Bugzilla – Bug 839
Meta name validation is too strict
Last modified: 2011-05-31 10:12:38 CEST
The current HTTP header validation on Validator.nu seems too strict. While I realize there are a vast array of meta name="" headers, there are a few I'd like to see permitted. These include meta tag verification for the major search engines -- name="verify-v1" for Google, name="y_key" for Yahoo, name="msvalidate.01" for Bing. It is true, of course, that each search engine does provide alternative means of verification, but not permitting the most widely used means of verification is problematic. This is also true for all pages that use name="robots", name="googlebot", name="msnbot", name="slurp", etc meta tags rather than an external robots.txt file. Registering geo meta tags is of assistance with mobile and local search. These include name="geo.placename", name="geo.position", and name="geo.region". This could also be said for the ICBM meta tag. I'd like to see the name="copyright" meta tag registered. In addition, I'd suggest some recognition for the SafeSurf Internet Rating Standard. Please see http://www.safesurf.com/ssplan.htm for further information. Thanks.
(In reply to comment #0) > The current HTTP header validation on Validator.nu seems too strict. While I > realize there are a vast array of meta name="" headers, there are a few I'd > like to see permitted. Validator.nu doesn't validate HTTP headers at present. <meta name=...> isn't an HTTP header. > These include meta tag verification for the major search engines -- > name="verify-v1" for Google, name="y_key" for Yahoo, name="msvalidate.01" for > Bing. It is true, of course, that each search engine does provide alternative > means of verification, but not permitting the most widely used means of > verification is problematic. If you can dig up the spec URLs for these, you can register them on the wiki page that the error message links to. For reference, the wiki page is: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions Updates aren't reflected in the validator in real time but should be reflected within a week or so. > This is also true for all pages that use > name="robots", name="googlebot", name="msnbot", name="slurp", etc meta tags > rather than an external robots.txt file. robots, googlebot and slurp are already registered. msnbot is not due to lack of a spec URL. That is, I was unable to find any current Microsoft documentation describing what effect msnbot has. Moreover, previously existing Microsoft documentation has been removed for Microsoft's sites. For all I know, msnbot might not have any effect anymore in the Bing world. > Registering geo meta tags is of assistance with mobile and local search. These > include name="geo.placename", name="geo.position", and name="geo.region". This > could also be said for the ICBM meta tag. If you have specs for these, you can register them on the wiki. Out of curiosity, which search engines pay attention to the geo.placename, geo.position and geo.region? However, it seems to me that some meta names on your page may not have significant utility. What's the point of <meta name="coverage" content="world-wide" />, for instance? What consuming software would think your page isn't meant for world-wide use if you didn't have that tag there? > I'd like to see the name="copyright" meta tag registered. If you have a URL to a specification that explains how name="copyright" is processed, you can register it on the wiki. I'm resolving this as INTENTIONAL, because the registered meta names you mention (robots, googlebot and slurp) are already recognized and the other names you mention aren't registered. However, if you register more names according to the registration requirements stated at http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/semantics.html#other-metadata-names , I will update the validator accordingly.