Is there a way to embed the Google +1 (plus one) button without the use of JavaScript or an iframe? Don't care about the counter of other people who also clicked the plus one since that's probably only something you can pull from the JavaScript version.

Google runs you through a wizard to add the +1 button to your website. What's generated is a few lines of JavaScript that your site/page needs to include in order to display the button.

For other sites like Twitter, delicious, reddit and even Facebook, you can send a link only version of their version of crowdsourcing social happy times.

You can also make that an inline version to send in emails or even drop in forums. Something you'd also be able to drop into a Tumblr post or such where they might not let you include either JavaScript or iframes in posts.

Is there a workaround to having an inline, non JavaScript or iframe version, of the Google +1 button?

  • What's wrong with using the javascript? The alternative would be to use an <iframe>, which is usually regarded as worse.
    – Eric
    Commented Jun 5, 2011 at 13:45
  • Don't like the extra wait time that happens with JavaScript files. Yes, they're Google. But sometimes, people also run NoScript and whatnot. Plus, being able to fold it into an image sprite helps. @eri Commented Jun 6, 2011 at 1:17

1 Answer 1


A standard, simple hyperlink way of +1ing something (and sharing to Google+) is now making the rounds on blogs (couldn't find an official source, so it may still be undocumented):


Replace %URL with the URL. This is what shows up in the Google+ stream:

Google+ URL post

  • If you don't enter something, do you know where it even shows up? Commented Nov 2, 2011 at 3:08
  • 1
    Also things from here: stackoverflow.com/questions/7157411/… Commented Jul 28, 2012 at 17:30
  • 1
    @EightDaysofMalaise Whoops, completely missed your comment from forever ago. The SO link describes it, but yeah: you know where it shows up because there's a confirmation screen when you use completed URL (if you don't fill in the URL parameter, it returns a 404).
    – user10884
    Commented Jul 28, 2012 at 21:21
  • 3
    Doesn't seem to work anymore.
    – pixeline
    Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 19:54

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.