Search the Community

Docs & Download: rockettpw/seo/markup-sitemap Modules Directory: MarkupSitemap Composer: rockett/sitemap ⚠️ NEW MAINTAINER NEEDED: Sitemap is in need of developer to take over the project. There are a few minor issues with it, but for the most part, most scenarios, it works, and it works well. However, I'm unable to commit to further development, and would appreciate it if someone could take it over. If you're interested, please send me a private message and we can take it from there. MarkupSitemap is essentially an upgrade to MarkupSitemapXML by Pete. It adds multi-language support using the built-in LanguageSupportPageNames. Where multi-language pages are available, they are added to the sitemap by means of an alternate link in that page's <url>. Support for listing images in the sitemap on a page-by-page basis and using a sitemap stylesheet are also added. Example when using the built-in multi-language profile: <url> <loc>http://domain.local/about/</loc> <lastmod>2017-08-27T16:16:32+02:00</lastmod> <xhtml:link rel="alternate" hreflang="en" href="http://domain.local/en/about/"/> <xhtml:link rel="alternate" hreflang="de" href="http://domain.local/de/uber/"/> <xhtml:link rel="alternate" hreflang="fi" href="http://domain.local/fi/tietoja/"/> </url> It also uses a locally maintained fork of a sitemap package by Matthew Davies that assists in automating the process. The doesn't use the same sitemap_ignore field available in MarkupSitemapXML. Rather, it renders sitemap options fields in a Page's Settings tab. One of the fields is for excluding a Page from the sitemap, and another is for excluding its children. You can assign which templates get these config fields in the module's configuration (much like you would with MarkupSEO). Note that the two exclusion options are mutually exclusive at this point as there may be cases where you don't want to show a parent page, but only its children. Whilst unorthodox, I'm leaving the flexibility there. (The home page cannot be excluded from the sitemap, so the applicable exclusion fields won't be available there.) As of December 2017, you can also exclude templates from sitemap access altogether, whilst retaining their settings if previously configured. Sitemap also allows you to include images for each page at the template level, and you can disable image output at the page level. The module allows you to set the priority on a per-page basis (it's optional and will not be included if not set). Lastly, a stylesheet option has also been added. You can use the default one (enabled by default), or set your own. Note that if the module is uninstalled, any saved data on a per-page basis is removed. The same thing happens for a specific page when it is deleted after having been trashed.

This is my first module. It is primitive, like my neighbor who loves to fire up his new Makita breaker hammer after 21:30h. Please, feel free to do whatever you want. I don't promise I will add better functionality but maybe... If you do, please ping and send me back. Thanks! It loads every page on the backend. It calculates the text width in two fields you choose on the configuration page.. If there are any updates, I will post them here. Happy ProcessWiring! PS: These measurements are specifically for desktop and Google's SERP (Search Engine Results Page). UPDATE on 15 May 2024: Google started to calculate (truncate) the meta title for 20px Arial yesterday. The Module has been updated. Here is the link to download/install the latest version: https://processwire.com/modules/seo-text-width/ EDIT: The version 0.0.5. Added two dropdown fields on the configuration page of the module. PROVE IMAGE: You can check the meta title, which was measured with 18px Arial and it was less than 512 pixels.

Are URL segments indexable & search engine optimizable? Site-mappable? With or without SEO meta tags rendered in the native site template rendering the URL segment, drawing page data from a separate PW installation? if only rendering when the urlSegment1 matches the name of a page of a specified template with the same parent? I don't know how to test this locally. Thank you.

Hi, through this site I generated a json-LD code for page definition from SEO point of view. They say that this language is the last frontier and better than RDF language. So I would like to understand how to integrate it with processwire. Integrating html meta tags with php language in processwire is easy and painless. I didn't understand if I can do the same thing with a json language. So the suggested scheme is this: <script type="application/ld+json"> { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "Article", "headline": "", "image": "", "author": { "@type": "", "name": "" }, "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "" } }, "datePublished": "" } </script> Through the wireinclude function the template could link to a .php file with this .json code in it, however with processwire/php strings in it. In this way: <script type="application/ld+json"> { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "Article", "headline": "<?=$page->title?>", "image": "", "author": { "@type": "", "name": "<?=$page->name_author?>" }, "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "<?=$page->name_site?>", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "" } }, "datePublished": "<?=$page->date_article?>" } </script> Can it be done or is it a mess? ?

