[Bug 12918] I found that you limited the keywords acceptable for the meta-name attribute and for the link-rel attribute. In the specs you use exhaustive lists of allowed keywords. In my opinion you should only suggest keywords. See also http://webhel.blogspot.com/20

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12918

--- Comment #5 from Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> 2011-06-13 12:19:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> The problem is pricipal: The content of a website should not be part of a
> standard. 

Why not? The standard itself is published on a Web site.

> More practical. I have tried to create a modern website which is accessible and
> usable. For that reason I have used some meta keywords. I was very surprised to
> find out that the webpages did not validate due to the fact that I used
> apparently old fashioned keywords. I tried to follow the HTML5 standard, for
> example by studying the list at
> http://www.w3schools.com/html5/html5_reference.asp and more specific (after
> discovering that the website did not validate) the meta tag reference, found at
> http://www.w3schools.com/html5/tag_meta.asp and
> http://www.w3schools.com/html5/att_meta_name.asp

Well, there's your problem. See http://w3fools.com/

> At this last page there is a list of possible metatags, without a reference to
> http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions
> 
> Also at this page there is stated that "You can define your own names in a
> schema" for other keywords. However there is no reference to a page which
> instructs you how to do this.

HTML5 has no such mechanism. You'll find that the HTML5 spec references
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions but doesn't reference w3schools.

> In practice I found that at the site of Cynthia says... they still recommend
> the use of meta name="language". See for example:
> http://www.contentquality.com/mynewtester/cynthia.exe?rptmode=2&url1=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.helenahoeve.nl%2F
> (second row of the Priority 3 Verification Checklist). Is it there for
> backwards compatability? And should it be elimated in the HTML5 standard? I
> still have my doubts. That's why I think meta keywords should not be part of
> the standard.

This looks like a bug in Cynthia Says. If you follow the links from the Cynthia
Says output, you'll see that it links to WCAG 1.0 which has been superseded by
WCAG 2.0 and even the WCAG 1.0 techniques don't actually have meta
name="language" in the suggested techniques.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Monday, 13 June 2011 12:19:52 UTC