|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 16,299 Likes: 116
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 16,299 Likes: 116 |
I thought that the SEO update was supposed to make the first post be the description in child pages? When I go here and look at the description in the meta tags it is of the first post on that page versus the first post of the thread...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1
Former Developer
|
|
Former Developer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1 |
description is for 1st post of page.. since the url changes to /page/2, then it would have a different og:Description it's by design 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1
Former Developer
|
|
Former Developer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1 |
take a look @ yoast and his comments on pagination.. also take a look at a page 2 in xenForo forum's thread. i like how they do SEO. they do it same way now IPB does it differently by prefacing the description ( 1st post ) with page x of y - that is to make it look 'different' as to not have duplicate content descriptions.. but in looking closely their og:description is the 1st post of that page too ( Example ) -- so, in the end, i sided with Yoast ( SEO guru ) and the newer forum platform xenForo -- also, iteration #2 will probably have an admin back end, where you can select certain things like: analytics, pagination style, apple iTouch icons, og:image .. rel="next" rel="previous" rel="canonical" og:site_name and more.. this is iteration #1 and gets the main og:xxx's out of the way to make it much easier for googlebot to grab SEO from the <head> section, vs wade thru table, tr, td stuff to figure it out. -- now if you want to have 1st post as description for every page, just modify showflat.inc.php where it does $ogDescription and voila  ubbDev for the win !
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 16,299 Likes: 116
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 16,299 Likes: 116 |
now if you want to have 1st post as description for every page, just modify showflat.inc.php where it does $ogDescription and voila ubbDev for the win ! Lol, probably what I'll end up doing; or making a separate portion for the shareaholic bar  .
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1
Former Developer
|
|
Former Developer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1 |
now for shareaholic, it's perfectly reasonable to link to the 1st post in topic, so i can see that.. matter of fact, a tweet and FB share too.. but for the best SEO, where you have distint indexed pagination, from what i've read, the og:description should track 1st post on page. we'll embellish in round two with rel=next, rel=previous and rel=canonical
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1
Former Developer
|
|
Former Developer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1 |
i have put rel="next" and rel="prev" into current release ( not in member's area yet ), for paginated topics now. i want to get a little more run time on this release, before releasing to Brooks.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,945 Likes: 145
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,945 Likes: 145 |
While on the topic of the "SEO Meta Description" -- for Facebook's OpenGraph protocol, I'd like to suggest adding two additional lines to html.inc.php to make the page pass validation @ https://developers.facebook.com/tools/debugAFTER LINE 314... <meta property="article:section" content="' . $forumTitle . '" /> ADD... <meta property="og:image" content="'. $config['FULL-URL-TO-HEADER-IMAGE-LOGO'] .'" />
<meta property="og:site_name" content="'. $config['COMMUNITY_TITLE'] .'" /> Where "FULL-URL-TO-HEADER-IMAGE-LOGO", insert the full url to your site's header logo. For example, https://www.ubbcentral.com/images/logo.pngNote: The recommended size is 200x200 or larger, and the image should be square. The code for the "FULL-URL-TO-HEADER-IMAGE-LOGO" string could be another category addition to "Control Panel > Display Options" @ admin/gen_display.php
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,562 Likes: 78
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,562 Likes: 78 |
Humm I think SD is waiting on Brooks.
But if you view source on this page you will see most is there already with a notation.
Now open graph is new to me .
But why can't you just make the entries in the html includes tab (Header Insert:
Use for meta tags, etc. )of the ubb control panel?
Then you can add whatever you want.