Hey, so we all know about SEO and the importance of performance. Basically we do it, because if no one finds the website we just built, it´s frustrating. We all try to write clean markup, css and js code and most might have a webpack/gulp/whatever pipeline to minimize css&js. But when thinking about it, optimizing your pipeline might save you a few (hundreds) of kb, compared to loading an image with 1 mb that´s literally nothing and frankly just ridiculous. Don´t get me wrong, frontend pipelines are great and should be used, but let´s shift your "I will optimize the shit out of that 3 css lines" focus to something different: try to serve images as fast as possible, this is where the performance boost really happens. I´m no pro on processwire so far, but I built a very easy to use picture element, which some of you could find interesting: 1. the picture comes with 3 different sizes: one for mobile (keep in mind the double dpi, therefore width of 828px), one for tablet and one for desktop 2. the picture generates a webp version and the original file extension as a fallback 3. the filesize of each element is rendered within the "data" attribute 4. lazy loading(sooo important!!!) is done via the native 'loading="lazy"' attribute. Please try it out and see the difference ? I posted this so others can easily optimize their images, but I would also like to hear your suggestions in making it better. Maybe you could decrease the rendering time or maybe you have some easy improvements. Please let me know. Greetings from Austria! <picture> <source data="<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->width(828)->webp->filesize);?>" media="(max-width: 414px)" srcset="<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->width(828)->webp->url) ?> 2x" type="image/webp"> <source data="<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->width(828)->filesize) ?>" media="(max-width: 414px)" srcset="<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->width(828)->url) ?> 2x" type="image/<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->ext)?>"> <source data="<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->width(767)->webp->filesize) ?>" media="(min-width: 415) and (max-width: 767px)" srcset="<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->width(767)->webp->url) ?> 2x" type="image/webp"> <source data="<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->width(767)->filesize) ?>" media="(min-width: 415) and (max-width: 767px)" srcset="<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->width(767)->url) ?> 2x" type="image/<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->ext)?>"> <source data="<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->webp->filesize) ?>" media="(min-width: 768px)" srcset="<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->webp->url) ?>" type="image/webp"> <source data="<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->filesize) ?>" media="(min-width: 768px)" srcset="<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->url) ?>" type="image/<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->ext)?>"> <img data="<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->filesize) ?>" class="img-fluid" loading="lazy" src="<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->url) ?>" alt="<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->description) ?>" type="image/<?php echo($oElement->repeater_image->ext)?>"> </picture>

Hey everyone- We recently had a need come up for a website. After launching our website the company hired an SEO specialist who is doing some significant work revising and optimizing content. To help enhance this process I wrote a very simple module that automatically submits the website's sitemap.xml file to Bing and Google when a page is published, or when a page is saved that was already published. As for our reasoning- there's a lot of information available as to why submitting your sitemap regularly can be beneficial. In classic Google style their official documentation says that there "is no guarantee" that submitting a sitemap alone will trigger a re-indexing by Google's bots. That said, devs have done tests where there is a strong correlation between a sitemap submission and activity by Google bots on that website. Google has stated that there is no limit or cap on the number of times you can submit a sitemap so there is no penalty for triggering this for every change. For more details and the hard science visit this excellent article https://trevorfox.com/2018/09/ping-sitemaps-search-engines/ 2021 Update! This module has been rebuilt almost entirely to perform even better and cover more events that can affect sitemap.xml data which makes it more effective for your SEO performance. Previously the module submitted the sitemap.xml URL when a page was saved but has now been expanded to encompass any event that potentially modifies your sitemap and does it more intelligently. These events include: New page is published - New URL created Existing page is unpublished - URL no longer available Existing page is saved - Content on page may have changed Existing page is moved - URL has changed Existing page is deleted - URL no longer exists Existing page is restored - URL is now available ProcessSitemapSubmit also: Checks if sitemap.xml exists/is available Logs submissions and results to sitemap-submit log Allows for the sitemap URL can be specified, defaults to yoursite.com/sitemap.xml Templates can be excluded for pages created/saved that should not be submitted to search engines Hidden pages do not trigger a submission. Supports Bing and Google As always, I'd never share a module with the community that I haven't used in production but I still ask that you test and ensure that it works for you. The repo for this module has a notice that it is still in development but I am going to bring it to a release and add it to the Modules directory soon (i.e. when I have a spare minute). This module should have little to no risk and the best way to test is to check the sitemap-submit logs for successful submissions. I am a big fan of the Sitemap module by @Mike Rockett and use it on all of my sites. The Sitemap module uses caching to deliver your sitemap.xml file efficiently. I've worked with Mike to update his module so that it allows ProcessSitemapSubmit to clear it's cache and deliver the latest changes to search engines. This module is aware of Sitemap and works with zero configuration out of the box. To get this functionality in tandem with ProcessSitemapSubmit, please update the Sitemap module on your site. The Sitemap module is not a requirement for this module to work as long as your website has an available sitemap.xml to submit. Check it out. https://github.com/SkyLundy/ProcessSitemapSubmit Feedback and bug reports welcome!

