Textpattern CMS support forum
You are not logged in. Register | Login | Help
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
rah_metas // new 1.x-versions of SEO/redirecting/automatic meta-tools
rah_metas
Outputs simple meta-information, prevents double content and creates metadescriptions automatically.
- Outputs automatic metadescriptions from article’s body, excerpt or custom field.
- Limits and customizes the automatic metadescription by word or character limit, strips all XHTML and invalid characters.
- Redirects messy urls to clean ones, if cleans are in use. In example,
?id=xxand?s=xxwould be redirect to the correct place, preventing possible double content. - Outputs other useful meta as author, description and language.
PS. Old topic was there but as it was on wrong forum section for ages and old post were about old versions that were quite different from the 1.0-series, so I decided to move it here, if it’s okay, as this is the plugin author support section.
Last edited by Gocom (2008-11-12 05:26:21)
Offline
Re: rah_metas // new 1.x-versions of SEO/redirecting/automatic meta-tools
Just on time… I was about to post on the old thread to ask about the new attributes.
As a user (and fan) of this plugin, thanks! I will try it ASAP.
In the meanwhile, I’ve read the first post and I have a few questions:
On description and keywords explanations, you wrote use_default_description and use_default_keywords. Didn’t you wanted to mean description_replacement and keyword_replacement?
On description_from:
If empty, then automatic description isn’t used.
I’m not sure I get it. What is used if automatic description isn’t used? description attribute content?
On prefercontent
Automatic description prefers a filled field over an empty one.
Does this apply also to an empty custom field? I mean… if attribute description_from is set to use a custom field, and that custom field is left empty, does rah_metas use automatic description generated from body/excerpt?
Thanks, Gocom!
Offline
Re: rah_metas // new 1.x-versions of SEO/redirecting/automatic meta-tools
On description and keywords explanations, you wrote use_default_description and use_default_keywords. Didn’t you wanted to mean description_replacement and keyword_replacement?
Yeah, you are right, maniqui. There is typo, as I replaced those two with xxxx_replacement as you said. There were in first place use_default_description and the other, but I thought that they were too long as attributes. Hmph, but seems that I forgot to replace them in the docs fully. :)
Does this apply also to an empty custom field? I mean… if attribute description_from is set to use a custom field, and that custom field is left empty, does rah_metas use automatic description generated from body/excerpt?
No, as I thought that the user that uses custom field won’t want to use the full automatic method. They think that is bad for SEO, so then there is no description if the field is empty and description_replacement isn’t used :)
I’m not sure I get it. What is used if automatic description isn’t used? description attribute content?
Nothing, then it doesn’t make the automatic description. Some ppl don’t want to use description, instead only the redirection functions that 1.x-series include – that will prevent possible double content :)
And no problems maniqui :) I will fix those typos in docs and first post ASAP.
Offline
Re: rah_metas // new 1.x-versions of SEO/redirecting/automatic meta-tools
Gocom wrote:
No, as I thought that the user that uses custom field won’t want to use the full automatic method. They think that is bad for SEO, so then there is no description if the field is empty and
description_replacementisn’t used :)
Yes, I remember when zero and Bloke (if I’m not wrong) brought this topic about meta description tag being bad for SEO if it just duplicates a chunk of content on body. Although I haven’t done proper research nor have read anything about this being an issue, I’m not sure I agree. Right now, crawlers knows were to find some description (that is, on the <meta description>) about the page, but can’t evaluate/find which chunk of content from <body> is the proper one for description.
But, Gocom, what about us (me :D) who are on the other shore?
When creating an article in “lazy mode”, I would like to use rah_metas automatic description created from body/excerpt. But then, if I feel like filling in the proper custom field, replace automatic description with custom field description.
In other words, use body/excerpt automatic description, unless the custom field has been filled in. In that case, use the custom field content.
Am I missing something? Is it currently possible with rah_metas attributes?
Some ppl don’t want to use
description, instead only the redirection functions that 1.x-series include – that will prevent possible double content :)
Ah, ok, I get it.
Offline
Re: rah_metas // new 1.x-versions of SEO/redirecting/automatic meta-tools
New version 1.0.2 published. See first post :)
maniqui wrote:
But, Gocom, what about us (me :D) who are on the other shore? When creating an article in “lazy mode”, I would like to use rah_metas automatic description created from body/excerpt. But then, if I feel like filling in the proper custom field, replace automatic description with custom field description.
Hehe, then I possibly made our day (your :D) – even better atleast. Now prefercontent works also with custom fields. If custom field is empty then it tries to find proper field that is filled, making “lazy mode” wanters happy :)
Offline
Re: rah_metas // new 1.x-versions of SEO/redirecting/automatic meta-tools
Many thanks, Gocom!