Blue Man Group
There is no such thing as stupid questions. Just stupid answers
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1
Former Developer
|
|
Former Developer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1 |
those won't be in html.inc.php, but you can easily add those two lines to the common header insert. matter of fact, it is done here
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,562 Likes: 78
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,562 Likes: 78 |
Blue Man Group
There is no such thing as stupid questions. Just stupid answers
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1
Former Developer
|
|
Former Developer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1 |
yes, but i confirmed that it WON'T be in there in the official release. ( responding to id242 ) what IS in there is an optional shareaholic config that also respects whether a forum can be 'guest readable'. ( new ) this looks much nicer than the FB and Twitter that was slammed in real quick. and even if you don't use shareaholic, the FB and Twitter now also won't show for private forums. ( change ) also, 2 new classes .announce_css and .sticky_css are added to the postlist.tpl file, so you can edit the Extra css section of your style(s) and add any changes you want those rows to take on.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 16,299 Likes: 116
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 16,299 Likes: 116 |
what IS in there is an optional shareaholic config that also respects whether a forum can be 'guest readable'. ( new )
this looks much nicer than the FB and Twitter that was slammed in real quick.
and even if you don't use shareaholic, the FB and Twitter now also won't show for private forums. ( change ) SD and I had a powwow last night lol...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,945 Likes: 145
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,945 Likes: 145 |
those won't be in html.inc.php, but you can easily add those two lines to the common header insert. Adding stuff to includes/header-insert.php is a start, but since "Facebook Open Graph" inserts are currently partialy being coded to one place, for the sake of being "proper," they should be completely coded in that one place. There really isn't any user-configurable data that cannot be derived from current config $strings -- so dropping the two lines I posted above, in to header-insert.php seems silly. Especially since without them, your "Facebook Open Graph" code wont validate without warnings. EXAMPLE: https://developers.facebook.com/too...2Ftopics%2F254231%2FSEO_Meta_DescriptionAnd, having incomplete Facebook Open Graph on many other pages that are not generated by html.inc.php (such as online, login, register...etc.) only makes your pages that people wont usually link to, unnecessarily larger. yes, but i confirmed that it WON'T be in there in the official release. ( responding to id242 ) Cool - So you're taking out the "Facebook Open Graph" code? If not, what I was trying to state in my previous code, was that if you're going to add Open Graph code to the html.inc.php (which is included in UBBT v7.5.8) then I suggest following their guidelines and having the code validate without warnings, through their debugger. Anyways - keep up the good work and take my suggestions for correction as only a hope for code improvement  - nothing is personal 
Last edited by id242; 12/07/2013 12:59 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,945 Likes: 145
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,945 Likes: 145 |
Humm I think SD is waiting on Brooks.
But if you view source on this page you will see most is there already with a notation. Ok, I just pulled up the source to ubbcentral.com/forums and noticed it in the source. I wasnt aware that this site (ubbcentral) was also THE sandbox for UBBT development.I just figured that the code running the site was the same code that was public. I was basing my correction advice on current code that is available in the member download area. The following is the current code which is running live on ubbcentral.com, which is not in the code available in the members area for download. Under the <title> tags... <!-- Brooks, you should put og:image, apple itouch icons here -->
<meta property="og:site_name" content="UBB.threads PHP Forum Software Community" />
<meta name="shareaholic:image" content="https://www.ubbcentral.com/forums/images/ubb-og-logo.png" />
<meta property="og:image" content="https://www.ubbcentral.com/forums/images/ubb-og-logo-2.png" />
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 16,299 Likes: 116
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 16,299 Likes: 116 |
FWIW, the refreshed code was released 12/6. I wasnt aware that this site (ubbcentral) was also THE sandbox for UBBT development.
I just figured that the code running the site was the same code that was public.