BACKGROUND SEO matters and so hiding pages behind a "section" is not necessarily good - example: Current practice is to show the pages "Foo, Bar, Baz" in a section. https://www.example.com/resources/foo https://www.example.com/resources/bar https://www.example.com/resources/baz For SEO reasons, it's better to show the page at root level like so: https://www.example.com/foo https://www.example.com/bar https://www.example.com/baz PROBLEM: LACK OF ORGANIZATION WHEN ALL PAGES ARE PUBLISHED AT ROOT LEVEL This design is fully possible today. However, the root folder becomes disorganized when all pages are published in the root - and the pages tree structure is not of much use when all pages are published in the root. SOLUTION: VIRTUAL PAGES TO THE RESCUE As a publisher, when publishing many pages that have a root level url, I want to organize my pages below a Virtual Page (that doesn't have a url), so that pages are organized in a Pages Tree Structure (using "Virtual Pages"). What is a "Virtual Page"? Virtual Page can never have a name (Admin -> Page -> Settings -> Name). The Name field is simply blank The Name field is never used in the url for child pages. Virtual Page is a container used to organize other pages. Virtual Page is never shown in the front-end. Virtual Page is shown in the Editing interface only. Virtual Page might have a Template - but the template can only be used in the Admin interface. Virtual Page might have fields (Title, Summary, Text etc.) - but the contents cannot be shown online.

I hadn't developed a website for a while, but here we are. It's a very simple minimalist website to showcase the latest work of Dominican Artist Patricia Abreu Mota. Site: https://patriabreu.com Modules: Procache ❤️ Seo Maestro Profiler Pro Lister Pro ProcessRedirects

Hey folks, currently Iam working on a website for one of my clients and I need some advice on how to approach this in PW. The website is for a company, that offers holiday houses in two locations. The client wants the homepage to show the first location. Normally I just have a home template for the first page, but here the URL should reflect that you are in Location 1. So when you visit the URL casamani.com it should redirect to casamani.com/location-1. Not sure if this makes sense at all. Whould it be bad for SEO and performance reasons to redirect home to the Location-1 page? Another approach would be to render the Location-1 template on the home template or do an include like discussed here. Here is how the tree looks: – Home – Location 1 (Homepage) – Creation – Adventure – Sustainability – Location 2 – Creation – Adventure – Sustainability Thanks for looking into this!

Hello Everyone, I was trying to update SEO meta title, description and meta keywords for my website in Process Wire CMS but it saving in the backend but it is not reflecting on my website, Please help me regarding this error. Please find below attached screen shot for your ref. TIA.

Hi guys, after getting a complain message from google about a robots.txt (where everything is ok), I searched for an online tool, where I can test my robots.txt files. I found this website: https://technicalseo.com/tools/ This page offers a bunch of nice tools, just wanted to share it with you.

