Feature request in Alloy for the future

Hi fellow Rapidweavers,
hi @elixirgraphics,

right now I am working on my website in regards of SEO. For SEO it would be good to have the chance to add to the post a description.
Is there a chance that it can be added already?
If not, is there a chance to have that in a future update?

Each individual post already gets Open Graph and Twitter meta data, which does include descriptions. Beyond that what meta data are you specifically interested in?

A description of the specific post. The open graph or twitter graph are the description of the website.

The OG and Twitter meta data is a description of your post on those individual pages, as it is meant to be. Try sharing an individual post’s page URL on Twitter, and you’ll see what I mean.

1 Like

Hi @elixirgraphics,

it is correct for social media, they are using the twitter and open graph meta.

I am talking about the description in concern of search engine optimization.
This description for example can be manipulated with a respective description for example in WordPress and the seo tools are asking for it. If there is not such a meta description then Google tries to provide one from the context it identifies.
I just checked one of my blog posts and in the SERP Google displays as rich snippet the first lines of the article.
If this could be influenced giving a unique meta description, would be very valuable in terms of search engine optimization.
To give you an idea what I try to explain, maybe having a look at GoogleSERP Snippet Optimization Tool helps.
Is it possible to put it in the YAML header from where Goolge could get the meta description and hopefully use it?

The Front Matter is not configured to accept anything like that at this time. The YAML section of posts isn’t a catch all. Alloy is only going to recognize what it is programmed to recognize in the Front Matter section.

That said though – creating good content is what is most important for SEO. In this case you mention…

This is good. It is doing what it should. Google cares more about the content on your page than it does about a meta tag description. I worked previously at a daily metro newspaper doing design and copyediting. When you’re writing an article good journalism tells us that the lead to the story, or blog post in this case, should let us know what the article is about. This is how Google sees it, too. Keep writing that good content and Google will pick up on it! :slight_smile:

Hi @elixirgraphics,

thanks a lot for clearing that issue with me.

Gives me enough information as to ignore that part of the seo tool that is complaining about it - and I simply can skip that part.

Means less work for me :slight_smile:

It isn’t that a meta tag isn’t helpful, but the article should be the most important part. I have taken note of your request to explore for the future, but you should be ok for now with just creating killer content.

Another feature request: Subfolders for blog posts.

Right now, I’ve got all my blog posts in the same folder. When it gets past 50 or so blog posts in the same folder, it’s going to get crowded even though the files are ordered by date.

Since I can specify the path to each blog post’s accompanying graphic (e.g., blogPix/2018-11), I can keep the pix organized more easily. I’d like to be able to do the same with the blog posts.

Hey there @Noah — that is a much more complex request than it might sound. It isn’t a feature that would impact a wide enough group to warrant the excess of work, etc it would entail. That said — with the upcoming major update I don’t think you’ll really need such a feature.

Oh, I don’t doubt that it would be a little complicated. But if you want feature requests, that’s one of mine.

I’m not sure what your major update will include, but I was thinking about how I would implement such a feature in the stack as it stands. I would collect the parent folder as one parameter, then the subfolder path as another parameter, validate both parameters to ensure that they conformed to the expected syntax, concatenate them into a single path string, do a final validation step on the path string, and then either accept it or display an error message. Since I don’t know the internals of your stack, I can’t know for sure if that method would even be possible, but it’s how I might try to solve such a problem. Of course, there would need to be a way to separate the blog posts themselves between the different subfolder paths. That’s probably the trickiest part.

Will try my best in doing so. Thanks for your help @elixirgraphics and taking my request into consideration. Seems like Christmas is coming closer :slight_smile:

Sounds like you’re on your way to writing your own stack there! :wink:

In all seriousness, it is much more complicated than that. It just isn’t something that I will likely add to Alloy. It makes a simple system much more complex than I wish it to be.

Hi Adam,

Not sure if this is the right topic, but here goes:

  • I’d love an option in Alloy Editor that removes any form of user authentication for the site owner. “Say whut…?” I hear you say… but let me explain.

I’d love to be able to stick the Alloy Editor behind a Sitelok user authentication (or one of Joe’s or Jannis’ authentication stacks… but I prefer Sitelok). Right now, that means the user has to log in twice: once in Sitelok and once more in Alloy Editor.

I think Sitelok (or Page Safe or UserAccess) offer a safe enough barrier against unwanted individuals.

Can that be done for the next version of Alloy?


This has been touched on before. I won’t be adding such a feature. Sorry.