Take the 2-minute tour ×
Webmasters Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for pro webmasters. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Here is the document about google image sitemaps. Of <image:caption> and <image:title>, which is more important? If I have only one description of this image, which part is better to be put in? I mean, put the description in <image:caption>, leave <image:title> blank, or put the description in <image:title>, leave <image:caption> blank.

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 2 down vote accepted

Those tags are entirely different–and fairly self-explanatory–things. The difference between them isn't really importance, but purpose. Your descriptions will fit best in the image:caption element. Reserve image:title for if/when you have actual titles, such as a named piece of artwork. Some images don't have titles at all, and that's fine; it's why the element is optional. That's not a reason to cram an entirely different kind of data into it.

share|improve this answer
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
 <urlset xmlns="http://www.sitemaps.org/schemas/sitemap/0.9"
  xmlns:image="http://www.google.com/schemas/sitemap-image/1.1">
 <url>
   <loc>http://www.couldserver.com/somepage.html</loc>
   <image:image>
     <image:loc>http://couldserver.com/image.jpg</image:loc>
     <image:title>a pretty car</image:title>
     <image:caption>a car description</image:title>
   </image:image>
 </url> 
</urlset> 

This the right usage, put image:title and image:caption inside image:image! It's better to use both tags.

share|improve this answer
    
This doesn't answer the question. He is asking which is more important when he doesn't have text for both. You just say to use both. –  Stephen Ostermiller Feb 4 at 18:40

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.