Here are details from the Thesis forum post on this topic (my questions/steps are numbered, responses start with a ">"):
1) Create a post - don't manually put in any Meta Description information
>Okay.
2) Verify the meta description populates automatically via Thesis
>Yup.
3) Install and activate the Digg Digg plugin
>Okay.
4) Look at that same post and see if the code is being injected into the meta description
>Nope, not without configuring the plugin. Yup, once "floating display" enabled.
5) Deactivate the Digg Digg plugin and then look at that meta tag again
>Back as it was in 2)
I'm not a PHP programmer but I'm thinking that there is a naming convention conflict between the two sets of code (Thesis and Digg Digg). And as I said, there have been other plugins that seem to have the same issue (but injecting different things into the meta description field).
>The code output seen in the meta description, if the meta description is blank, is occurring because the code itself is output inside the content of the post (after title/byline, before text body of post). It also adds a div around the content,
, right before the first
tag. Since this appears to be a constant, could probably hack Thesis core or do some other form of fancy str_replace function to populate the meta description on the fly, but I don't really see much value in work versus benefit.
>Easier to add a manual meta description IMO, which as noted earlier, I'd recommend doing anyway. Irrelevant (which is possible with automated) is not much better than code garble in the meta description, visible in SERPs, if you want a decent click through rate then you need to give the person searching a fast reason why they should click, neither DiggDigg garbage nor automated descriptions are likely to do this (maybe sometimes with automated non-Diggdigg, but why work hard on a post and not give it the best shot it can have in the SERPs with a few more seconds of work?).
(end)
Any thoughts?
