22245 2013-06-03 14:03:50 +0000 Requirements unclear for "other" metadata names 2016-04-25 22:38:39 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG HTML5 spec unspecified PC All RESOLVED MOVED P2 normal --- 1 robin robin eoconnor mike public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking travil public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 88570 0 robin 2013-06-03 14:03:50 +0000 In http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/document-metadata.html#the-meta-element, we have: "Conformance checkers may use the information given on the WHATWG Wiki MetaExtensions page to establish if a value is allowed or not" which makes it sound optional, but followed by "values (...) not listed in either this specification or on the aforementioned page must be reported as invalid" which is a strict requirement. Double-proposal: - Metadata names not listed in the standard or wiki shouldn't be hard errors; they seem like warning material. - Either way, it should be clearly may or must, but not both. 121196 1 mike 2015-06-17 14:50:08 +0000 FYI, the Nu Html Checker no longer checks the value of meta[name] at all. It will accept any value for it without reporting an error. The reason I made that change is that I think the experiment in trying to enforce registration of meta[name] values has been a big failure and in the mean time cost us way more time and trouble than it would have been worth even if it'd ever had the effects it was intended to have, which is hasn't. So speaking as a conformance-checker developer, at this point it doesn't matter what the spec says here one way or the other, because I'm not implementing support for any additional checking here, and won't be regardless of what new changes might ever be made to the spec for this. 126133 2 travil 2016-04-25 22:38:39 +0000 HTML5.1 Bugzilla Bug Triage: Moved to Github issue: https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/160 To file additional issues please use the W3C HTML5 Issue tracker: https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/new Thanks!