Because I have dynamically generated pages which deal with "categories" - for example, a selection of Christmas motifs all shown on one page, is there a way to ensure that I can use an implicit internal sort order of the DB elements and pick up a field for SEO that would better illustrate the contents of the entire page rather than a single element? That is, because I don't have access to my reference databases in the SEO selection, I cannot easily get my meta data which would be preferable for these page SEO descriptions, images etc ... .
For example, I have various elements from a DB displayed on the page such as
Image of Santa, Description of Santa, other database fields
Image of Rudoph, Description of Rudolph, other database fields
What I would like to place in the SEO for this page is some sort of generic christmas title and description and image (which I have access to through a reference DB but of course, those are NOT accessible via the SEO selections).
Without adding yet another field in the DB and putting the desired information into ALL of them to ensure that the one field is populated for SEO use, IS THERE A WAY TO UNDERSTAND THE internal sort order or to force the sort order in some way such that I could populate and use JUST ONE of my entries in particular to pick my SEO description and image WITHOUT NEEDING TO REPLICATE IN ANOTHER FIELD THIS INFO FOR ALL INSTANCES of my entries.
In the same way you use reference DBases for this strategy for your page content, we don't seem to be able to do the same for SEO.
Right now, I don't appear to be able to even predict the database entry that will be picked up first for SEO from my dataset - it appears random, or even worse, picked up from some other non-dynamic static gallery on my page. I am trying to understand if there is a way to understand which row entry the SEO selections when you name a field on a dynamically generated page.
This problem would be solvable of course, if I could access another database through reference fields where I hold my category information.
Has anyone else been able to find a workaround to address this?