Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Enhancement for "Images only" #45

Open
Cool-Programmer opened this issue Aug 4, 2018 · 4 comments
Open

Enhancement for "Images only" #45

Cool-Programmer opened this issue Aug 4, 2018 · 4 comments

Comments

@Cool-Programmer
Copy link

Cool-Programmer commented Aug 4, 2018

Hi there.
I'd like to propose a new feature for your module
As my SEO exploration shows, search engines like when there is a separate images-sitemap.xml file for images only (there are a lot of media-heavy sites that have separate webpages containing a large image, a short description and title). Those type of sitemaps require specific type of syntax (webpage URL & image URL). Please refer to https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/178636?hl=en

I can say for sure currently there is no package that does this, and because your module is the easiest to work with, and it also works great, i'd really like to see that functionality here (or may be in another one?).

@lgraubner
Copy link
Owner

Could be useful. I would suggest a flag like --image to create a sitemap like this. Your linked page list two options: Inline the information in normal sitemap or a separate sitemap. What's your preference?

Technically this shouldn't be a big deal to implement. Feel free to make a PR and I'm happy to merge.

@Cool-Programmer
Copy link
Author

Sorry for the late answer. I guess using a separate file could be more beneficial, because search engines nowdays allow adding multiple ones, and there'll be no cluttering.

I'll see what can i come around with and will surely let you know.

@Rob-Rychs
Copy link
Contributor

Hey @Cool-Programmer I can try working on a PR for this functionality if you've been too busy to tackle it? I see the use case as valid and most of the code already written within module

@Connum
Copy link

Connum commented May 22, 2019

Hey @Cool-Programmer and @Rob-Rychs ,

any progress on this? Could come in handy for a project I'm working on and I want to avoid doing the work already done by someone else...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants