Post History

In the comments it was noted that a [previous question](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/280149) points out the position of the "Copy Link" button feature in the interface, which at first seems like a natural "home" for this feature.

A big part of my workflow on SE sites was right-clicking the title of a page to open it in a new tab so I can temporarily shove the current question aside while I look up something else. Using the explicit copy-link button is more difficult. The button is not that attention-grabbing, but more importantly it *isn't at the top of the page*. It's basically always easier to reach the top of a web page than an arbitrary point a short way down from that; for example, pressing the Home key might do it instantly, or a scrollbar can be mindlessly dragged straight to the top. For the same reasons, this is also more convenient for people who found the Q&A useful and want to share it elsewhere.

Speaking of which, *sharing*. Copying a link as Markdown is useful *internally*, but there are also many *external* uses - for example, share widgets for social media. There's a lot of bikeshedding possible there, but I'll boldly offer my thoughts regardless of the risk of multiplying the things to argue about.

In my opinion, a *good* link sharing interface would:

* Show the HTTP link in plaintext in an editable field and *not in any way* interfere with selecting editing the text in that field. That text field should be labelled in a way that makes it clear that this is what's going on.
* Offer "Copy original URL" and "Markdown link" buttons (I don't understand what a "Rich Link" is) that work based off the original URL, *not* anything edited in the previously mentioned text field.
* Include buttons to facilitate link sharing on other specific sites, where possible - and *let each community decide* which other platforms are the most relevant sharing targets (for example, I personally would rather see Mastodon links than ~~Twitter~~ X, but I'd be happy to be outvoted on that) - since showing all the options for everyone could be overwhelming.
* Remind people explicitly of the content license. (In the current design, the ordinary notice is adjacent to the Copy Link button; but the changes proposed here would break that.)
* *Not* shove user IDs etc. into share links for logged-in users, but base them off the normal URL. The system doesn't need to know who's responsible for that social media link that drove tons of traffic and doesn't need the ability to infer an association between someone's social media account and the same person's Codidact account (not that I think you *would*, but still).

As for presenting the interface, my best-of-all-worlds preference is:

* Self-link the title, as described before.
* Move the "Copy Link" button to be *in-line* with the title, flowing with that span.
* Have the button open a drop-down menu with the previously described sharing interface.

I'm not worried about making it harder to copy the text of a question title, because *the primary reason for doing so is to create a Markdown link manually*, and this way, the option for an automatic link is right there. Separately linking the title preserves the right-click -> "open in new tab" workflow without interfering with the share widget, and I saw a comment to the effect that it might also be good for SEO.