I will try it tonight.
Offline
Re: rah_metas // new 1.x-versions of SEO/redirecting/automatic meta-tools
Would it be possible in a future version (if you think it worthwhile). To have a combined ‘keywords’ option.
Set keywords in the tag <txp:rah_metas keywords=“blah, blah1” … /> and if I also input in the Adv Options Keywords field… blah2, blah3
I get <meta name=“keywords” content=“blah, blah1, blah2, blah3” />
but if I’m in ‘lazy mode’ I’m guaranteed to get <meta name=“keywords” content=“blah, blah1” />
This would mean I can set keywords I always want for the Page/Form and add others in Adv Options specific to the article.
It might also be useful for Descriptions
Thanks Geoff
Last edited by geoff777 (2008-06-22 11:03:38)
There are 10 types of people in the world: those who understand binary, and those who don’t.
Offline
#8 2008-07-06 17:59:41
- FireFusion
- Member
- Registered: 2005-05-10
- Posts: 698
Re: rah_metas // new 1.x-versions of SEO/redirecting/automatic meta-tools
How do I just descriptions to show up on sections lists where i’m only displaying a sticky article?
PS. Great Plugin!
Last edited by FireFusion (2008-07-06 18:00:08)
Offline
Re: rah_metas // new 1.x-versions of SEO/redirecting/automatic meta-tools
FireFusion wrote:
How do I just descriptions to show up on sections lists where i’m only displaying a sticky article?
Sorry, but I don’t undestand your question :P If I translated that somewhat right (might not), then could it be: description-attribute, maybe compined with couple different rah_metas-tags, wrapped around with txp:if_section – ‘cause a sticky ain’t an individual article.
Last edited by Gocom (2008-07-06 18:11:34)
Offline
#10 2008-08-03 08:35:46
- ian_ep
- Member
- Registered: 2004-02-29
- Posts: 25
Re: rah_metas // new 1.x-versions of SEO/redirecting/automatic meta-tools
I seem to be experiencing a little bug with this plugin:
The text of all my meta descriptions is getting the last word truncated and replaced by the ellipsis. It doesn’t matter what I specify in number of chars or words, the last word just gets chopped off!
Also, I can’t seem to get ‘words’ and/or ‘maxchars’ to allow anything over 25 words, whatever I specify.
I’m, of course, using the latest version of Txp and rah_metas.
Offline
Re: rah_metas // new 1.x-versions of SEO/redirecting/automatic meta-tools
ian_ep wrote:
the last word just gets chopped off
Yep that happens. Fixed in rah_metas 1.0.3, “The unchopping slayer biker”:
Also, I can’t seem to get ‘words’ and/or ‘maxchars’ to allow anything over 25 words, whatever I specify.
That doesn’t happen. But if you are using custom field for description, ofcourse it can output only 255 character and why? Because custom fields are in the DB are limited to 255 chars. It’s textpattern’s basic feature and not going anywhere ;)
To increase the limit, you must specify both values.
In example, <txp:rah_metas words="200000" maxchars="200000" /> will output:
<meta name="description" content="Chewing gum is good for teeth, but when it is used for a web software developing, then are really starting to go to the forest. Nice examples are those silly little bastards called “implementing random tools together”. It is nice, but when you don’t know what you are doing, then ain’t so. Nicest ones are real page caching system, plus another login and password protect system. In example these could be build for some CMS, in example Textpattern that we love to use. The software could be very secure at itself, but when we add two independed big plugin to the stable core, then it might feel much more insecure. Insecure, how so? Well, what does caching do? Yep, it caches, in example your login information and login forms. What? Yeah, it’s nice how the banned user is still able to see information from the webpage, he does have the content…" />I’m, of course, using the latest version of Txp and rah_metas.
Not anymore, there is the new 1.0.3 :)
Last edited by Gocom (2008-09-26 20:32:34)
Offline
#12 2008-08-03 14:44:05
- ian_ep
- Member
- Registered: 2004-02-29
- Posts: 25
Re: rah_metas // new 1.x-versions of SEO/redirecting/automatic meta-tools
Yep that happens. Fixed in rah_metas 1.0.3
Great, thanks! Now working perfectly.
it can output only 255 character …
I know about the 255 character limit of custom fields, but what I was seeing was from the excerpt. But it seem I was only seeing a problem with my arithmetic skills! My excerpts just happen to be all almost exactly 25 chars! ;-) IOW that too is working fine.
Thanks again for the quick fix.
IanOffline