Improved title element

February 6, 2002 7:04 AM

If you have the poster's name when printing the TITLE element on a post's detail page, it'd be nice to have the window title be e.g. "MetaFilter | Comments on ParisParamus's post" instead of "MetaFilter | Comments on 14703". It'd let the browser's history list be more useful...

(Although of course you'd have to implement a sophisticated possessive-forming engine to avoid "s's" as in my bad example...)
posted by nicwolff to feature requests at 7:04 AM (31 comments total)

What if you're not the type of person who keeps track of threads by their content and hardly ever glances to see who made the initial post (like me)?

More useful would be user-entered title tags that give a summary, although that would add an opportunity for excessive cutesiness or abuse.
posted by werty at 7:11 AM on February 6, 2002

I can see it now:

"MetaFilter | Comments on Dong_Resin's post"

posted by machaus at 7:29 AM on February 6, 2002

Yeah, that sounds good in theory. "In theory, communism works. In theory."

But, in practice, I'd rather not have Senator Dong's name in my history file.
posted by ColdChef at 8:15 AM on February 6, 2002

What werty said. Unless it's a bad post and everybody needs to get their MeTa on, after the first few comments it's fairly irrelevant who made the initial post.
posted by briank at 8:48 AM on February 6, 2002

ColdChef - In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.

Discuss.
posted by jonmc at 9:44 AM on February 6, 2002

nic: actually, according to strunk & white's elements of style, your construction of the possesive is perfectly acceptable.
posted by mlang at 10:04 AM on February 6, 2002

Why not just use the first 30 or so characters of the post, as is done in the Newer/Older section of MeFi? For example:

"MetaFilter | Comments on If you have the poster's name..."

Or maybe:

"MetaFilter | Comments on 1771 (If you have the poster's name...)"
posted by gluechunk at 10:31 AM on February 6, 2002

And I don't want some wise guy pointing out that I should have used the word MetaTalk in the above examples.
posted by gluechunk at 10:32 AM on February 6, 2002

The older and newer links at the bottom of a thread on MeFi proper work that way, so I guess it would work in the title too.
posted by riffola at 10:43 AM on February 6, 2002

i also agree that it would be nice to have some identifier other than the thread number in the title element, not only for history review purposes, but for one-click bookmarking purposes as well.

i've always got a whole bunch of bookmarked threads (to which i intend to return) but i can't keep straight which is which without adding descriptive monikers myself — and i'm lazy, so i rarely do. and then i find myself playing metafilter roulette:

me: 'hey grainne, check out this really interesting and insightful thread about gender equality'.
*waits for email reply*
*waits*
me: 'beb? did you get my email about metafilter?'
*waits*
goneill: 'martin, what the fuck are you talking about? the thread you linked to was some cardosian nonsense about pornographic pictures. did you think i'd be amused? well i'm not. and i don't think that you should come over tonight'.
me: 'awww, i'm sorry hon, i must have sent you the wrong bookmark; let me check again'.
goneill: 'you've got this shit bookmarked?! didn't you read that andrea dworkin book i gave you? don't you understand how such images contribute to the culture of oppression...you definitely aren't coming over tonight, mister i'm a fucking tool of the patriarchy'.
*sits home alone all night, looking at pictures of naked women* (thanks, miguel!)
posted by mlang at 11:00 AM on February 6, 2002

uh, martin - why did you send me a link to this thread? why are you belittling our relationship in front of all of these people? you can think again about seeing lord of the rings with me for the fiftieth time. i am soooooo sick of sci-fi geeks...

WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU?

posted by goneill at 11:09 AM on February 6, 2002

ladies and gentlemen of the jury: i rest my case.

p.s. i didn't even want to see that stupid movie. and she wouldn't shut up the whole time: 'frodo is soooo effing hot! frodo is soooo effing hot!' i ask you, is that healthy?
posted by mlang at 11:22 AM on February 6, 2002

mLang: Dude! I swear I wasn't flirting with your chick.
posted by ColdChef at 11:58 AM on February 6, 2002

chef: take it to 11629 (fscking austinites).
posted by mlang at 12:46 PM on February 6, 2002

beb?

I think I'm gonna be sick.
posted by swift at 1:15 PM on February 6, 2002

lol - u2????
posted by Hankins at 1:18 PM on February 6, 2002

swift - it really is ridiculous. but no more ridiculous say... than staying up all night watching vh12 and nick at night with your girlfriend every night
posted by goneill at 1:33 PM on February 6, 2002

regarding me and 'the chef':
just because i exhibit the occasional chuckle at his very funny (*winks slyly so that mlang can't see*) posts, doesn't give you the right to look at miguel's porn!!!!
posted by goneill at 1:37 PM on February 6, 2002

who gets up at 7AM to watch the first Buffy episode of the day? anybody?
posted by swift at 2:00 PM on February 6, 2002

who, upon hearing the question, "what are you guys watching" from their roommate EVERY NIGHT, stares at their girlfriend for a full minute before responding, "I don't know"*

* even if it's cheers
posted by goneill at 2:06 PM on February 6, 2002

I'm obviously watching my girlfriend.
posted by swift at 2:09 PM on February 6, 2002

Wow,

Reading this thread is like watching some couple fighting in the middle of a public space. You feel bad for them, but you can't help but listen in.
posted by SweetJesus at 2:11 PM on February 6, 2002

ergo

posted by goneill at 2:15 PM on February 6, 2002

full disclosure:

1. swift and his girlfriend and i are roommates. they met each other when we all moved in together. i knew them both before.

2. mlang and i are a brand new couple who have been best friends for a long time..

3. coldchef and i are having an affair.
posted by goneill at 2:18 PM on February 6, 2002

shhhhhhhhh...
posted by ColdChef at 2:24 PM on February 6, 2002

i typed really quietly. i promise.
posted by goneill at 2:25 PM on February 6, 2002

*tiptoes in, looks around, thinks 'Days Of Our Metatalk' (aka D.O.O.M) is on again, slowly backs away, slips out the door, runs like hell.*

posted by Lynsey at 3:54 PM on February 6, 2002

mlang and goneill make a terrific couple and their give-and-take, wit and affection are an example to us all. It certainly sounds like true love(Grave Kelly and that boat in "High Society")to me.

Oh, they're the greatest double act since...
posted by MiguelCardoso at 7:12 PM on February 6, 2002

jonmc and JakeEXTREME?

(rimshot)
posted by jonmc at 7:25 PM on February 6, 2002

it was beautiful moment.
posted by goneill at 7:29 PM on February 6, 2002

a
posted by goneill at 7:29 PM on February 6, 2002