1

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.

5

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.

1
<?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:caption>
   </image:image>
 </url> 
</urlset> 

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

  • 2
    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 '15 at 18:40
  • 1
    In line 9 is a mistake - please close with an caption, no with title. – Marco Sep 26 '17 at 21:29

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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