I'm trying to wrap my head around designing a simple Wiki style app. In a traditional wiki, say wikipedia, are 'links' referenced in any kind of backend/complex way? Ie HABTM... or are links simply links?
I'm trying to decide myself what to do, a bit different but similar. I have pages written by individuals which they can attribute to themselves or credit a.. say a famous author. Should I save this attribution as merely a tag? The tag would create a reference to the famous person, which may or may not exist, but could also be created, but nothing more than a link. OR, do I dive deep and create a real data relationship (HABTM) ?
Thoughts?
A SQL-style Has And Belongs To Many mapping table is never necessary in Mongo.
If you'd like to provide, for example, a "what links here" view for a page, then I would do something like this for each page in your Wiki. I'll give an example of a page about pandas:
{
_id: "Panda",
text: "Page's contents go here",
links: ["Raccoon", "Weasel"]
}
You're using the page's title as its _id. To find titles of pages that link to "Raccoon", you can query like:
db.pages.find({"links": "Raccoon"})
Obviously, you should make an index on "links".
Related
Google displays my website’s page title differently to how it is meant to be.
The page title should be:
Graphic Designer Brighton and Lewes | Lewis Wallis Graphic Design
It displays fine in Bing, Yahoo and on my actual website.
However, Google displays it differently:
Lewis Wallis Graphic Design: Graphic Designer Brighton and Lewes
This is annoying as I want my keywords "graphic designer brighton" to go before my name.
I am using the Yoast SEO plugin and my only suspicion is that there might be a conflict between that and my theme, Workality.
Has anyone got any suggestions as to why this might be happening?
Google Search may change webpage titles they show in the result page (since 2012-01):
We use many signals to decide which title to show to users, primarily the <title> tag if the webmaster specified one. But for some pages, a single title might not be the best one to show for all queries, and so we have algorithms that generate alternative titles to make it easier for our users to recognize relevant pages.
See also the documentation at http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35624:
Google's generation of page titles and descriptions (or "snippets") is completely automated and takes into account both the content of a page as well as references to it that appear on the web. The goal of the snippet and title is to best represent and describe each result and explain how it relates to the user's query.
[…]
While we can't manually change titles or snippets for individual sites, we're always working to make them as relevant as possible.
In my answer on Webmasters SE I linked to questions from people having the same issue.
Is is possible that you changed the title, or installed the plugin, and Google hasn't picked up the changes yet?
It can take a few weeks for Google to pick up changes to your site, depending on how often it spiders it. The HTML looks fine so I can only think that Google hasn't got round to picking up the changes yet.
Sorry for being a total rookie.
I am trying to help my professor implement this advice:
Either as a courtesy to Forbes or a favor to yourself, you may want to include the rel="canonical" link element on your cross-posts. To do this, on the content you want to take the backseat in search engines, you add in the head of the page. The URL should be for the content you want to be favored by search engines. Otherwise, search engines see duplicate content, grow confused, and then get upset. You can read more about the canonical tag here: http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/canonical-link-tag/. Have a great day!
The problem is I am having trouble figuring out how to edit the head element on a post-by-post basis. We are currently on a super old blogging platform (Movable Type 3.2 from 2005), so maybe it is not possible. But I'd like to know if that is likely the reason, so I'm not missing out on a workaround.
If anyone could point me in the right direction, I would greatly appreciate it!
Without knowing much about your installation, I'll give a general description, and hopefully it matches what you see and helps.
In Movable Type, each blog has a "Design" section where you can see and edit the templates for the blog. On this page, the templates that are published once are listed under "Index Templates," and the templates published multiple times, once per entry, per category, etc., are listed under "Archive Templates."
There probably is an archive template called "Entry" (could be renamed) publishing to a path like category/sub-category/entry-basename.php. This is the main template that publishes each entry. Click on this to open the template editor.
This template could be an entire HTML document, or it might have "includes" that look like <MTInclude module=""> or <$mt:Include module=""$> (MT supports varying tag styles.).
You may find there is an included module that contains the <head> content, or it might just be right in that template. To "follow" the includes and see those templates, there should be links on the side of the included templates.
Once you find the <head> content, you can add a canonical link tag like this:
<mt:IfArchiveType type="Individual">
<mt:If tag="EntryPermalink">
<link rel="canonical" href="<$mt:EntryPermalink$>" />
</mt:If>
</mt:IfArchiveType>
Depending on your needs, you might want to customize this to output a specific URL structure for other types of content, like category listings. The above will just take care of telling search engines the preferred URL for each entry.
#Charlie: may be I'm missing something, but your solution basically places a canonical link on each entry to… itself, which is a no-no for search engines (the link should point to another page that's considered the canonical one).
