Dumb SEO Questions

(Entry was posted by Shao Chieh Lo on this post in the Dumb SEO Questions community on Facebook, 05/07/2020).

Hreflang-XML sitemap vs HTML vs HTTP header for big site?

Hi, I recently trying to QC one of m clients` hreflang implementation (huge e-commerce with more than 10 million pages) And I found it extremely hard to QC or examine certain pages because they are using sitemap hreflang. especially when I try to examine a specific page and I have to go back to the sitemaps to see if there is the reference, and I already fond a lot of errors in their hreflang sitemaps too. However, should I recommend them using HTML or HTTP method instead? I heard that HTML hreflang will increase page weight, but those codes are not render blocking nor do they have to download or send HTTP request, they are just plain text, it seems shouldn`t effect pagespeed too much right? How about HTTP hreflang? How would you deal with huge e-commerce`s hreflang? Let me know your though or experience, thanks,
This question begins at 00:06:39 into the clip. Did this video clip play correctly? Watch this question on YouTube commencing at 00:06:39
Video would not load
I see YouTube error message
I see static
Video clip did not start at this question

YOUR ANSWERS

Selected answers from the Dumb SEO Questions Facebook & G+ community.

  • Jacek Wieczorek: I always recommend html hreflangs for the reason you pointed in your post. It`s easier to debug the code and find errors in html. Don`t worry about page weight - it`s just a new line in the code.
  • Shao Chieh Lo: Jacek Wieczorek Thank you for your insight 😀
  • Jacek Wieczorek: Well, I meant html rather than http header. Http headers are even harder to find.
  • Shao Chieh Lo: Jacek Wieczorek okay, got it 😀
  • Bill Hunt: Hi Shao - I have always been pro XML site map for large sites and
    those with many language versions. To use either http or meta tag it would require Google to visit all 10 million of those pages to validate the cross references. Eric Enge has done a number of studies on crawl rates and how long that would take.

    With XML Google can get the alternate verifications but ingesting the site maps without the need to visit the pages. This is why we see hreflang issues solved in 48 hours via XML vs weeks for the other two methods.

    For QA you can let Google do that for you. The language report is a good indicator of the quality of the XML. If there are few to no errors you are in good shape.

    I am trying to finish a guide that deals with these enterprise challenges but solving these problems keeps getting in the way.
  • Shao Chieh Lo: Bill Hunt Thank you so much Bill, this is very insightful, definitely let me know when the guide is available 😀
  • Richard Hearne: Http header versus HTML tags will add very similar weight to each page. HTML tags a little greater of course.

    XML sitemap for very large site will probably be easier to maintain and update. It`s far easier to implement any of the choices than maintain them. You always need to consider the dev/production overhead of maintaining this as that`s where the real overhead lies. So you want o consider this holistically - not only what makes your life easier as an SEO.

View original question in the Dumb SEO Questions community on Facebook, 05/07/2020).