[Mediawiki-l] Why Facebook and others can't see a wiki's most important image

Daniel Friesen lists at nadir-seen-fire.com
Sun Jul 24 07:04:46 UTC 2011

Because there is no good reason for Facebook to render css and try to
extract background images which are likely to be style...
Facebook DOES have a microformat, Open Graph.


~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://daniel.friesen.name]

On 11-07-23 10:43 PM, alicatux wrote:
> logos are content, not style so we should use img
> the only way to fix it in mediawiki probably is to add some kind of
> microformat to the logo
> but still I doubt facebook whether will process that microformat
> How is this not a facebook bug?
> On 24 July 2011 17:15, Daniel Friesen <lists at nadir-seen-fire.com> wrote:
>> On 11-07-23 09:21 PM, K. Peachey wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 2:17 PM,  <jidanni at jidanni.org> wrote:
>>>> Ha Ha, Ha Ha, told you so *for years*. Now when anybody quotes a
>>>> MediaWiki article on Facebook, there is a 95% chance it will look bad...
>>>> serves you all right! Plus (Google+? Dare not also test it there to see
>>>> what happens), it is NOT a Facebook bug. Ho Ho Ho. Muhahaha.
>>> How is this not a facebook bug? It doesn't scan the page properly for
>>> a list of possible images to choose from?
>> Facebook scans the <img> tags on a page for images that are at least
>> 50x50px with a max aspect ratio of 3:1.
>> When you try to share a url for a Wikipedia article with a good set of
>> images you'll get a selection of images to pick from. Of course an
>> article without any images won't have any to pick from and FB will just
>> use no image. It does trip up on some of the templates the Wikipedia
>> community uses, some of which embed some icons at sizes slightly larger
>> than 50x50px causing FB to include those.
>> The logo is an embedded background-image so it doesn't show up in the scan.
>> jidanni seams to have the opinion that the logo of a wiki is so
>> important that a user with a text browser that can't see images would
>> like to see something like "[site logo here]" to indicate that the site
>> has a logo they can't even see.
>> jidanni isn't particularly good at calmly presenting a problem in a way
>> that would get people to see what pieces are broken and get people to
>> chime in on ways to fix them. Rather he seams to think that insulting
>> the people he's trying to get to change something will help, rather than
>> cause them to simply dismiss him as a jackass and miss the few valid
>> points of his cause counterproductively making it even less likely what
>> he's trying to get changed will be changed.
>> He might also want to take a look at the flash based sites out there
>> before he tries to argue that MW which is built with a number of
>> features to permit accessibility for screen readers and text browsers
>> was built by people with no knowledge of how screen readers and search
>> engines work.
>> Looking over things. Our powered by icons and whatnot make use of <img>
>> tags. Sadly while the background-image trick could hide them I don't
>> believe it would work since that'll break the accessibility there since
>> the background-image trick can't replicate the alt text, least not
>> without having negative quirks while images are still loading. Screen
>> reader and search engine wise the <img> would be correct here.
>> The logo uses a background-image. It's not a static pre-bundled image
>> like the powered by icons. In this case, I believe that the function of
>> using the background-image rather than an <img> with an alt or an empty
>> alt="" is to prevent overly large logos (we don't have a standard logo
>> size, and the sizes that skins use actually vary) from overflowing out
>> of the logo area and obscuring the page content.
>> --
>> ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://daniel.friesen.name]
>> _______________________________________________
>> MediaWiki-l mailing list
>> MediaWiki-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
> _______________________________________________
> MediaWiki-l mailing list
> MediaWiki-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l

~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://daniel.friesen.name]

More information about the MediaWiki-l mailing list