Hi, we can choose the "headline" and "title" and "summery" in panel page of processwire, but we can't write the "metadecriptions" and "tags". I can write mdescropt and tags in templates, but I've same templates for many articles... so, how I can change mdescription and tags? Thanks...

Hello for all, these days finishing project what is combination of e-commerce and portal website. Problem is "Products" page-tree because content need to be divided inside 48 categories. Also the client gave me content divided in 68 categories, but at the end they accepted my proposal about reducing that number. But problem is that and with 48 categories in backend, "Products" page tree is very large, long list, and very hard for administration. On front-end mega-menu with labels (menu group headings) solved that problem for vistors. And, at the end, I decided to test variant with additional categories to group categories, and result is good (now it's easy for adminsitration to find what they want very easy). Problem: now urls are longer, and in some parts (categories) not sure how that's can affect on SEO (eg. before: "products/showers/some-product", now: "products/showers-and-bathtubs/showers/some-product"). There are few more examples like that. And another thing is that urls are now longer (more characters, and deeper). For better administration I added new level of categorisation - I think - that is not a way to go. What is your opinion or suggestion about that? Maybe different, custom admin template, with custom navigation, or some folders? or ...? Thanks.

Is there any way with PW to do environment-specific robots.txt, i.e. to block robots from staging sites without having to manually edit files in different environments?

Hi All ? How to append canonical URL to head from certain templates? Thanks!!!

Hi there, I added a ssl certificate to my site and I'd like to redirect every single http url to its new https version So I added this code in the .htacces file, after the RewriteEngine On : Redirect 301 /about https://www.mysite.it/about Unfortunately this is now working: I get the "too many redirects" error. The following code works, but it's a bulk redirection to the home page, something I don't want for SEO reasons (https://moz.com/blog/save-your-website-with-redirects? RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} mysite\.it [NC] RewriteCond %{SERVER_PORT} 80 RewriteRule ^(.*)$ https://www.mysite.it/$1 [R,L] Any suggestions?

hey there I guess a lot of you have already heard of the hreflang attribute which tells search engines which URL they should list on their result pages. For some of my projects I build this manually but now I am wondering if there's need to add this as a module to PW modules directory. How do you deal with the hreflang thingy? Would you you be happy if you can use a module for this or do you have concerns that using a module maybe does not cover your current use cases? Cheers, Chris

Had a question about trailing slashes and forcing one or other. I've a site where most pages can be accessed with AND without a trailing slash IE domain.com/about-us/contact and domain.com/about-us/contact/ are both accessible and being indexed by Google. It's obviously bad for SEO but I can't seem to make PW respect one and redirect etc. There is a setting in templates>template>URLs I must be overlooking something as I have 'yes' selected and both URLs are still reachable with no redirect. What do you guys do to counter this?

Hi, I have an ongoing issue with Google SEO that I can't seem to fix. Wondering if anyone has come across a similar situation? We deployed a new version of the website using a new deployment methodology and unfortunately, the wrong robots.txt file was deployed basically telling Googlebot not to scrape the site. The end result is that if our target keywords are used for a (Google) search, our website is displayed on the search page with "No information is available for this page." Google provides a link to fix this situation on the search listing, but so far everything I have tried in it hasn't fixed the situation. I was wondering if anyone has gone through this scenario and what was the steps to remedy it? Or perhaps it has worked and I have misunderstood how it works? The steps I have tried in the Google Webmaster Tool : Gone through all crawl errors Restored the Robots.txt file and Verified with Robots.txt tester Fetch/Fetch and Render as Google as both Desktop/Mobile, using root URL and other URLs, using Indexing Requested / Indexing Requested for URL and Linked Pages. Uploaded a new Sitemap.xml Particularly on the Sitemap page, it says 584 submitted, 94 indexed. Would the Search Engine return "No Information available" because the page is not indexed? The pages I'm searching for are our 2 most popular keywords and entry points into site. It's also one of 2 most popular category pages. So I'm thinking it probably isn't the case but ... How can I prove / disprove the category pages are being indexed? The site in questions is Sprachspielspass.de. The keywords to search are fingerspiele and kindergedichte.

