Can you have a /sitemap.xml and /sitemap.html on the same site?

[PioneerServices]

Thanks in advance for any responses; we really appreciate the expertise of the SEOmoz community!

My question: Since the file extensions are different, can a site have both a /sitemap.xml and /sitemap.html both siting at the root domain?

For example, we've already put the html sitemap in place here: https://www.pioneermilitaryloans.com/sitemap

Now, we're considering adding an XML sitemap. I know standard practice is to load it at the root (www.example.com/sitemap.xml), but am wondering if this will cause conflicts.

I've been unable to find this topic addressed anywhere, or any real-life examples of sites currently doing this.

What do you think?

[OlegKorneitchouk]

Nope, won't cause any problems. The xml sitemap is what you will submit to G and search engines while the HTML one is for your site visitors who want to see all your pages (although it will be crawled and indexed as well).

[ThompsonPaul]

As Oleg says - not a problems at all. What you're proposing to do is a pretty standard implementation used by most websites out there.

XML sitemaps are a very specific configuration of data built to a standard that the Search Engines all agreed on - even the naming convention. Spiders are programmed to look for the whole filename (specifically including the .xml suffix) not just the first part of the file name. And yea, connecting to them inside your Webmaster Tools accounts is an extra signal for where the search engines should find them.

Paul

[BlueprintMarketing]

Just like Oleg & Paul I agree 100% your site may have and it will probably benefit from having both a site map which is a nice feature in HTML format and one in XML format as they are not used for the same purpose by Google nor by individuals so you may safely create a regular webpage in HTML and call it whatever you like if it ends in.XML it is not a forward facing webpage it has a separate use and that uses to tell Google's crawler where you would like it to go now keep in mind Google does not always listen to what we want but site maps can be helpful.

I hope this was of help to you

sincerely,

Thomas

[PioneerServices]

So if I'm understanding you correctly, there's no technical issues with having two items with the same url, but different file extensions, coexisting? I was unable to find any examples of other sites doing this, which is making me question.

I mean, what we're proposing is two separate pieces of content that resolve as:

• https://www.pioneermilitaryloans.com/sitemap
• https://www.pioneermilitaryloans.com/sitemap.xml

I want that to work, but it's just amazing to me that it doesn't cause any issues.

[ThompsonPaul]

As all 3 of us have said here, Pioneer, there is no issue with setting things up the way you are proposing. Can't make it any clearer than that.

To answer your specific point - /sitemap and /sitemap.xml are categorically NOT seen as the same URL by search engines. They are absolutely considered two different pages. Your statement "...two items with the same url, but different file extensions..." is a non-sequitur. If the URLs have different file extensions, they are by definition NOT the same URL. The file extension (or lack thereof) is an integral part of the URL.

Since 3 different people have given you the same answer and you still don't believe us, why not simply test for yourself?

• Implement the two files as above, then use Google Webmaster Tools to report your XML sitemap location, and confirm that it's finding and recognizing it correctly.
• Then use your browser to go to the URL of the regular sitemap and you'll see that it renders the html version of your sitemap map just fine.

Paul