Re: [Lift] Customizing meta fields

2010-03-08 Thread Ross Mellgren
For your particular example, you can use head merge as Naftoli suggests. Head merge is a behavior of Lift templates where any head tags will be merged together for the final output, so you put your meta name=description in each of the specific places, any general head stuff you want in your

Re: [Lift] Customizing meta fields

2010-03-08 Thread Martin Dale Lyness
Again, thank you so much for the help! The head merge feature is perfect for this situation i described and my next line of though is right inline with how you describe bind points! Thanks again! -- Martin On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Ross Mellgren dri...@gmail.com wrote: For your

[Lift] Customizing meta fields

2010-03-07 Thread Martin
How would one go about having dynamic description and keyword meta tags in a template? Here is what i've tried: default.html meta name=descriptionb:meta_desc //meta HelloWorld.scala Helpers.bind(b, in, time - date.map(d = Text(d.toString)), meta_desc - test desc) I'm using a basic archetype

Re: [Lift] Customizing meta fields

2010-03-07 Thread Ross Mellgren
To be parsed by the bind, it must be enclosed by lift:HelloWorld.hello.../lift:HelloWorld.hello There is relatively little magic -- Lift goes through your template looking for lift: prefixed tags. For those tags, it will look up a snippet class by using the part before the period (HelloWorld,

Re: [Lift] Customizing meta fields

2010-03-07 Thread Martin Dale Lyness
Thank you Ross, for the very informative response! Now, I consider SEO to be closer to a designer task than a developer task so keeping the power in the design documents would be my best idea. Is there anyway to allow individual pages to define blocks that are read into the snippets and then

Re: [Lift] Customizing meta fields

2010-03-07 Thread Naftoli Gugenheim
It's not necessary. Just put a head section in the template and it will be combined with the head section in default.html. - Martin Dale Lynessmartin.lyn...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you Ross, for the very informative response! Now, I consider SEO to be closer