Clearbit Open Graph Logo Spec

callahad 10 years ago |

Maybe I'm missing the point of some Open Graph properties, but in this case... what's wrong with just using the HTML standard <link rel="icon" href="/path.png"> tag, which is already well-specified, well-supported, and even includes an optional "sizes" attribute?

https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/semantics.html#rel-ic...

maccman 10 years ago | |

In general we've found that companies are using the icon rel for favicons (16x16 icons) which don't do a good job of representing a company logo at larger sizes.

callahad 10 years ago | | |

If you're looking for positive intent, maybe propose that sites explicitly set the sizes attribute? Either way, you're asking folks to modify their <head>. Embracing the icon rel avoids duplicating effort.

maccman 10 years ago | | |

Yes good point! We'll make sure that we pick up icon rels that point to pngs or jpgs (not icos) too.

test_account_ 10 years ago | |

There are a huge number of cases where application icon (favicon) and corporate logo are not the same thing. For example, Google.

alexkadis 10 years ago | |

I agree completely. I don't see why this additional spec is wanted/needed.

Postscapes 10 years ago |

We are planning on using your Logo API (and other APIs) in a new project and really appreciate the service and intent behind this new initiative.

notanintern 10 years ago |

Half of the companies i searched for were either incorrect logos or ones that clearly looked like a random google image search.

tlb 10 years ago |

s/greyscale/grayscale/ please

JeffreyKaine 10 years ago | |

This is one of those silly english things. Grey/Gray are both acceptable spellings.