They seem to have good open graph meta tagging, but literally every page on the site has the same value in the <title> tag. As a result, every page in their search index shows up as the same title.
:shrug:
The conditional logic to try and give sensible titles to things in the index could become a :rabbit: :hole: . But, we will probably have to draw a line somewhere, and if it gets bad, tell people to make the damn websites work, to quote the GSA Administrator.
Process checklist
- [ ] Has a clear story statement
- [ ] Can reasonably be done in a few days (otherwise, split this up!)
- [ ] Shepherds have been identified
- [ ] UX youexes all the things
- [ ] Design designs all the things
- [ ] Engineering engineers all the things
- [ ] Meets acceptance criteria
- [ ] Meets [QASP conditions](https://derisking-guide.18f.gov/qasp/)
- [ ] Presented in a review
- [ ] Includes screenshots or references to artifacts
- [ ] Tagged with the sprint where it was finished
- [ ] Archived
### If there's UI...
- [ ] Screen reader - Listen to the experience with a screen reader extension, ensure the information presented in order
- [ ] Keyboard navigation - Run through acceptance criteria with keyboard tabs, ensure it works.
- [ ] Text scaling - Adjust viewport to 1280 pixels wide and zoom to 200%, ensure everything renders as expected. Document 400% zoom issues with USWDS if appropriate.
At a glance
In order to navigate results sensibly as a user I want titles of search links to make sense.
Acceptance Criteria
We use DRY behavior-driven development wherever possible.
Shepherd
Background
The Surface Transportation Board (stb.gov) has the same
<title>tag for every page in their site.https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6535405/what-is-the-attribute-property-ogtitle-inside-meta-tag
They seem to have good open graph meta tagging, but literally every page on the site has the same value in the
<title>tag. As a result, every page in their search index shows up as the same title.:shrug:
The conditional logic to try and give sensible titles to things in the index could become a :rabbit: :hole: . But, we will probably have to draw a line somewhere, and if it gets bad, tell people to make the damn websites work, to quote the GSA Administrator.
Security Considerations
Required per CM-4.
None.
Process checklist
- [ ] Has a clear story statement - [ ] Can reasonably be done in a few days (otherwise, split this up!) - [ ] Shepherds have been identified - [ ] UX youexes all the things - [ ] Design designs all the things - [ ] Engineering engineers all the things - [ ] Meets acceptance criteria - [ ] Meets [QASP conditions](https://derisking-guide.18f.gov/qasp/) - [ ] Presented in a review - [ ] Includes screenshots or references to artifacts - [ ] Tagged with the sprint where it was finished - [ ] Archived ### If there's UI... - [ ] Screen reader - Listen to the experience with a screen reader extension, ensure the information presented in order - [ ] Keyboard navigation - Run through acceptance criteria with keyboard tabs, ensure it works. - [ ] Text scaling - Adjust viewport to 1280 pixels wide and zoom to 200%, ensure everything renders as expected. Document 400% zoom issues with USWDS if appropriate.