Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Relax the constraints on the new 'meta' element to support RDFa (and perhaps other schemes) more appropriately #206

Closed
ndw opened this issue Jul 3, 2021 · 0 comments
Closed

Relax the constraints on the new 'meta' element to support RDFa (and perhaps other schemes) more appropriately #206

ndw opened this issue Jul 3, 2021 · 0 comments
Labels
v52

Comments

@ndw
Copy link
Contributor

ndw commented Jul 3, 2021

When we added meta to the info elements in an earlier 5.2 beta, we made the name attribute required. This is consistent with how meta works in HTML, which was our model at the time. Recent discussion on the DocBook list have made me think that we should make name optional. That would open up the use of meta for things like RDFa lite metadata.

I think we can easily do this in the next 5.2 beta.
@ndw ndw added the v52 label Jul 3, 2021
@ndw ndw closed this as completed in 2fbec36 Jul 14, 2021
ndw added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 14, 2021
@ndw
Merge pull request #207 from ndw/fix-206
b16950b 
Fix #206 by making the name attribute optional on meta
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
v52
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@ndw