I'm seeking clarification regarding the use of og:type article vs website for an individual web page that is technically not an "article" but also does not represent an entire website.
Documentation seems contradictory:
From https://developers.facebook.com/docs/opengraphprotocol/#types
Use article for any URL that represents transient content - such as a
news article, blog post, photo, video, etc. Do not use website for this
purpose. website and blog are designed to represent an entire site, an
og:type tag with types website or blog should usually only appear on the
root of a domain.
In this case, article should only be used for "transient" content. The definition of "transient" is "lasting only for a short time". This quote also implicitly says "website and blog are designed to represent an entire site...(and) should usually only appear on the root of a domain."
EDIT: Interestingly, the same page describing types also says:
If your URL is a video, you should set og:type to video.
Which, in and of itself, contradicts the quote above regarding video.
Back on subject, however, higher up, the same page also says:
If your URL is a piece of content — such as a news article, photo, or
similar — you should set og:type to article (see below).
This seems to concur with the first quote.
Furthermore, the following page (https://developers.facebook.com/docs/technical-guides/opengraph/built-in-objects/#article) shows using og:type = article in conjunction with Publish Time, Expiration Time, and Author, which support the idea that it should be used for pages that have "articles" on them. On the same page, the website example