<txp:meta_keywords /> doesn't work

Bongo-man · 2014-04-16 03:36:19

Yesterday I realized the tag <txp:meta_keywords /> doesn’t work in my website pages.

In a template I have got solution changing the meta tag:

to

Furthermore I have the same keyword problem in a template calling the keywords from a ‘form’ by means of this expression:

that calls the keywords from some forms whose name are something like these: ‘keys-directory1’, ‘Keys-directory2’ and so on.
——————————————————

Of course all this expressions worked till some time ago.

My website doctype is:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN”
“http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd”>

Any Idea, in order to find a solution?

Last edited by Bongo-man (2014-04-16 04:47:06)

GugUser · 2014-04-16 12:14:17

For your doctype you have to use <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" />
I don’t see <txp:meta_keywords /> tag in your example (your title says “<txp:meta_keywords /> doesn’t work”).
The sections “directory1” and “directory2” exist?
Are the typographic quotes in your code or only here in the post?

Bongo-man · 2014-04-16 13:46:30

1) Ok, anyway it doesn’t work.

2) There are no examples; I only told that making a certain change in the meta tags of a template, keywords were displayed in the page code. not the same occurred for the pages generated by others templates, both using <txp:meta_keywords /> and <meta name=“keywords” content=”<txp:output_form form=‘keys-<txp:section />’ />” />.

3) Yes these are only some of the section profiting the expression <meta name=“keywords” content=”<txp:output_form form=‘keys-<txp:section />’ />” /> to display the keywords in their index page.

4) …only here in the post.

philwareham · 2014-04-16 16:21:48

I wouldn’t worry about meta keywords, they are obsolete on the modern web.

The only thing I’d think anyone would need use it for nowadays is for you have some sort of meta keyword search mechanism built into your site – search engines such as Google/Bing/Yahoo won’t use meta keyword data in ranking your site (in fact I’ve read that Bing can actually penalise sites for abusing meta keywords).

gaekwad · 2014-04-16 16:38:27

philwareham wrote #280275:

I wouldn’t worry about meta keywords, they are obsolete on the modern web.

With that in mind, is there scope to ~~phase out support for~~ deprecate it and perhaps replace it with something that’s more appropriate for the modern t’internets? Genuine question, not trolling.

Edit: changed my words

Last edited by gaekwad (2014-04-16 16:39:02)

philwareham · 2014-04-16 20:13:18

gaekwad wrote #280276:

With that in mind, is there scope to ~~phase out support for~~ deprecate

All we should do it highlight in the documentation that meta keywords have limited scope. I don’t think there’s a need to deprecate the tag.

The lack of a meta description tag in core is more of a concern to me. I could use that for either head section or in schema.org markup. I guess that’ll happen eventually with custom fields though.

I’d also like some way of parsing Textfilter (Textile, Markdown, whatever Textfilter is installed) on custom field/body/excerpt at tag level instead of using per-article overrides. Is there a way to do that?

Bloke · 2014-04-16 20:33:26

philwareham wrote #280277:

The lack of a meta description tag in core is more of a concern to me.

Slightly OT I suppose, but if meta description is important enough in terms of SEO then we could add it as a first class citizen of the article. But can we foresee that the search engines won’t decide to phase that out too one day, in favour of plain old automated content scraping to build the meta info for search results? Or is that unlikely? Do they trust us to not keyword stuff our meta descriptions? Stuffing article titles is all the rage, after all.

I’d also like some way of parsing Textfilter (Textile, Markdown, whatever Textfilter is installed) on custom field/body/excerpt at tag level instead of using per-article overrides.

The main problem is that if it’s not parsed at save time then it needs to be parsed at runtime, which is processor expensive. If it’s important that custom fields support some form of markup then an extra column or three in the custom field tables I’m (slowly) building could be added and the tags altered so you can choose raw or marked-up content at display time. Discuss pros and cons in a separate thread and we’ll figure something out.

tye · 2014-04-17 02:56:39

Makes sense to make it some kind of meta description tag – can be used to social media open graph as well… if its already there & its just the case of a name change (I know, I know, I sound like a client :)) – then +1 from me

Last edited by tye (2014-04-17 03:04:09)

philwareham · 2014-04-17 07:13:15

Good points about Textfilter, I hadn’t though that through.

I think we should have an article meta description tag, it’s a bit convoluted at the moment to make descriptions (if you use the excerpt field then you have to turn it’s Textfilter off which limits using excerpt in other places).

I don’t think the meta description will be obsoleted any time soon – page scraping just doesn’t work well enough. Even properly marked up schema.org descriptions which I add to pages are ignored by Google (and they were one of the creators of schema).

Eventually I want to make it easier to hide UI in admin side so people that don’t need keywords or description could omit those fields from view.

Gocom · 2014-04-17 07:24:13

philwareham wrote #280277:

I’d also like some way of parsing Textfilter (Textile, Markdown, whatever Textfilter is installed) on custom field/body/excerpt at tag level instead of using per-article overrides. Is there a way to do that?

In short, no. Markup parsing and all formatting must happen when the article is saved.

Bloke wrote #280278:

Discuss pros and cons in a separate thread and we’ll figure something out.

There is no cons in adding Textfilter support for text-type custom fields, but there is nothing but if its not added. You know users will want to use formatting is other textareas too. Some plain-text textareas are pointless.

Single fields and booleans etc. of course do not need Textfilters and their contents must not be processed.

Gocom · 2014-04-17 07:25:51

philwareham wrote #280281:

I think we should have an article meta description tag, it’s a bit convoluted at the moment to make descriptions (if you use the excerpt field then you have to turn it’s Textfilter off which limits using excerpt in other places).

You should just use text type custom field (that renders as a textarea) for a description.

Eventually I want to make it easier to hide UI in admin side so people that don’t need keywords or description could omit those fields from view.

All extra, and future, fields are all hopefully going to be custom fields.

Last edited by Gocom (2014-04-17 07:35:03)

Bongo-man · 2014-04-19 06:19:19

…coming back to my question can anyone tell me if are any script in the block section whose modification can prevent keywords are displayed, or are any similar issue related tu the actual Textpattern release?

Other question: which is the php module linked to the funcion of displaying the keywords; if i know it, i can try to contact my website server-provider in order to get a solution, assuming that there are no installation problems, considering that all this occurs in all my textpattern blogs.

3) The lack of keywords displaying can be linked to an ‘http’ issue on the website server? …my websites share their IPs with many other websites.

Last edited by Bongo-man (2014-04-19 06:24:03)

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#1 2014-04-16 03:36:19