Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
SEO Improvements #1183
SEO Improvements #1183
Changes from 5 commits
d064bee
c16edb6
623b59e
cde7cab
7efc80c
562e4ff
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
16x16? do we need more sizes? we need to do this if we understand why do we have them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oops! Looks like I kinda messed up this manual re-add without a quick
git diff
to lean on.I also just found this:
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/9290858?hl=en
Seems like the original change that removed them was made based on this info, which provides guidelines to have one favicon at 48x48 (or a larger multiple of that) and explicitly says not to provide a 16x16 icon.
It also says to use the
rel='shortcut icon
bit removed from before, so I'll re-add that.I'll adapt the PR to this new info.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yep, that link makes sense, but I would not do SEO in isolation from other needs. meta tags exist not only for Google search page, also link sharing, browsers, embeds, etc, etc - that's why reviewing meta tags ticket ticket is relevant to this one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You're right, and the article itself says that "penalized" sites weren't downranked, simply not allowed to use their custom 16x16 icon.
This should mean that despite Google ignoring it and downscaling a larger image, having the 16x16 (and any other sizes) shouldn't cause any harm. I'll keep the old entries exactly how they are and re-add
shortcut
to the.ico
entry as it seems like the "best" icon given it's currently the primary one and has transparency.Making these favicons absolute is probably premature as well, since favicons work now. I now think these favicons should just be reverted to their original state, which I'll do next commit.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@rogermparent my only point is that this ticket + meta tags one requires a bit of research :) what are the best practices now? what images and for what should we include, etc, etc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I get what you mean. I generally use Google Lighthouse as the source of truth when if comes to SEO because SEO is more or less for Google. Since Lighthouse doesn't flag having all our original icon sizes as a problem, I think it's best for this PR to keep them to remove later.
Since they were removed in the first commit from @fabiosantoscode, I'll tag him to ask the reason.
I think not removing any is the best for this PR so it can go through easier and fix the share card image issue, which this PR appears to do now from my tests of a new build on it with both the Facebook debugger and another at http://debug.iframely.com for good measure.
The opengraph spec shows that they expect urls to be absolute instead of root-relative, which is where I believe the issue with share card images comes from.