Hi Taylor, So is it correct to assume that my users will no longer be able to advertise their webpage links through a direct appearance of that link in their tweets (i.e. http://www.mygreatwebsite.com), because this new initiative will always obfuscate the link within a t.co wrapper? In fact, is it true that the only way the original link would be displayed in a tweet is if the client Twitter app viewing the tweet took advantage of the entities information provided with the tweet and converted the t.co link back to the original link prior to displaying the tweet (something my app has no control over)?
Just my opinion, but I don't think Twitter should alter the content of their clients' tweets. How can Twitter know for sure that the alteration will be harmless to the original intended meaning of the tweet? What if, as a joke, a user wanted to include in their tweet the phrase "www.whatthehell.com"? Twitter would convert that into a t.co wrapper that goes no where, and destroy the meaning of the tweet in the process? I can appreciate why Twitter wants to be in the "click loop" for embedded URLs, but can you think about it some more and perhaps come up with a less intrusive way of do it? Ron On Jun 10, 9:44 am, Taylor Singletary <taylorsinglet...@twitter.com> wrote: > While it's true that some details are still being worked out, the following > is the intention: > > a) You post the linkhttp://f.ws/tcowithin a tweet > b) Within the published, text component of the tweet, you'll see the t.coURL > c) within the entities of the tweet, you'll see yourhttp://f.ws/tcolink > d) It's up to clients on how they want to render the link. They might want > to render it as a t.co link. They might want to reference the annotation and > render the URL there (which would be an f.ws link, not the ultimate > destination). They might want to do something else with how they display the > URL, or interpret the URL referenced in the entity by some other means. > > Taylor > > > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 9:06 PM, TJ Luoma <luo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On the list we were told: > > > > our current plan is that no user will see a t.co URL on twitter.com but > > we still have some details to work through. the links will still be > > displayed as they were sent in, but the target of the link will be the > > t.co link instead. and, we want to provide the same ability to display > > original links to developers. we're going to use the entities attribute to > > make this possible. > > > On the website, > > (http://blog.twitter.com/2010/06/links-and-twitter-length-shouldnt.html) > > Twitter said: > > > > When this is rolled out more broadly to users this summer, all links > > shared on Twitter.com or third-party apps will be wrapped with a t.co URL. > > A really long link such as > >http://www.amazon.com/Delivering-Happiness-Profits-Passion-Purpose/dp...be > >wrapped as > >http://t.co/DRo0trjfor display on SMS, but it could be displayed to web > > or application users as amazon.com/Delivering- or as the whole URL or page > > title. Ultimately, we want to display links in a way that removes the > > obscurity of shortened link and lets you know where a link will take you. > > > Reading that last sentence, it makes it sound like you are going to > > auto-expand shortened URLs, which would effectively kill all other URL > > shortening services. > > > Can someone clarify this? I searched through the list archive but > > didn't see an answer. > > > If I post "http://ƒ.ws/tco <http://xn--3ha.ws/tco>" to Twitter (which is a > > redirect to > >http://blog.twitter.com/2010/06/links-and-twitter-length-shouldnt.html), > > will the user see "http://ƒ.ws/tco <http://xn--3ha.ws/tco>" and if the > > user clicks on > > http://ƒ.ws/tco <http://xn--3ha.ws/tco> will it actually go through (for > > analytics, etc)? > > > Thanks! > > > TjL
