Re: Proposal: Allow stopwords in slugs generated by ModelAdmin.prepopulated_fields

[Scott Cranfill]

The PR was merged! Thanks everyone for your input and assistance.

On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 12:51:56 PM UTC-4, Scott Cranfill wrote:
>
> Thanks for the additional feedback, folks!
>
> We have opened a fresh PR, rebased on the latest master and referencing 
> #11157, at https://github.com/django/django/pull/12945
>
> Best,
> Scott
>
>
> On Saturday, May 16, 2020 at 5:25:29 AM UTC-4, Adam Johnson wrote:
>>
>> There's a bit more support now, and there have been no opinions against 
>> it.
>>
>> Because of this I've reopened the older closed ticket #11157: 
>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/11157 . Andy/Scott, I hope you can 
>> retarget your PR as per my comment there. Thanks!
>>
>> Admin users still get a preview of the slug and can edit it if needed.
>>>
>>
>> Agree, no need for deprecation warnings. This behaviour is in front of 
>> users with an easy override.
>>
>> ‪On Sat, 16 May 2020 at 03:04, ‫אורי‬‎  wrote:‬
>>
>>> I very much prefer a slug "to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question" 
>>> than "be-or-not-be-question" (which doesn't make sense).
>>> אורי
>>> u...@speedy.net
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 11:35 PM Andy Chosak  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Automatic slug generation in ModelAdmin via prepopulated_fields 
>>>> <https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/3.0/ref/contrib/admin/#django.contrib.admin.ModelAdmin.prepopulated_fields>
>>>>  
>>>> uses a urlify.js 
>>>> <https://github.com/django/django/blob/b2bd08bb7a912a1504f5fb5018f5317e6b5423cd/django/contrib/admin/static/admin/js/urlify.js>
>>>>  
>>>> file which, among other behaviors, removes certain stop words 
>>>> <https://github.com/django/django/blob/b2bd08bb7a912a1504f5fb5018f5317e6b5423cd/django/contrib/admin/static/admin/js/urlify.js#L168-L176>
>>>>  
>>>> from the slug. For example, a string like "To be or not to be, that is the 
>>>> question" will generate a slug "be-or-not-be-question", not 
>>>> "to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question" as one might expect. I’d like to 
>>>> solicit feedback on the idea of removing this logic so that slugs can 
>>>> contain these words.
>>>>
>>>> For reference, the current list is: a, an, as, at, before, but, by, 
>>>> for, from, is, in, into, like, of, off, on, onto, per, since, than, the, 
>>>> this, that, to, up, via, with.
>>>>
>>>> Django ticket #30538 <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/30538> 
>>>> mentions this behavior as part of a more general comparison between 
>>>> urlify.js and Python slugify 
>>>> <https://github.com/django/django/blob/b2bd08bb7a912a1504f5fb5018f5317e6b5423cd/django/utils/text.py#L394>.
>>>>  
>>>> It was closed as wontfix due to reasons of backwards compatibility. Per 
>>>> the triaging 
>>>> guidelines 
>>>> <https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/3.0/internals/contributing/triaging-tickets/#closing-tickets>,
>>>>  
>>>> I’m making this post to solicit feedback on the more specific question of 
>>>> addressing stopword removal in the JS code only -- not to try to address 
>>>> any other differences in behavior between these two methods. There’s been 
>>>> quite a bit of discussion on generating slugs for non-English languages 
>>>> (for example #2282 <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/2282>), and 
>>>> this post is not intended to reopen that discussion.
>>>>
>>>> The current list of stopwords being removed seems to have been the same 
>>>> since 
>>>> at least 2005 
>>>> <https://github.com/django/django/blob/dd5320d1d56ca7603747dd68871e72eee99d9e67/media/js/urlify.js>
>>>>  
>>>> (the earliest code I can find including this logic). Some of these words 
>>>> feel a little unexpected, for example “before” and “since”. After 15 years 
>>>> it seems reasonable to revisit the list and consider whether it still 
>>>> makes 
>>>> sense.
>>>>
>>>> Was removal of these words introduced for SEO reasons? If so, is this 
>>>> still a recommended default behavior? In 2020, search engines like Google 
>>>> seem smart enough to interpret them properly. Here's 
>>>> <https://cseo.com/blog/google-stop-words/> an arbitrary page that 
>>>> discusses this an

Re: Proposal: Allow stopwords in slugs generated by ModelAdmin.prepopulated_fields

[Scott Cranfill]

Thanks for the additional feedback, folks!

