Facebook Share & RDFa vs. Video Sitemaps & mRSS - Google Supports Both Feeds

Google accepts information from both video feeds, such as Video Sitemaps and mRSS, as well as on-page markup, such as Facebook Share and RDFa? Google recommend that you use both!"If you've limited resources, however, here's a chart explaining the pros and cons with key differentiators include:While both feeds and on-page markup give search engines metadata, […]

Google accepts information from both video feeds, such as Video Sitemaps and mRSS, as well as on-page markup, such as Facebook Share and RDFa? Google recommend that you use both!

"If you've limited resources, however, here's a chart explaining the pros and cons with key differentiators include:

  • While both feeds and on-page markup give search engines metadata, Video Sitemaps/mRSS also help with crawl discovery -- we may find new URL that otherwise wouldn't have easily discovered.
  • Using Video Sitemaps/mRSS requires that the search engine support these formats and not all engines do. Because on-page markup is just that -- on the page -- crawlers can gather the metadata through organic means as they index the URL. No feed support is required," explains Google.

Video Sitemaps & mRSS vs. Facebook Share & RDFa

"If you're wondering about the of specific feeds (Video Sitemaps vs. mRSS); One benefit of Video Sitemaps is that, because it's a format we're actively enhancing, we can quickly extend it to allow for more specifications.

All this said, if you're going to start from scratch, Video Sitemaps is recommended start," Google informs.

Video Sitemaps & mRSS vs. Facebook Share & RDFa

[tags]video feeds,video sitemaps,mRSS,facebook share,RDFa,metadata,crawlers,organic[/tags]

[Source]