SYNOPSIS A little guide to generating an sitemap.xml using (I believe) a script Ryan originally wrote with the addition of being able to optionally exclude child pages from being output in the sitemap.xml file. I was looking back on a small project today where I was using a php script to generate an xml file, I believe the original was written by Ryan. Anyway, I needed a quick fix for the script to allow me to optionally exclude children of pages from being included in the sitemap.xml output. OVERVIEW A good example of this is a site where if you visit /minutes/ a page displays a list of board meetings which includes a title, date, description and link to download the .pdf file. I have a template called minutes and a template called minutes-document. The first page, minutes, when loaded via /minutes/ simply grabs all of its child pages and outputs the name, description and actual path of an uploaded .pdf file for a visitor to download. In my back-end I have the template MINUTES and MINUTES-DOCUMENT. Thus: So, basically, their employee can login, hover over minutes, click new, then create a new (child) record and name it the date of the meeting e.g. June 3rd, 2016 : --------------------------- OPTIONALLY EXCLUDING CHILDREN - SETUP Outputting the sitemap.xml and optionally excluding children that belong to a template. The setup of the original script is as follows: 1. Save the file to the templates folder as sitemap.xml.php 2. Create a template called sitemap-xml and use the sitemap.xml.php file. 3. Create a page called sitemap.xml using the sitemap-xml template Now, with that done you will need to make only a couple of slight modifications that will allow the script to exclude children of a template from output to the sitemap.xml 1. Create a new checkbox field and name it: sitemap_exclude_children 2. Add the field to a template that you want to control whether the children are included/excluded from the sitemap. In my example I added it to my "minutes" template. 3. Next, go to a page that uses a template with the field you added above. In my case, "MINUTES" 4. Enable the checkbox to exclude children, leave it unchecked to include children. For example, in my MINUTES page I enabled the checkbox and now when /sitemap.xml is loaded the children for the MINUTES do not appear in the file. A SIMPLE CONDITIONAL TO CHECK THE "sitemap_exclude_children" VALUE This was a pretty easy modification to an existing script, adding only one line. I just figure there may be others out there using this script with the same needs. I simply inserted the if condition as the first line in the function: function renderSitemapChildren(Page $page) { if($page->sitemap_exclude_children) return ""; ... ... ... THE FULL SCRIPT WITH MODIFICATION <?php /** * ProcessWire Template to power a sitemap.xml * * 1. Copy this file to /site/templates/sitemap-xml.php * 2. Add the new template from the admin. * Under the "URLs" section, set it to NOT use trailing slashes. * 3. Create a new page at the root level, use your sitemap-xml template * and name the page "sitemap.xml". * * Note: hidden pages (and their children) are excluded from the sitemap. * If you have hidden pages that you want to be included, you can do so * by specifying the ID or path to them in an array sent to the * renderSiteMapXML() method at the bottom of this file. For instance: * * echo renderSiteMapXML(array('/hidden/page/', '/another/hidden/page/')); * * patch to prevent pages from including children in the sitemap when a field is checked / johnwarrenllc.com * 1. create a checkbox field named sitemap_exclude_children * 2. add the field to the parent template(s) you plan to use * 3. when a new page is create with this template, checking the field will prevent its children from being included in the sitemap.xml output */ function renderSitemapPage(Page $page) { return "\n<url>" . "\n\t<loc>" . $page->httpUrl . "</loc>" . "\n\t<lastmod>" . date("Y-m-d", $page->modified) . "</lastmod>" . "\n</url>"; } function renderSitemapChildren(Page $page) { if($page->sitemap_exclude_children) return ""; /* Aded to exclude CHILDREN if field is checked */ $out = ''; $newParents = new PageArray(); $children = $page->children; foreach($children as $child) { $out .= renderSitemapPage($child); if($child->numChildren) $newParents->add($child); else wire('pages')->uncache($child); } foreach($newParents as $newParent) { $out .= renderSitemapChildren($newParent); wire('pages')->uncache($newParent); } return $out; } function renderSitemapXML(array $paths = array()) { $out = '<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>' . "\n" . '<urlset xmlns="http://www.sitemaps.org/schemas/sitemap/0.9">'; array_unshift($paths, '/'); // prepend homepage foreach($paths as $path) { $page = wire('pages')->get($path); if(!$page->id) continue; $out .= renderSitemapPage($page); if($page->numChildren) { $out .= renderSitemapChildren($page); } } $out .= "\n</urlset>"; return $out; } header("Content-Type: text/xml"); echo renderSitemapXML(); // Example: echo renderSitemapXML(array('/hidden/page/')); In conclusion, I have used a couple different processwire sitemap generating modules. But for my needs, the above script is fast and easy to setup/modify. - Thanks