We have opened a fresh PR, rebased on the latest master and referencing 
#11157, at https://github.com/django/django/pull/12945

Best,
Scott


On Saturday, May 16, 2020 at 5:25:29 AM UTC-4, Adam Johnson wrote:
>
> There's a bit more support now, and there have been no opinions against it.
>
> Because of this I've reopened the older closed ticket #11157: 
> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/11157 . Andy/Scott, I hope you can 
> retarget your PR as per my comment there. Thanks!
>
> Admin users still get a preview of the slug and can edit it if needed.
>>
>
> Agree, no need for deprecation warnings. This behaviour is in front of 
> users with an easy override.
>
> ‪On Sat, 16 May 2020 at 03:04, ‫אורי‬‎ > 
> wrote:‬
>
>> I very much prefer a slug "to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question" 
>> than "be-or-not-be-question" (which doesn't make sense).
>> אורי
>> u...@speedy.net 
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 11:35 PM Andy Chosak > > wrote:
>>
>>> Automatic slug generation in ModelAdmin via prepopulated_fields 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> uses a urlify.js 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> file which, among other behaviors, removes certain stop words 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> from the slug. For example, a string like "To be or not to be, that is the 
>>> question" will generate a slug "be-or-not-be-question", not 
>>> "to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question" as one might expect. I’d like to 
>>> solicit feedback on the idea of removing this logic so that slugs can 
>>> contain these words.
>>>
>>> For reference, the current list is: a, an, as, at, before, but, by, for, 
>>> from, is, in, into, like, of, off, on, onto, per, since, than, the, this, 
>>> that, to, up, via, with.
>>>
>>> Django ticket #30538  
>>> mentions this behavior as part of a more general comparison between 
>>> urlify.js and Python slugify 
>>> .
>>>  
>>> It was closed as wontfix due to reasons of backwards compatibility. Per the 
>>> triaging 
>>> guidelines 
>>> ,
>>>  
>>> I’m making this post to solicit feedback on the more specific question of 
>>> addressing stopword removal in the JS code only -- not to try to address 
>>> any other differences in behavior between these two methods. There’s been 
>>> quite a bit of discussion on generating slugs for non-English languages 
>>> (for example #2282 ), and 
>>> this post is not intended to reopen that discussion.
>>>
>>> The current list of stopwords being removed seems to have been the same 
>>> since 
>>> at least 2005 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> (the earliest code I can find including this logic). Some of these words 
>>> feel a little unexpected, for example “before” and “since”. After 15 years 
>>> it seems reasonable to revisit the list and consider whether it still makes 
>>> sense.
>>>
>>> Was removal of these words introduced for SEO reasons? If so, is this 
>>> still a recommended default behavior? In 2020, search engines like Google 
>>> seem smart enough to interpret them properly. Here's 
>>>  an arbitrary page that 
>>> discusses this and includes a much longer list of what might be considered 
>>> stopwords. As another datapoint, the popular WordPress Yoast SEO plugin 
>>> used to remove stopwords, but stopped doing so 
>>>  a few years back.
>>>
>>> Potentially outdated SEO concerns aside, does this behavior still align 
>>> well with the needs and desires of Django users? Is this something this 
>>> community would be open to revisiting? Thanks for your consideration.
>>>
>>> (One minor point on language support: allowing these words would help to 
>>> resolve at least some of the unequal treatment given to English over other 
>>> languages, for example #12905 
>>> . See also wagtail#4899 
>>> , from which much of 
>>> this post has been copied, for an example of how this logic impacts a 
>>> Django-based CMS.)
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>> Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>> an email to 

Re: Proposal: Allow stopwords in slugs generated by ModelAdmin.prepopulated_fields

[Scott Cranfill]

Does anyone else have an opinion on whether or not we should still be 
removing these stopwords?

Hopefully someone more involved in i18n can weigh in.
>

I'm not sure if there are any i18n concerns here. In fact, ceasing this 
practice removes the impetus for the recurring issues being raised about 
how this practice negatively affects the experience for users of other 
languages, or doesn't remove words in their language, etc.

Thanks for the suggested code, Adam. On the topic of deprecation, in 
general: Andy I weren't really sure how to approach that for a 
JavaScript-only change. We can't throw deprecation warnings in the Django 
console like we could if we were talking about Python code, can we? I could 
see adding some more aggressive messaging, maybe even in the Admin?

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/9bae6eba-2046-4270-b16b-69fe2b2c8e87%40googlegroups.com.