Amazon onebox issue

bug
1

For some reason, the onebox doesn’t actually fill anything out
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00H4SSB02

Doesn’t appear limited to just .com either:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00H4SSB02

Edit: It seems the Amazon side is working OK:

4 Likes
2

Hmm. Testing full link (for a different product):

Stripping parameters:

Stripping ref:

huh. it seems to be something about the onebox information for that product.

2 Likes
3

Test…

4

I think I fixed it for most of the products.

https://github.com/discourse/onebox/pull/304

761×400 1.07 MB

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00H4SSB02 seems to be a special case.

1468×866 209 KB

7 Likes
5

Just a thought: It would be nice if this code also matched the smile.amazon.com domain (the rest of the URL is always the same) which allows non-profits to get a cut of the revenue.

8 Likes
6

Submit a PR to expand the URL matching:

https://github.com/tgxworld/onebox/blob/507776c0de340a059505f61a92a08a7682746855/lib/onebox/engine/amazon_onebox.rb#L11

7

Is there a reason we try to scrape using mobile pages from Amazon? The desktop pages contains a description meta tag that we can use to improve reliability and avoid breaking Amazon onebox everytime they change their HTML.

https://github.com/tgxworld/onebox/blob/fix_amazon_onebox/lib/onebox/engine/amazon_onebox.rb#L14

1 Like
8

The idea was that mobile would have less cruft to sort through, if desktop is easier, go for it.

9

gc1oWWQWeFrO8dKBlaAHGDkRj84J5YOAdjpcT4h7o6E=w1242-h126-no1242×126

Hmm the description meta tag is pretty good but I’m not sure if on Amazon.com. *Free* shipping on qualifying offers is too much of a distraction. I would like to find out your thoughts on this :smiley_cat:

10

RrZvf1KTDJ1PUpvWjjIZR2SJOeU_Z8xboCVJSc71ckQ=w696-h595-no696×595

Hmm I tried out using the description in the meta tag and I think it feels too much like an advertisement rather than providing more information about the product.

I’ll stick with the mobile pages.

cc/ @sam

4 Likes
11

Have we pulled in the updated onebox @eviltrout?

12

I just bumped it. I can’t say for sure if we were on the latest because our gemfile referenced a version that was pushed to Rubygems that wasn’t also set in our repo. I can confirm that now we are on the very latest onebox code.

https://github.com/discourse/discourse/commit/bcaad5282b890be290785773d42af2fc492ebefc

2 Likes
13

Test again:

Looks like this bug isn’t fixed, or we still aren’t deploying the latest version of onebox.

14

The PR hasn’t been merged yet :wink:

https://github.com/discourse/onebox/pull/304

15

Ok can we please merge that @neil? And merge in onebox version update too.

1 Like
16

I think it is working now at last, thank you very much @tgxworld!

3 Likes
18

This is done now.

4 Likes