I was basing my correction advice on current code that is available in the member download area. this is generally only the case when there is a release candidate available I believe. The following is the current code which is running live on ubbcentral.com, which is not in the code available in the members area for download. Under the <title> tags... <!-- Brooks, you should put og:image, apple itouch icons here -->
<meta property="og:site_name" content="UBB.threads PHP Forum Software Community" />
<meta name="shareaholic:image" content="https://www.ubbcentral.com/forums/images/ubb-og-logo.png" />
<meta property="og:image" content="https://www.ubbcentral.com/forums/images/ubb-og-logo-2.png" />
these are added via the header insert I believe.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,945 Likes: 145
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,945 Likes: 145 |
FWIW, the refreshed code was released 12/6. OK, cool. I wasn't aware that a code refresh had happened. On 2013-11-29 I saw 7.5.8 On 2013-11-30 I saw 7.5.8.1 And now on 2013-12-07 I only see 7.5.8 So I figured that 7.5.8.1 was just renamed to a whole number, since 7.5.8 was only released 12 hours prior and most people didn't even notice the "show stopper" bug within it. I also missed the announcement of a 7.5.8 refresh (2013-12-06), since the only post on the first page was the initial announcement from 11/29/13 @ 07:48 PM... and no mention of changes since then. I probably missed the post discussing that, can someone please post the link to the "7.5.8 refresh" announcement post? Anyway - I just grabbed the most recent version of "7.5.8" from the members section and compared it to 7.5.8.1 -- and yes, "7.5.8" is newer than "7.5.8.1" 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 16,299 Likes: 116
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 16,299 Likes: 116 |
I don't like that refreshes aren't announced myself, but it's been that way some time (I bet if you're running 7.5.7 and you compare the code to what's in the member area the two don't match; it's all too common and quite annoying) My changelog at the wiki ( here; third party volunteer operated site) is updated accordingly however; when I notice changes and try to document them. Since SD was integrating one of my mod's and several of my changes I was notified when it was released to document.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,945 Likes: 145
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,945 Likes: 145 |
Thanks again, Giz - You rock! EDIT, to add:I don't like that refreshes aren't announced myself, but it's been that way some time (I bet if you're running 7.5.7 and you compare the code to what's in the member area the two don't match; it's all too common and quite annoying) You're right again. I just compared v7.5.7 (rel 12/12/2012) with the current version of v7.5.7 posted in the members area. They have several differences. The current v7.5.7 contains several changed files... from 03/14/2013. It would have been nice to know about that update. Even if it wasn't announced, it would have been nice to have a version point added to it, so we would have, at the very least, known that there was an update. To recap, what I've learned today was... 7.5.7 !== 7.5.7  7.5.8.1 < 7.5.8
Last edited by id242; 12/07/2013 5:25 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1
Former Developer
|
|
Former Developer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1 |
creating a new .1 release vs a 1 week later refresh, was a calculation that turned out in favor of a refresh. with unlimited resources and time, maybe the .1 woulda happened. ce la vi
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1
Former Developer
|
|
Former Developer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1 |
The following is the current code which is running live on ubbcentral.com, which is not in the code available in the members area for download. Under the <title> tags... <!-- Brooks, you should put og:image, apple itouch icons here -->
<meta property="og:site_name" content="UBB.threads PHP Forum Software Community" />
<meta name="shareaholic:image" content="https://www.ubbcentral.com/forums/images/ubb-og-logo.png" />
<meta property="og:image" content="https://www.ubbcentral.com/forums/images/ubb-og-logo-2.png" />
yes, and that doesn't come from html.inc.php here either. it is simply the COMMON header insert, which any ubb admin can place themselves i did that here and even left a comment for Brooks, when he has time to maybe add the iTouch icons for iApple stuff
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,945 Likes: 145
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,945 Likes: 145 |
SD, that wasn't in the original v7.5.8, released 11/29/2013, and that was the release I was referring to when I wrote what I wrote above. But (since Gizmo has shared the news of v7.5.8 being updated on 12/06/2013) without any other announcement or version change to reflect that update, I was going off from what I knew to be true. If there was official notice of an updated release (or even a point-revision) reflecting that there was any type of update, I probably would have contributed something different - or even no code at all
Last edited by id242; 12/07/2013 10:33 AM. Reason: 7.5.8... bah! typos...lol
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1
Former Developer
|
|
Former Developer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,940 Likes: 1 |
i don't deny that you saw two different 7.5.8's and even 7.5.7's i was just bottom lining what the admins can do in their common header insert going forward
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,945 Likes: 145
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,945 Likes: 145 |
|
|
|
Bots
by Outdoorking - 04/13/2024 5:08 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 members (Nightcrawler),
963
guests, and
210
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
