Official statement
Other statements from this video 11 ▾
- □ Faut-il supprimer la balise 'priority' de vos sitemaps ?
- □ Faut-il vraiment supprimer la balise 'changefreq' de vos sitemaps ?
- □ Pourquoi Google ignore-t-il la balise 'lastmod' dans vos sitemaps ?
- □ Faut-il encore remplir la balise lastmod dans vos sitemaps XML ?
- □ Pourquoi soumettre un sitemap ne garantit-il pas le crawl de vos URLs ?
- □ Faut-il remplacer les extensions de sitemap par des données structurées ?
- □ Faut-il mettre à jour lastmod quand on ajoute des données structurées ?
- □ Pourquoi créer un sitemap révèle-t-il plus de problèmes techniques qu'il n'en résout ?
- □ Pourquoi les identifiants de session en paramètres URL menacent-ils encore le crawl de votre site ?
- □ Un site crawlable garantit-il vraiment une meilleure navigation utilisateur ?
- □ Faut-il vraiment attendre le crawl même après avoir soumis ses URLs via API ?
Google is considering deprecating certain video and image sitemap extension tags in favor of Schema.org structured data. The reason given: avoid conflicts between static sitemap information and dynamically updated structured markup. In practice, practitioners will need to migrate to Schema.org VideoObject and ImageObject.
What you need to understand
Why does Google want to deprecate these sitemap tags?
The reason is straightforward: structured data embedded in HTML is systematically up-to-date upon page rendering, unlike XML sitemaps which represent a frozen state. When an editor modifies a video thumbnail or image caption in their CMS, the Schema.org markup updates automatically, but the sitemap requires regeneration and resubmission.
Google prefers a single source of truth rather than two potentially contradictory channels. If the sitemap indicates a different thumbnail URL than the one declared in VideoObject, which should prevail? This ambiguity creates inconsistencies in crawler processing.
Which sitemap tags are affected by this deprecation?
Google is targeting the tags of the video:* and image:* extensions that have direct equivalents in Schema.org. For example: video:thumbnail_loc (equivalent: thumbnailUrl in VideoObject), video:title (equivalent: name), image:caption (equivalent: caption in ImageObject).
Tags without Schema.org equivalents — if any remain — could persist, but the trend is clear: consolidate all markup into structured data.
Is this an immediate or gradual deprecation?
Gary Illyes uses the conditional: Google "is considering" this deprecation. No precise timeline is announced. This is a strategic direction signal rather than an imminent technical update.
That said, the wording leaves little doubt about the outcome. Prepare the transition now to avoid any future indexation penalties.
- Single source of truth: Schema.org becomes the reference for video and image metadata
- Affected tags: video:*, image:* with equivalents in VideoObject and ImageObject
- Unclear timeline: deprecation being considered, no official date
- Google's objective: eliminate conflicts between static sitemap and dynamic markup
SEO Expert opinion
Is this statement consistent with observed practices?
Absolutely. For several years, Google has been pushing publishers toward structured data at the expense of XML metadata. Search Console has long displayed Schema.org errors with far more detail than video sitemap issues.
Concretely? Video rich results (carousels, enriched snippets) already rely primarily on VideoObject, not on video:* in the sitemap. This official deprecation formalizes a ground reality: the video sitemap now serves only a discovery role, not a descriptive one.
What nuances should be added to this announcement?
First point: Gary doesn't specify whether the root element <video:video> or <image:image> will also be deprecated. If it remains, this means the sitemap retains a discovery signal role ("this URL contains a video"), while Schema.org provides descriptive metadata.
Second nuance: [To verify] what will be the priority in case of persistent conflict after deprecation? If a publisher maintains deprecated tags in their sitemap AND contradictory Schema.org, will Google silently ignore the sitemap or raise an alert in Search Console?
Third point — and this is crucial — this deprecation concerns only the video and image extensions. The main sitemap (changefreq, priority, lastmod) and the news extension (news:*) are not mentioned.
In what cases could this rule cause problems?
For sites with thousands of videos hosted on external CDN, migrating from video sitemap to VideoObject can represent a massive technical undertaking. If thumbnail and content URLs are stored in a database without being injected into the HTML, you need to modify front-end templating.
Another edge case: sites using aggressive lazy-loading that only render video markup after user interaction. If Google doesn't see the Schema.org upon first render, video indexation becomes unreliable. The XML sitemap served as a safety net — that net disappears.
Practical impact and recommendations
What should you do concretely right now?
Start by auditing your existing video and image sitemaps. List all the video:* and image:* tags you currently declare. Then verify that each URL possesses the equivalent Schema.org markup (VideoObject for videos, ImageObject for images).
Next, implement or complete your structured data. For videos: thumbnailUrl, uploadDate, description, name, contentUrl/embedUrl are mandatory. For images: contentUrl, license (if applicable), acquireLicensePage (for licensed images) are recommended.
Test with Google's Rich Results Test tool and validate that your markup is compliant. Monitor "Videos" and "Enhancements" reports in Search Console to detect any parsing errors.
What mistakes should you avoid during this transition?
Don't remove your video/image sitemap tags before Google officially announces the deprecation. As long as no date is announced, maintain both channels in parallel to guarantee indexation.
Avoid inconsistencies between sitemap and Schema.org: if you declare a 120-second duration in the sitemap and 180 in VideoObject, Google may ignore both. Automate generation so a single source feeds both formats.
Don't neglect server-side rendering for SPAs. If your React/Vue site injects Schema.org only client-side, Googlebot may not see it upon first render. Use dynamic rendering or SSR to ensure markup is present in the initial HTML.
How can you verify your site will be compliant after deprecation?
Create a mapping table between each video/image sitemap tag and its Schema.org equivalent. Example: video:thumbnail_loc → VideoObject.thumbnailUrl, video:duration → VideoObject.duration, image:caption → ImageObject.caption.
Run a crawl with Screaming Frog or Oncrawl with structured data extraction enabled. Compare the URLs in your video sitemap against URLs detected in VideoObject tags. Any gap signals a URL not covered by Schema.org.
Set up a Search Console alert to monitor structured data errors. If the number of VideoObject or ImageObject errors suddenly increases, it signals implementation flaws.
- Audit current video/image sitemaps and list all tags used
- Implement VideoObject and ImageObject with all mandatory properties
- Validate markup with Google's Rich Results Test tool
- Maintain sitemap AND Schema.org in parallel until official announcement
- Automate generation to avoid inconsistencies between channels
- Ensure server-side rendering of Schema.org for JavaScript applications
- Crawl the site to detect video URLs without VideoObject
- Monitor Search Console reports "Videos" and "Enhancements"
❓ Frequently Asked Questions
Dois-je supprimer immédiatement mes balises video:* et image:* du sitemap ?
Les sitemaps vidéo et image vont-ils complètement disparaître ?
Que se passe-t-il si mes données sitemap et Schema.org sont contradictoires ?
Cette dépréciation concerne-t-elle aussi les sitemaps actualités ou mobiles ?
Dois-je implémenter Schema.org même si je n'ai que quelques vidéos ?
🎥 From the same video 11
Other SEO insights extracted from this same Google Search Central video · published on 05/05/2022
🎥 Watch the full video on YouTube →
💬 Comments (0)
Be the first to comment.