Live data from Hacker News

Why to use Twitter, Facebook and Google Plus share links and not buttons

garron.me

51–60 of 65 posts

Re: Why to use Twitter, Facebook and Google Plus share links and not buttons

#51
I've recently done this on some client sites - it's far neater than including several sets of js each loading their own support libraries etc. The main reason for doing it was speed (each button makes several requests for js and assets), but it does also obviate serving multiple third-party js files, and protects your users from tracking by Facebook etc. which some of them won't be keen on. It's a shame that FB, Google etc insist on hosted js - a nicer solution would just be a link around one dynamically generated image showing the user the same information, though I guess that could still be used for limited tracking by IP.

After trialling the standard js we decided to forgo the dynamic buttons for speed, security and the privacy of our users and use locally hosted images of the buttons or logos with a simple link to the social site. For the readers it's very similar experience, but a much faster solution.

Re: Why to use Twitter, Facebook and Google Plus share links and not buttons

#56
post #54
post #8

A small typo in the title: Javascript and not java script.

Which title? Anyhow, it's "JavaScript" with a capital 'S'.

The title here in HN. It was originally "Don't expose your visitors to tracking. Use share links instead of Java scripts"

It was then edited (by a moderator I assume) to reflect the actual title of the post.

Re: Why to use Twitter, Facebook and Google Plus share links and not buttons

#57
post #33

This seems like a great time to plug RequestPolicy: "ReuestPolicy is a Firefox extension that improves the privacy and security of your browsing by giving you control over when cross-site requests are allowed by webpages you visit."[1] It is even better if you pair it with NoScript.[2] Whenever I toy with the idea of switching to Chrome I am always end up sticking with iceweasel because of the lack of equivalent RP+N…

I've tried noscript and it breaks most things. Ghostery quite rarely breaks things.

Re: Why to use Twitter, Facebook and Google Plus share links and not buttons

#58

I don't have an opinion on the core of the article, but this bit at the end is not the best advice from a user experience standpoint. "And I am seriously thinking into serve my own copy of Twitter Bootstrap scripts instead of serving them from the Google Network." The point of using a CDN for common js/css is to serve it as close to your users as possible as well as increase the change that they already have it in th…

I tried to use Google's AJAX CDN (because I was thinking the same thing you are) and have been burnt several times because of it. Occasionally, it won't serve your js files, leaving users with an indefinite 'Waiting on ...' message or a partially rendered and broken page. It's fixed if they refresh. If you use your own server, at the least there's a connection already established and the JS files will be served. My suspicion is that Google is prioritizing other traffic, and the free AJAX CDN is low on the list of services that should work flawlessly.

Re: Why to use Twitter, Facebook and Google Plus share links and not buttons

#59
There is one downside to share links vs. buttons: visitors can't see how many times the page has already been shared.

At https://starthq.com we've opted for a half way solution by confining the share buttons to individual iframes. This way we don't prevent the tracking, but do contain their ability to break our page or grab users' data.

Re: Why to use Twitter, Facebook and Google Plus share links and not buttons

#60
Just wanted to chime in with my 2 pennies to say I agree 100% with this article.

My feeling is that if social interaction is core enough that it needs to appear on every single page of your site (or at least on core, highly trafficked pages) then the common way of doing this sucks on two levels;

1) Depending on other websites to load content? Madness.

2) Depending on JavaScript to execute core functionality? Pointless.

I have solidified my thoughts better here: http://tosbourn.com/2013/01/development/replacing-social-med...

I have also written up how you can get the functionality without the JS in this github repo https://github.com/tosbourn/nojs-socialshare

Post reply on HN