Udostępnij za pośrednictwem

Proofreading...

  • Artykuł

So this morning, I was reading the PI's Microsoft blog and noticed this post: Google, Microsoft, Yahoo in 'SiteMaps' pact.  Cool!

 

So I went to the Live Search blog post mentioned in the PI article, and went to the Sitemaps.Org site.

I was curious, so I clicked on the protocol link, and found the protocol page.

The very first example of a sitemap was (as of 10:20 PST on November 16, 2006):

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<urlset xmlns="https://www.sitemaps.org/schemas/sitemap/0.9">    <url>
      <loc>https://www.example.com/</loc>
       <lastmod>2005-01-01</lastmod>
<changefreq>monthly</changefreq>
<priority>0.8</priority>
</urlset>

 

What's wrong with this XML?

Come on guys.  At least make sure your protocol examples are correct before you go live with a major announcement.

 

The good news is that it appears that only the first sitemap example given on the site has the problem.

Comments

  • Anonymous
    November 16, 2006
    No closing url tag, for shame.

  • Anonymous
    November 16, 2006
    Ha :-) Glad to see I wasn't the only one who noticed.

  • Anonymous
    November 16, 2006
    ahhh... I'll bite: Larry Osterman: Flattening the World -> ...  I've had enough "wierd" things happen (strange Outlook behaviors, etc) that I decided it would just be safer to reset the world. It's wierd, I've not reinstalled an OS on my of my machines in a VERY long time (at least a couple of years now), it felt strange. Proofreading... yeah...

  • Anonymous
    November 16, 2006
    I blame Windows Live Writer - I've gotten used to the squiggly lines. And I never said I was perfect.  On the other hand, they rarely issue press releases about my blog content (thank goodness).

  • Anonymous
    November 16, 2006
    The closing url tag is missing just before the closing urlset tag. Well spotted Larry, your skim reading is better than mine ;-( I hadn't spotted it when I glanced at it earlier.

  • Anonymous
    November 16, 2006
    That's not quite as bad as the Frontpage advertisement that was bragging about their new, cleaner code... and the HTML that they wrote in the ad was malformed.

  • Anonymous
    December 18, 2006
    The comment has been removed