I can personally confirm that at least as of today, google will add jumplinks for singlepage scrolling sites...but I have not found a way to get sitelinks for a single-page site.
To get jumplinks working you should have:
href="#idOfContent" with anchor text (or alt text for image links) which you want to show on google as a jumplink.
- document elements with corresponding IDs to the URL fragment.
In the example below the jump links are Section Title 1,3,4:
I thought I had "site links" but apparently only have "jump links" for my single page site.
Jump links are provided for single page sites if you have the anchors and things setup properly. Haven't found any docs from google about them yet though which is strange.
If your single page site uses url fragments (
#sectionid) you may be out of luck for site links. However there are some client-side js frameworks ("single page app" type stuff) that can work with normal URIs (e.g.
The problem with this is that google will see the same content on all these supposedly different pages (different URIs) and will likely penalize you in search results or only show one of your pages. So if it is really a Single-Page-App, just make sure each URI is displaying different content and not just scrolling to different content.
The other problem is that if you really just have a single page scrolling site...using in-page links with url fragments is really the right way to do it as url fragments are intended to link to a location within a single document (think table of contents at top linking to specific sections farther down in page/document).
Another potential problem with a Single-Page-App using different URIs (
/path/to/content rather than
/app#contentId) is that web browsers will think these are all different pages and cache them independently even though your webserver may be returning the same app content/code for all the different requests and only fetching unique content on subsequent requests.
Moral of the story:
single page site with jumplinks is great for very basic marketing/corporate websites where you don't have that much content. However as your site content expands it really does make sense to add more pages in order to group similar content together (e.g. products page, pricing page, login page, etc would make sense to be different than the home page).
If you have a "single page app" that is really a multi-page site (google search docs (3) calls this the app shell model)... then you should do what I suggested above and have your singlepage app use the URI instead of the URL fragment to determine which content/page to show. Different URIs should show different content, different page titles, different page meta descriptions, etc.
Don't confuse sitemaps (e.g. sitemap.xml) with sitelinks.
Sitelinks are a google-specific thing which are sub-links to individual pages/sections under your main website search result.
Google Webmaster tools will allow you to submit a sitemap. This is really only necessary if for some reason you think that google's crawler may have trouble discovering all your pages.
Providing google webmaster tools a sitemap will help their crawler to discover your pages in order to crawl them (ie if for some reason google can't find all your pages via following links from your home page).
If google can't find/crawl your pages without a sitemap.xml...then this will of course prevent google from generating sitelinks. Besides that sitelinks and sitemaps are not related.
...when you have content not readily linked by other pages, such as new pages or obscure information, you can help our system learn about your URLs by providing them in a list, known as a sitemap. (2)
According to google (1) the sitelink generation process is automated based on their proprietary algorithms. This means you can't force sitelinks to show up, you can just try to do the right technical things to enable google to show sitelinks if they decide they want to.
Google may draw the content of sitelinks from page titles, anchor text (or alt text for image links), page meta-data, etc.
I like to think of sitelinks as just a way for Google to visually compress multiple search results from the same site into a single group result.
Single page sites fail SEO miserablyyou'd hope that would be the case, and would assume that would be the case with what various Google employees have said but I've seen plenty of sites to suggest otherwise. Google my full name for example (simonhayter.co.uk), My one page site, with almost zero content out ranks many other Simon Hayter's :) Power of good links and authority, can rank anything, just takes a little more... Google wants people to believe that content is king, but sadly, its STILL not the case.