Discover how to effectively explore a sitemap to optimize your web navigation
A sitemap lists the URLs of a site in a structured file, but not all search engines utilize this file in the same way. Google, Bing, and other crawlers interpret the tags it contains differently, which affects how to build and maintain it. Comparing these behaviors allows for more precise technical decisions when configuring a sitemap.
XML Sitemap: How Google and Bing Handle Tags Differently
| Sitemap Tag | Google Handling | Bing Handling |
|---|---|---|
| lastmod | Used if the date reflects a real and verifiable change | Associated with prioritizing recrawls, supplemented by IndexNow |
| changefreq | Practically ignored | Not a reliable lever to speed up crawling |
| priority | Practically ignored | Not a reliable lever to speed up crawling |
| Submission | Via Google Search Console or robots.txt | Via Bing Webmaster Tools, robots.txt, or IndexNow |
This table highlights a often overlooked point: the changefreq and priority fields no longer serve to speed up crawling for either of the two major engines. Keeping these tags in a sitemap is not harmful, but spending time configuring them amounts to optimizing a signal that no one reads.
The most significant difference concerns lastmod. Google specifies that this data is only considered when it is “consistent and verifiable.” A simple automatic regeneration of the sitemap or updating a secondary field (copyright date, for example) does not constitute a relevant change. Bing, on the other hand, uses lastmod to schedule its visits, but recommends pairing it with IndexNow for ad-hoc changes.
Those managing an editorial site or a product catalog can explore the sitemap of Little Geek to see how a structured XML file organizes its URLs by categories.
IndexNow and Sitemap: Two Complementary Signals for Bing
Bing now recommends combining sitemap and IndexNow rather than opposing them. The sitemap provides persistent coverage of all URLs. IndexNow, on the other hand, is used to quickly notify participating engines of the addition, modification, or deletion of a page.
This distinction changes the way one thinks about updating a sitemap. For a site where pages change little, the sitemap alone is sufficient. For an editorial site that publishes several articles a day or an e-commerce site with rotating product listings, IndexNow speeds up the consideration without waiting for the next scheduled crawl.
Google has not adopted IndexNow. For sites primarily targeting Google traffic, submitting the sitemap via Google Search Console and declaring it in the robots.txt file remain the two reference channels. However, for those wanting to cover Bing and engines that rely on its index (including Microsoft Copilot), the dual approach of sitemap plus IndexNow becomes relevant.
Which URLs to Include in a Sitemap to Keep It Useful
An effective sitemap does not contain all the URLs of a site. It only lists those that deserve to be indexed. Mixing useful pages with technical, redirected, or duplicated URLs dilutes the signal sent to crawlers and can slow down the crawling of priority content.
Here are the filtering criteria to apply before generating or updating a sitemap file:
- Each URL in the sitemap must return an HTTP 200 code. Pages with 301 or 302 redirects, 404 errors, and URLs blocked by robots.txt do not belong in the file.
- Pages with a noindex meta tag should be excluded. Including a noindex URL in a sitemap sends a contradictory signal to the engine, which must choose between two opposing instructions.
- Session, sorting, or filtering parameter URLs (often present on e-commerce sites) should be excluded in favor of the canonical version of each page.
- Paged content beyond the first page can be included, but only if each pagination page contains distinct and indexable content.
A good sitemap does not exceed a few thousand URLs per file. Beyond that, splitting into multiple sitemaps referenced by an index file facilitates both crawler processing and webmaster maintenance.
HTML Sitemap and XML Sitemap: Distinct Uses
The XML sitemap is aimed at crawlers. The HTML sitemap, on the other hand, is a page of the site intended for visitors. The two have neither the same format, nor the same role, nor the same SEO impact.
The HTML sitemap can help users find a page buried in the hierarchy. It also contributes to internal linking by creating links to deep pages. However, it never replaces a well-designed internal linking: a page that is only accessible via the HTML sitemap signals a structural problem, not a solution.
Sitemap Submission: Search Console, robots.txt, and Common Errors
Declaring a sitemap does not guarantee its crawling or the indexing of the URLs it contains. Submission is a signal, not a command. Google and Bing then decide, based on their own criteria (content quality, crawl budget, domain authority), which pages deserve to be crawled.
Two submission methods coexist. The first goes through the webmaster tools interface (Google Search Console or Bing Webmaster Tools), where the file is declared manually. The second involves adding the line Sitemap: followed by the complete URL of the file in robots.txt. The two methods are complementary.
The most common error after submission is failing to check the coverage report. Search Console indicates how many submitted URLs have been crawled, indexed, or excluded, and for what reason. A submitted sitemap that is then forgotten gradually loses its coherence with the actual site, especially if pages are deleted or redirected without updating the file.
The lastmod field, when correctly filled with the date of the last substantial modification, helps engines prioritize their visits. Conversely, artificially updating lastmod (by regenerating the file every night without real change) ends up being ignored, or even penalizing in terms of trust.
A well-maintained sitemap remains a living file, constantly aligned with the actual structure of the site. Its value does not lie in its size, but in the relevance of each URL it contains.