Hi, I'm using Formbuilder to build forms in my website, I have different forms to track Google Adwords Conversions but I have like 20 differents forms. I was wondering how do you guys handle conversions in Google Adwords

Hi guys, i was trying to implement SEO URL structure on my another processwire website. SEO team requested us to put .html on every pages. e.g http://www.mydomain.com/products.html and if click any product then it will like http://www.mydomain.com/products/product-one.html so after little bit research i find out it can be done with URLsegment option in template options. i checked on Allow URL Segment, said No to "Should page url end with slash" and said No to "Should URL segments end with a trailing slash? " but after all this setting we try to access the it is showing 404 page. i don't know why. Any help will be highly appreciate Thanks J

Hi there, I am using a url schema like this: page.html page1.html etc. As the name unter settings. I don't want to start a discussion about how useful .html is Works but not for pages that have child pages, where the path would is page.html/child1.html page1.html/child4.html The page and page1 should be without html if I access the children and with if I click the parent.

Hi guys, I'm a Processwire-Newbie and new to this forum. Happily I have to struggle with very few difficulties, thanks to the clear and pleasing concept and structure of PW. Currently there is only one thing that makes me brood: I have a main category 'posts' that contains the majority of all pages. So the regular url would be 'domain/posts/post-one' etc. As I prefer the url scheme 'domain/post-one' I followed the instructions discussed in this topic. This hook is in my 'init.php': wire()->addHookBefore('Page::path', function($event) { $page = $event->object; if($page->template == 'post') { $event->replace = true; $event->return = "/$page->name/"; } }); And this is in my 'home' template: if(strlen($input->urlSegment2)) { throw new Wire404Exception(); } else if(strlen($input->urlSegment1)) { $input->urlSegment1; $name = $sanitizer->pageName($input->urlSegment1); $post = $pages->get("/posts/")->child("name=$name"); if($post->id) echo $post->render(); else throw new Wire404Exception(); $renderMain = false; } else { // regular homepage output $posts = $pages->find("parent=/posts/, limit=$limit, sort=-date"); $body = renderPosts($posts); } Both templates 'home' and 'post' have 'url segments' option activated. On the first sight everything is working fine. $page-name outputs '/domain/post-one' and the page '/domain/post-one' ist getting displayed. What's frighening me is the fact, that 'domain/posts/post-one' is working as well. This means 'post-one' can be adressed with two different urls, and I’m not sure how to rate that. On one hand, nobody will ever notice the '/domain/posts/page-one' option, as it's listed nowhere. So I could just ignore it. On the other hand, I don't know for sure if this presumption is correct. Maybe there are unknown channels where the 'wrong' urls will be spreaded, then there will be 'doubled content' which is bad, as far as I know. So what I'm asking for: Is there an easy way to avoid the double url-scheme option and output a 404 error, when 'domain/posts/page-one' is called? Or should I just don't care, as it doesn't matter a all? Unfortunately, I don’t fully understand every line of the second code, so I would be very grateful if someone could light it up for me a bit. Thanks + regards Ralf

One of my blogs seems to be accessible from multiple URLs and it's affecting my clients SEO. For example, using the following URL structures, I can access the same page. http://www.domain.not/blog/page2/ http://www.domain.not/blog/posts/page2/ The correct one is probably the second one as all posts are children of blog. My actual blog structure is as follows Blog - Posts -- Post A -- Post B -- Post C (etc) - Tags - Categories I have pagination enabled on a template called blog-posts which is applied to the Posts page. I'm not sure though why the double URL is occouring?