page-summary-formats: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
AndyMabbett (talk | contribs) (Examples) |
(rescoped page to a generic page-summary-formats page and documented pre-existing meta description page summary format and flaws in both pre-existing formats) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<h1>Page Summary Formats</h1> | |||
==Documentation== | This page describes existing formats that enable an author to publish a summary description for a page. Whether or not this is worthy of doing research (e.g. [[page-summary-examples]], [[page-summary-brainstorming]]) for a microformat is open to debate. Nonetheless, it doesn't hurt to at least have a place to document existing formats. | ||
== meta description == | |||
HTML4.01 provides meta description as an example in [http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/appendix/notes.html Appendix B: Performance, Implementation, and Design Notes] of the [http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/ HTML 4.01 spec]. E.g. | |||
<code><nowiki><META name="description" content="Idyllic European vacations"></nowiki></code> | |||
===Product Support=== | |||
Google search results display the value of the meta description element for a page when that page is listed in Google search results. | |||
===Flaws=== | |||
* '''Invisible.''' meta description is invisible metadata on the page and therefore violates microformats principles. | |||
* '''Depends on <code>head</code> element.''' This summary format depends on the author having access to the head element which in many (most?) web authoring/publishing scenarios the content author has no access. | |||
== microsummary == | |||
Mozilla has introduced a proprietary format called "microsummary", which is used in Firefox 2.0's support for bookmarks. | |||
===Documentation=== | |||
* http://wiki.mozilla.org/Microsummaries | * http://wiki.mozilla.org/Microsummaries | ||
==Code== | ===Code=== | ||
* WP-Microsummary plugin for WordPress: http://www.xs4all.nl/~jlpoutre/BoT/WP/microsummary/ | * WP-Microsummary plugin for WordPress: http://www.xs4all.nl/~jlpoutre/BoT/WP/microsummary/ | ||
==Examples of discussion== | ===Examples of discussion=== | ||
* George Hotelling: http://george.hotelling.net/90percent/geekery/firefox_2s_great_new_feature_with_a_horrible_ui.php | * George Hotelling: http://george.hotelling.net/90percent/geekery/firefox_2s_great_new_feature_with_a_horrible_ui.php | ||
==Firefox extension== | ===Firefox extension=== | ||
* [http://www.melez.com/mykzilla/2006/10/improving-microsummary-discoverability.html Microsummary Buddy] | * [http://www.melez.com/mykzilla/2006/10/improving-microsummary-discoverability.html Microsummary Buddy] | ||
==Examples== | ===Examples=== | ||
*West Midland Bird Club | *West Midland Bird Club | ||
**[http://www.westmidlandbirdclub.com/new.htm What's New] | **[http://www.westmidlandbirdclub.com/new.htm What's New] | ||
**[http://www.westmidlandbirdclub.com/ladywalk/latest.htm Ladywalk News] | **[http://www.westmidlandbirdclub.com/ladywalk/latest.htm Ladywalk News] | ||
===Flaws=== | |||
* '''Invisible.''' Though different from meta description in that the <code>link</code> tag is used to relate to a summary at another URL - this doesn't actual markup the summary content itself. Since the content is not visible on the page itself, an author could easily change the page content without noticing or even knowing to bother to change the referenced "summary" page/resource. Thus this method has all the same flaws of typical invisible metadata publishing, which is that overtime it rots, becomes out of date, unreliable and untrustworthy in general. | |||
* '''Depends on <code>head</code> element.''' This summary format depends on the author having access to the head element which in many (most?) web authoring/publishing scenarios the content author has no access. | |||
Revision as of 00:28, 3 November 2006
Page Summary Formats
This page describes existing formats that enable an author to publish a summary description for a page. Whether or not this is worthy of doing research (e.g. page-summary-examples, page-summary-brainstorming) for a microformat is open to debate. Nonetheless, it doesn't hurt to at least have a place to document existing formats.
meta description
HTML4.01 provides meta description as an example in Appendix B: Performance, Implementation, and Design Notes of the HTML 4.01 spec. E.g.
<META name="description" content="Idyllic European vacations">
Product Support
Google search results display the value of the meta description element for a page when that page is listed in Google search results.
Flaws
- Invisible. meta description is invisible metadata on the page and therefore violates microformats principles.
- Depends on
headelement. This summary format depends on the author having access to the head element which in many (most?) web authoring/publishing scenarios the content author has no access.
microsummary
Mozilla has introduced a proprietary format called "microsummary", which is used in Firefox 2.0's support for bookmarks.
Documentation
Code
- WP-Microsummary plugin for WordPress: http://www.xs4all.nl/~jlpoutre/BoT/WP/microsummary/
Examples of discussion
- George Hotelling: http://george.hotelling.net/90percent/geekery/firefox_2s_great_new_feature_with_a_horrible_ui.php
Firefox extension
Examples
- West Midland Bird Club
Flaws
- Invisible. Though different from meta description in that the
linktag is used to relate to a summary at another URL - this doesn't actual markup the summary content itself. Since the content is not visible on the page itself, an author could easily change the page content without noticing or even knowing to bother to change the referenced "summary" page/resource. Thus this method has all the same flaws of typical invisible metadata publishing, which is that overtime it rots, becomes out of date, unreliable and untrustworthy in general.
- Depends on
headelement. This summary format depends on the author having access to the head element which in many (most?) web authoring/publishing scenarios the content author has no access.