It’s true that other social sharing sites use a square image, but I think this works in most situations.
It would also be great if the og:description and og:title tags could be specific to the actual page, not just generic as they are now. In fact, this error is an even bigger obstacle to sharing links on social platforms.
Thanks for the feedback, and for the nice mockup! As I don’t use social media, I have to rely on reports from others about this. We did spend quite a bit of time getting the social media stuff working, but clearly there is much room for improvement.
@Aminah, can I get you to follow up on this and create an appropriate issue? We should have a checklist for what should show up on each sharing site. This should include Discourse as well as FB, Twitter, etc.
“Social media” might not be the best term. More like link sharing. Even messaging aps like WhatsApp will do a link preview. I’m sure others know more, but as I understand it there are generic meta og tags that can be assigned as well as tags for specific platforms. I think it makes sense to get the generic ones set and then only if it doesn’t work on a specific platform investigate further.
In my experience the things that matter are the image, title, and description. Some sites will pull description text from the body of the page. If at all possible I think the nice descriptions SC has for each sutta are perfect for that tag.
I think the image could be the same for all. If you really, really wanted to be fancy you could have a different one for each nikaya, but that’s not necessary.
In writing up the issue, I noticed it’s actually connected with the HTML structure update. For the moment I’ve kept them as two separate issues (also in view of the new image aspect), but really, to me this mostly seems to belong to #1161 (which I’ll add in my notes to the current round of legacy file play).
Bonus aside: when looking up whatever, in God’s great kingdom, an open graph might be I came across this fun article:
Thanks for highlighting! Interesting to know that the metadata works on… is that Facebook? I don’t use those kinds of services, so have no clue, but I had noticed that the title info isn’t given on D&D (which was part of the original spec). Eg.
Anyway, great that it does work elsewhere in Internetland.