#user2359284 you need a way to define the canonical entry for those which need this link. As Shmuel suggested, either reuse an unused field or a custom field plugin. Then you simply add that link in the header in the proper archive template that outputs your notes. In the hypothesis that the Entry template includes the same header as other templates, and, say, you're using the Keywords field to set the URL, then the following code should work (the mt:IfArchiveType test simply ensures it's output in the proper context, which you don't need if your Entry template has its own code for the header):
<mt:IfArchiveType type="Individual">
<link rel="canonical" href="<$mt:EntryKeywords$>" />
</mt:IfArchiveType>
I'm trying to do something usually simple with SQL (with foreign key in the same table for example) (it may be as easy with MongoDB, I just don't know yet) which is to build a recursive data structure.
For this example, I'll talk about Pages in a Website. I'd like to make a multiple level page structure. So there could be:
Home
Our Products
Product 1
Product 2
About us
Where are we?
Contact us
Let's say pages would have a title and a content.
I need to know what's the best way to do this, and also how I could build a sitemap based on that data structure (page that shows every page from every level).
I'm building a node.js app with MongoDB for this case.
EDIT: Wouldn't it work by simply referencing a parent page in each page? Pages would be like { title: 'test', content: 'hello world', parentPage: ObjectID(parent page) }
Thanks for the help!
Personally I would implement a materialised paths structure here, it is very easy to update and query using prefixed none case insensitive regexs (which means it will use an index), so an example would look like:
{_id: {}, path: 'about_us/where_are_we'}
This also, as you can see, allows for SEO friendly URLs to hit directly on this tree giving you maximum power. This is particulary helpful in help systems where you like to display a URL like:
/help/how-to-use-my-site
Since how-to-use-my-site can hit directly on the path or even futher you can house two fields and hit directly on the full text like:
{_id: {}, path: 'about_us/where_are_we', normalised_url: 'where_are_we'}
Of course as the previous answer said you have to know how you wish to access you content but materialised paths are a good start in my opinion.
You can read more on tree structures in Mongo here: http://www.mongodb.org/display/DOCS/Trees+in+MongoDB
You will need to know how you want to access to your data.
The last time I was using a tree structure I implemented this (I took inspiration from various sources) in Ruby, it stores an _id path and the complete uri (slugified page titles), it is a pain to handle structures like this.
On the other side, you can create a collection documents (roots) and embedded documents (branches and leaves). It is more simple to handle but you will have to get the whole tree when querying, and you can query the inner documents only if you know how deep it is.
From my past experiences all the work to support a tree structure is not worth the candle (unless it is a requirement), most users will create a loose structure based more on tags than fixed categories.
It is a question about django that has found absolutely no answer for me.
Let's suppose I have a site where I display two blocks in the sidebar :
A list of the last users who've logged in
A list of the last published blog articles
Let's say that these blocks are to be displayed on 80% of the website urls and presented using template files.
The data for these blocks is generated by code (obviously), bt not by url views.
Well, how to do such a thing ?
You might want to take a look at custom template tags.
Edit: more specifically, look at inclusion template tags.
I'm maintaining an existing website that wants a site search. I implemented the search using the YAHOO API. The problem is that the API is returning irrelevant results. For example, there is a sidebar with a list of places and if a user searches for "New York" the top results will be for pages that do not have "New York" in the main content section. I have tried adding Yahoo's class="robots-nocontent" to the sidebar however that was two weeks ago and there has been no update.
I also tried out Google's Search API but am having the same problem.
This site has mostly static content and about 50 pages total so it is very small.
How can I implement a simple search that only searches the main content portions of the page?
At the risk of sounding completely self-promoting as well as pushing yet another API on you, I wrote a blog post about implementing Bing for your site using jQuery.
The advantage in using the jQuery approach is that you can tune the results quite specifically based on filters passed to the API and playing around with the JSON (or XML / SOAP if you prefer) result Bing returns, as well as having the ability to be more selective about what data you actually have jQuery display.
The other thing you should probably be aware of is how to effectively use #rel attributes on your content (esp. links) so that search engines are aware of what the relationship is between the actual content they're crawling and the destination content it links to.
First, post a link to your website... we can probably help you more if we can see the problem.
It sound like you're doing it wrong. Google Search should work on your website, unless your content is hidden behind javascript or forms or something, or your site isn't properly interlinked. Google solved crawling static pages, so if that's what you have, it will work.
So, tell me... does your site say New York anywhere? If it does, have a look at the page and see how the word is used... maybe your site isn't as static as you think. Also, are people really going to search your site for New York? Why don't you input some search terms that are likely on your site.
Another thing to consider is if your site is really just 50 pages, is it really realistic that people will want to search it? Maybe you don't need search... maybe you just need like a commonly used link section.
The BOSS Site Search Widget is pretty slick.
I use the bookmarklet thing but set as my "home" page in my browser. So whatever site I'm on I can hit my "home" button (which I never used anyway) and it pops up that handy site search thing.