Hey, Google accepts both txt and xml sitemaps,but some ppl say xml sitemaps are much better and more preferable by Google. Have txt sitemaps, ~49k links each and ~2.2mb Xml verison is ~ 4-5mb and sometimes Google shows warning (smtn like 'takes too long to download' ) Is there any significant difference between txt and xml or it's another gossip?
I don'[t know if there is a significant difference between txt or xml, but you should definitely consider offering Google a .tar.gz version as well, and submit this in webmaster tools
Is .tar.gz really acceptable? I tought its just .xml.gz and NOT .xml.tar.gz Can someone confirm this.
XML Sitemaps can hold more information such as priority and date changed so if you can take advantage of that they are better. XML Sitemaps can also be gzipped and placed in sitemap indexes for a hierarchical organization of the sitemap. The sitemap index can also have a date changed so Google can avoid downloading sitemaps that have not changed recently. If you use these features then XML sitemaps are better. If you don't then they are just bigger files.
From a seo/indexing POV there is not really any difference. You have to find the one that's right for you - if the xml is too big, use text, but if priority is a big issue, use xml. Personally, I use text because I have relatively few pages
I think use xml easy it caused wordpress have plugin for it that called as xml sitemap. it will also create .targz