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > >>> "Google Web Toolkit" group. > >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > >>> . > >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >>> [email protected]<google-web-toolkit%2Bunsubs > >>> [email protected]> > >>> . > >>> For more options, visit this group at > >>>http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. > > >> -- > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > >> "Google Web Toolkit" group. > >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >> [email protected]<google-web-toolkit%2Bunsubs > >> [email protected]> > >> . > >> For more options, visit this group at > >>http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
