hey! the recent release of ItemBadges 1.1.6 has an error which is being reported by the SEO Engine, I'd wait until it gets fixed before updating the current 1.1.5 version

Have you raised a case for this?

I've requested the customer to do so, I can share the number as soon as I have it

Thanks, because I couldn't see an open issue for it

@Steve Goldberg typically 99% of SC/A customers will never debug the seo page generator. Its not until a partner with seo experience tests it, that you'd get a support case. I think we should change the approach on how to tackle seo issues, shouldn't we? I mean, this feature is for devs not for admins nor users. If you hire a non-sca seo agency, they'd never figure out what is going on (and I expect them to not even have to worry about it?) My proposal is to all be more proactive on testing it. In order for that to happen, we the "partners" need to be told what will change just like it happens with regular netsuite releases - and have at least some time and awareness to proactively test and report issues before making it into prod. Once an SEO issue made it to production, customers loses money for months - and recovery isn't free (the fix to the issue doesn't recover the traffic back on its own!)

I agree in principle. We're going to be making a change to the SEO generator soon that should eliminate the majority of problems people encounter. Secondly, if an extension fails (like in this case), partial content is still served to the crawler bot. As extensions JavaScript executes after the main JS, the page should still have the key details.

good morning @Steve Goldberg here is the case number #6469315

Thanks. I'll keep an eye out for the issue ticket.

hi @Steve Goldberg What is the definition of "key details"? To me, all frontend html is key details. IE: if we don't render the footer, we are losing all the internal linking we put there. IE2: if we utilize a cms area below items on PLP pages for seo purposes but we the rendering stops at a certain point, we lose all the value of that cms area. Etc. So if I am interpreting yourself correctly, no, rendering "some" content is not better than rendering nothing. Rendering nothing at least gives google a signal that he should try use JS to render the page (unreliable, undesirable) - while if we serve content Google will assume that IS the content of the page. Google is always trying to optimize its resources, the only strategy that would benefit SuiteCommerce sites is to "pay the cost ourselves" instead of trying to also save resources ourselves. The more pre-render scenarios we cover, the better - if we think of SC/A's ability to growh and have higher visibility