Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Title Junk

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 85 posts

Re: Title Junk

#11

Post by Semiapies »

scdlbx wrote: post #6
Semiapies wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because we could usefully distinguish billions of sites by their tiny little icons? ETA: To expand, I just opened the top 12 stories on HN right this moment in new tabs. I recognized the NYT logo in one favicon and the Apple logo in another. Of the other eight that did have favicons, those little icons told me absolutely nothing useful. A few of those sites did indicate their names in the titles, however.

I can distinguish the icons of every site I visit on a semi-regular basis.

And you never visit any other sites?

How useful to you is an unfamiliar favicon, or a row of tabs with an assortment of unfamiliar favicons?

Re: Title Junk

#12

Post by Semiapies »

bergie wrote: post #7
Semiapies wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because we could usefully distinguish billions of sites by their tiny little icons? ETA: To expand, I just opened the top 12 stories on HN right this moment in new tabs. I recognized the NYT logo in one favicon and the Apple logo in another. Of the other eight that did have favicons, those little icons told me absolutely nothing useful. A few of those sites did indicate their names in the titles, however.

Do you really want to distinguish a site by the title attribute? Think about it, a site already has two "branding elements": favicon and domain. Why not leave the title for just content, the thing that the site visitor is most likely interested in?

I don't know about you, but domains don't show up on my tabs or my bookmarks (unless I open one's properties). Only the title and the favicon do, and unlike the favicon, the title isn't a tiny picture that's only useful if I go to a site enough to recognize it.

Re: Title Junk

#13

Post by ghshephard »

bergie wrote: post #2

If all sites had proper favicons for branding we could start dropping site name from page titles and focus just on the content.

That works for Tabs - I just spent 10 minutes watching my browsing behavior, and realized the only thing I look at in Tabs, is the Favicon.

Personally, Google has replaced my bookmarking behavior. I don't bookmark pages any more - when I need to search for them, I just google for the appropriate keywords. In fact, this works so well, it's rare that I even need to add a "site:" to give a hint as to which site to look for it.

Re: Title Junk

#14

Post by scdlbx »

Semiapies wrote: post #11
scdlbx wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can distinguish the icons of every site I visit on a semi-regular basis.

And you never visit any other sites? How useful to you is an unfamiliar favicon, or a row of tabs with an assortment of unfamiliar favicons?

An unfamiliar favicon lets me know I am not somewhere I normally would be, and to regard the site I am at more suspiciously. Without familiar favicons, I would treat every site that way before looking at the page more thoroughly. Obviously I do not rely solely on favicons, but they are a good initial way of orienting myself when looking at tabs.

Re: Title Junk

#16

Post by jbri »

Semiapies wrote: post #12
bergie wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really want to distinguish a site by the title attribute? Think about it, a site already has two "branding elements": favicon and domain. Why not leave the title for just content, the thing that the site visitor is most likely interested in?

I don't know about you, but domains don't show up on my tabs or my bookmarks (unless I open one's properties). Only the title and the favicon do, and unlike the favicon, the title isn't a tiny picture that's only useful if I go to a site enough to recognize it.

If you bookmarked a page on an unfamiliar site, chances are it's the content of the page that you bookmarked it for, not the name of the site.

Re: Title Junk

#17

Post by Semiapies »

scdlbx wrote: post #14
Semiapies wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you never visit any other sites? How useful to you is an unfamiliar favicon, or a row of tabs with an assortment of unfamiliar favicons?

An unfamiliar favicon lets me know I am not somewhere I normally would be, and to regard the site I am at more suspiciously. Without familiar favicons, I would treat every site that way before looking at the page more thoroughly. Obviously I do not rely solely on favicons, but they are a good initial way of orienting myself when looking at tabs.

In other words, the favicon is only useful for familiar sites or for knowing a page isn't from a familiar site. It's of absolutely no use in any other case, whereas a site name or a domain in the title tag will actually tell me what the site is in all cases.

Re: Title Junk

#18

Post by chime »

ghshephard wrote: post #13
bergie wrote: post #2

If all sites had proper favicons for branding we could start dropping site name from page titles and focus just on the content.

That works for Tabs - I just spent 10 minutes watching my browsing behavior, and realized the only thing I look at in Tabs, is the Favicon. Personally, Google has replaced my bookmarking behavior. I don't bookmark pages any more - when I need to search for them, I just google for the appropriate keywords. In fact, this works so well, it's rare that I even need to add a "site:" to give a hint as to which site to look…

I use Google to search my own sites. Typing 'tip my' into Google takes me to my 'Tip of my Tongue' page faster than looking for the bookmark in my browser.

Re: Title Junk

#19

Post by Semiapies »

jbri wrote: post #16
Semiapies wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about you, but domains don't show up on my tabs or my bookmarks (unless I open one's properties). Only the title and the favicon do, and unlike the favicon, the title isn't a tiny picture that's only useful if I go to a site enough to recognize it.

If you bookmarked a page on an unfamiliar site, chances are it's the content of the page that you bookmarked it for, not the name of the site.

1) Then why worry about the favicon? You're being circular.

2) Chances are also that I might want to know which site something came from at a glance.

Re: Title Junk

#20

Post by ayu »

ghshephard wrote: post #13
bergie wrote: post #2

If all sites had proper favicons for branding we could start dropping site name from page titles and focus just on the content.

That works for Tabs - I just spent 10 minutes watching my browsing behavior, and realized the only thing I look at in Tabs, is the Favicon. Personally, Google has replaced my bookmarking behavior. I don't bookmark pages any more - when I need to search for them, I just google for the appropriate keywords. In fact, this works so well, it's rare that I even need to add a "site:" to give a hint as to which site to look…

I like how Chrome remembers the sites I've visited the most and autocompletes them in the nav bar. Usually I'll pop open a new tab, type a letter (e.g. "s" for slickdeals") and hit enter. 2 letters takes care of any site I visit on a semi-regular basis.
Post reply on HN