What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 130 Stack Exchange communities.

I had originally asked for ThinkGeek products to be oneboxed and the answer provided made me wonder why support for oneboxing OpenGraph data in the chats does not exist?

At the moment we get YouTube and Amazon oneboxes as well as a handful of others, however the important geek sites like ThinkGeek and GitHub (which both have pretty complete OG data) are left off the onebox list. (These are two examples, more can and should be added of course)

Would it be possible for the chat systems to onebox data from sites that provide complete (or complete enough) OpenGraph metadata?

Please?! (obligatory please)

share|improve this question
2  
Do we really need more stuff oneboxed? Is it that hard to just click a link? –  Richard J. Ross III May 2 '13 at 20:58
4  
Do we really need YouTube oneboxed over GitHub? It's not about being hard to click a link, it's about having the ability to show useful stuff in the chat without forcing people to click links. –  rlemon May 2 '13 at 21:05
1  
@RichardJ.RossIII Yes, yes we need GitHub oneboxed. Also what rlemon said. Showing the starting frame of a web video is not really useful, whereas showing information of a GitHub repository is. –  Octavian Damiean May 2 '13 at 21:07
5  
I'd also like to add that GitHub provides an API. –  Octavian Damiean May 2 '13 at 21:13
1  
@rlemon YouTube is absolutely vital for oneboxing for many other sites in the SE network that aren't programming related. Gaming & DIY are two sites that benefit tremendously from oneboxing, and I'm sure there are many others. –  casperOne May 2 '13 at 21:13
    
@rlemon Also, the same argument can be made for not oneboxing anything (including what you're asking for); "is it too hard to click a link?" That might not be the argument you want to use. –  casperOne May 2 '13 at 21:14
    
@casperOne It wasn't an argument I used up front, and to be frank (you can be sally) I think if the link can be oneboxed it should. The room owners / 10K+ users already have a somewhat handle on keeping rooms free of clutter. Adding a few more sites to the onebox list wouldn't be a nuisance, but that is my opinion so I opened it up to meta :) –  rlemon May 2 '13 at 22:10
4  
So we're really discussing if oneboxing, probably the biggest and most important website for programmers would be a good idea and how vital YouTube it compared to that? What was the website producing most traffic on the SE network again, right SO. –  Octavian Damiean May 2 '13 at 22:17
3  
The fact GitHub isn't one box is annoying. It's probably one of the most linked to websites here, and always having to click a link is annoying. Sometimes, especially when linking to specific code lines or a gist this could be really useful. In general, anything that keeps me in SO chat and does not make me go to an external website is appreciated. –  Benjamin Gruenbaum May 2 '13 at 22:21
1  
As long as it won't be the same horrible oneboxing as it does for github gists I really would like to see this. –  PeeHaa May 2 '13 at 22:34
    
@OctavianDamiean I'm an SO mod, and even I find that attitude elitist. There's currently 100 other sites in the network other than Stack Overflow. Also, this is not an either/or conversation. YouTube is already oneboxed. I was pointing out how important it is to sites that cater to non-programmers. –  casperOne May 3 '13 at 11:59
2  
SO chats are separate from SE chats. And it's not elitist it's just a fact. If there are onebox opportunities that would help the majority of the SE users (which is SO users) then they should be considered heavily. –  rlemon May 3 '13 at 12:13
    
@rlemon You think they're separate because they're on separate sites, but in reality, they all use the same engine, back end infrastructure, etc. They aren't as separate as you think. Oneboxing for any chat site one will make it available to every chat site. –  casperOne May 3 '13 at 13:56
1  
Separate domains and inter-room linkings.. they are pretty well removed. I understand your point here, that a change would effect the entire system, however that change is not to remove any functionality; just make it richer and start supporting the majority of use cases (which are programming and IT related). The fun oneboxes are just for that: fun. Youtube might be useful on other sites, however it cannot be argued that the most used site (SO) still lacks certain oneboxes that would seems to be obvious to have. –  rlemon May 3 '13 at 13:58
2  
Let me make it clear: I'm requesting this not just for GitHub, it is just to make the system more robust in handling onebox capabilities for any given site. GitHub and ThinkGeek are just the two examples i'm running with. –  rlemon May 3 '13 at 14:00

1 Answer 1

up vote 8 down vote accepted

I've built a small C# library designed with this in mind: https://github.com/Zirak/CSOpenGraph

It's mostly complete, but having no knowledge of what Stackoverflow uses internally, I pretty much picked the first Html parser which cropped up; however, with such a small thing, I'm sure it'll be a trivial change. As the README says, I've tested it on all sites supporting OpenGraph mentioned in this post with success.

If anything crops up which fails (when it shouldn't), do raise an issue or notify me in some other way.

share|improve this answer
    
This is so awesome. +1 internet points! –  rlemon Jun 4 '13 at 15:37

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .