OpenGraph implementation

[skakri]

Title:
OpenGraph implementation

Area:
frontend, accessibility, cross-site data sharing

Summary:
It would be nice if sites, that use OpenGraph metadata, could use our provided data, instead of crawling the page in question and collecting arbitrary data (article image, article title, author, etc.)

Description:
Sites that support OpenGraph Protocol (http://ogp.me/), like Facebook and Google+ would benefit from already provided data; that would help those sites 1) categorize that data (entry title, tags), 2) provide correct information, when posting to FB or G+ (title, image), instead of full page title (username | post, for example).

Example - http://skakri.grab.lv/2360053.html (check source; done: profile username, entry image, entry title, publishing date and used tags). Could be implemented also in profile pages - user.domain.tld/profile

Poll #9490 OpenGraph implementation

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 40

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
5 (12.5%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
1 (2.5%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
3 (7.5%)

(I have no opinion)
31 (77.5%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Comments

[pocketmouse]

...I have no idea what you're suggesting. My only guess is that you want to provide better data for external sites, that most people I know block anyway with robots.txt?

[kyrielle]

People using the site for blogging don't necessarily, but I have to agree I don't understand the suggestion. :|

[marahmarie]

Me, neither. I wish we could vote (I have no idea), not (I have no opinion), which is completely inaccurate for me in this case. :)

[matgb]

I am, generally, in favour of supporting open protocals between sites, interoperability is good.

But the page you link doesn't tell me what the point is, only how to do it. How does it benefit me, how does it benefit DW, how does it benefit other sites?

From a quick scan of Wiki articles, it looks like a way of implementing more with sites like Facebook-I have no personal problem with that and think we should allow it for those that want it, but it would need VERY strong privacy options for those that don't want such integration, probably linked to extant opt in/opt outs regarding search presense or similar.

Summary: why should we do this?

[azurelunatic]

It's for labeling the elements of the page according to the protocol, so when interacting with other sites, the other site can try determine what is what on the page based on its markup, in a way that a human would naturally.

If I recall the presentation I attended correctly, it might help somewhat with the problem of search engines indexing various thread views of the comments as if they were entirely separate entities from the main entry.

[matgb]

That on its own would be useful, gets a bit frustrating seeing search results for a comment thread when the content you need is in the post, or multiple results from the same page, etc.

So, if it's doable, then for searchable entries it's a good thing (and you know that's 99.9% of my entries, but others are a bit less keen on being found).

[azurelunatic]

I wonder if any screenreaders will be taking advantage of it?

[deborah]

Is it this thing? If so, I don't see any buzz about it in the accessibility communities and lists, or any evidence that it is being used by accessibility software.

It seems like it's mostly for the benefit of Facebook, right now, right? Our search engines actually taking advantage of it?

I am absolutely not voting down a suggestion I don't exactly understand, but I would see more utility (From my accessibility focused viewpoint, and as a non-Facebook user *g*) in moving towards HTML 5 Section elements and WAI-ARIA roles. Oh, wait, we have that last one already, and it's my bug. :P

[azurelunatic]

Google either already is or will likely be doing so shortly.

*breaks out pom-poms, cheers development*

[montuos]

Oh, is this what's going on when Google+ prettifies the one link it lets you "attach" (for lack of a better word) to a post? Where it knows the right image (if there is one) instead of simply picking the first image listed in a page, and gets the article text instead of the the first crap in the page headers, and so on?

If that's what this is about, then yes, I think it's a lovely idea.

Edit: Abstaining from poll until confirmation whether my understanding is correct.

[matgb]

Agreed, on the occasions when I've had incoming links, things that make it easier for my SN using friends to put up an attractive link are a Good Thing. I know not all users want people linking from off site, and some would rather it never happened, but that's why we have privacy functions.

If a standard is being developed to encourage user-friendly sharing, then it should be something we look at.

(although I barely posted last yyear, one of the few posts I did make got a massive number of readers, many of whom came from incoming links from Facebook and similar, given the nature of that post and the situation at the time, those links were useful to all concerned)