Hi all, First post to the list after lurking for quite some time. Hopefully I don't come accross as too negative. I will give it a shot. <div>On 3/24/06, Scott Reynen <<a href="mailto:scott@randomchaos.com">scott@randomchaos.com</a>> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> If microformat site maps existed, I would use them as starting points to know where to look, but I wouldn't trust them as any sort of accurate listing of what's on a domain just because I know I would likely forget to update my own if I had one.  </blockquote></div> I don't think having a sitemap is such a hot idea precisely for this reason. It violates the DRY (don't repeat yourself) principle. You will update your site and of course, at some point you will forget to update your siteindex unless you use some sort of automated tool to do the updating for you, but you KNOW that not everyone is going to use a tool such as this. So I think we are better off having just tools that detect the presence of uf's by parsing the whole shebang. If you add a siteindex you will complicate things for the publisher which will hurt adoption. Remember humans first, machines second. Cheers, Antonio -- Antonio Touriño Consultor en Tecnologías Web Brilliance Tech