• About Us
  • Contributors
  • Guides
  • Speaking Engagements
  • Write for The SEM Post
  • Submit a tip or contact us!
  • Newsletters

The SEM Post

Latest News About SEO, SEM, PPC & Search Engines

  • Google
  • SEO
  • Mobile
  • Local
  • Bing
  • Pay Per Click
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • State of the Industry
You are here: Home / Google / Implementing Hreflang? Google Recommends Hreflang Sitemaps

Implementing Hreflang? Google Recommends Hreflang Sitemaps

April 15, 2016 at 4:50 am PST By Jennifer Slegg

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • WhatsApp
  • Evernote
  • SMS

hreflang sitemapsIs there one type of hreflang implementation that is more successful than others?  Maile Ohye from Google was asked this question during the SEJ Summit on Wednesday.  And she had some interesting comments about it, especially for first-time implmenetations.

So does one hreflang implementation have greater success?

I would say yes.  And then there’s like short term versus long term.  So in the short term, if you have a lot of languages you are trying to map to, I would say to use the sitemap.  And I would say that because for your protection, for rel canonical and pagination we cut off at the head.  So anything we see after that, we don’t take into account because we don’t want users putting up their own “rel canonical to my blog”, right?  So we cut off at the head so no one can alter it.

But for these sites that evolve a lot, sometimes the head is closing way sooner than all their tags.  So it’s like on the page, why aren’t you seeing this?

So if you do it in a sitemap, you don’t have to care what your developers are doing with the code.  “It renders right but we don’t see it in the head tag.”  So that’s a lot of errors that we see.  So I would say the sitemap is more foolproof in that way.

But long term, a sitemap is also hard to debug.  So if you did it right, it works, and you can always check your errors in search console under international targeting.  For a large site, I would go with sitemap and check for errors if possible at the same time.

So it seems sitemaps are the best solution for newer hreflang users who want to cause fewer mistakes.  And of course, this answer was targeted to a newer crowd… but it is always best to go with the option that is more familiar, for those with experience.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • WhatsApp
  • Evernote
  • SMS
The following two tabs change content below.
  • Bio
  • Latest Posts
My Twitter profileMy Facebook profileMy Google+ profileMy LinkedIn profile

Jennifer Slegg

Founder & Editor at The SEM Post
Jennifer Slegg is a longtime speaker and expert in search engine marketing, working in the industry for almost 20 years. When she isn't sitting at her desk writing and working, she can be found grabbing a latte at her local Starbucks or planning her next trip to Disneyland. She regularly speaks at Pubcon, SMX, State of Search, Brighton SEO and more, and has been presenting at conferences for over a decade.
My Twitter profileMy Facebook profileMy Google+ profileMy LinkedIn profile

Latest posts by Jennifer Slegg (see all)

  • 2022 Update for Google Quality Rater Guidelines – Big YMYL Updates - August 1, 2022
  • Google Quality Rater Guidelines: The Low Quality 2021 Update - October 19, 2021
  • Rethinking Affiliate Sites With Google’s Product Review Update - April 23, 2021
  • New Google Quality Rater Guidelines, Update Adds Emphasis on Needs Met - October 16, 2020
  • Google Updates Experiment Statistics for Quality Raters - October 6, 2020

Filed Under: Google, Local, SEO

Sign up for our newsletter


Trackbacks

  1. SearchCap: Apple search ads, Google trending auto complete & more says:
    April 15, 2016 at 1:00 pm

    […] Implementing Hreflang? Google Recommends Hreflang Sitemaps, thesempost.com […]

Founder & Editor

Jennifer Slegg (2052)

Sign up for our daily news recap & weekly newsletter.


Follow us online

  • Facebook
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • Twitter

Latest News

2022 Update for Google Quality Rater Guidelines – Big YMYL Updates

We finally have the first Google Quality Rater Guidelines update of 2022, and like usual, it is … [Read More...]

Recent Posts

  • 2022 Update for Google Quality Rater Guidelines – Big YMYL Updates
  • Google Quality Rater Guidelines: The Low Quality 2021 Update
  • Rethinking Affiliate Sites With Google’s Product Review Update
  • New Google Quality Rater Guidelines, Update Adds Emphasis on Needs Met
  • Google Updates Experiment Statistics for Quality Raters
  • Analyzing “How Google Search Works” Changes from Google
  • Google Quality Rater Guidelines Update: New Introduction, Rater Bias & Political Affiliations
  • Google Updates Quality Rater Guidelines: Reputation for News Sites; Video Content Updates; Quality for Information Sites
  • Google Makes Major Changes to NoFollow, Adds Sponsored & UGC Tags
  • Google Updates Quality Rater Guidelines Targeting E-A-T, Page Quality & Interstitials

Categories

  • Affiliate Marketing
  • Amazon
  • Apple
  • Bing
  • Branding
  • Browsers
  • Chrome
  • Content Marketing
  • Design
  • Domains
  • DuckDuckGo
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Firefox
  • Foursquare
  • Google
    • Analytics
    • Google RankBrain
    • Quality Rater's Guidelines
  • History of Search
  • Industry Spotlight
  • Instagram
  • Internet Explorer
  • Links
  • Local
  • Mobile
  • Native Advertising
  • Other Search Engines
  • Pay Per Click
  • Pinterest
  • Publishers
  • Security
  • SEO
  • Snapchat
  • Social Media
  • State of the Industry
  • The SEM Post
  • Tools
  • Twitter
  • Uncategorized
  • User Experience
  • Video Marketing
  • Week in Review
  • Whitepapers
  • Wordpress
  • Yahoo
  • Yelp
  • YouTube
May 2025
MTWTFSS
« Aug  
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org

Copyright © 2025 · News Pro Theme On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in