You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 11, 2019. It is now read-only.
<div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/CreativeWork">
<data itemprop="name" value="data value attribute" content="data content attribute" >data element text content</data>
<data itemprop="name" value="lone data value attribute" >missed data element' value attribute [BUG]</data>
<data itemprop="name">data used its element's textContent</data>
<meter itemprop="name" content="meter content attribute" value="meter value attribute">meter element text content</meter>
<meter itemprop="name" value="lone meter value attribute" >missed meter element's value attribute [BUG]</meter>
<meter itemprop="name">meter used its element's textContent</meter>
</div>
in the SDL generates:
data content attribute
meter used its element's textContent
lone meter value attribute
data used its element's textContent
lone data value attribute
meter content attribute
and in Google's SDTT gives
@type: CreativeWork
name: data content attribute
name: missed data element' value attribute [BUG]
name: data used its element's textContent
name: meter content attribute
name: missed meter element's value attribute [BUG]
name: meter used its element's textContent
I'll do more testing, but I think modulo the apparent bug in Google of not reading the value attribute at all, I think we should align the value algorithm to match this behaviour. See also #20, #38
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
see #20, #38, #39
Note that if there is a `content` attribute is is selected **in
preference** to another specific attribute, including `src` and `href`
in the SDL generates:
and in Google's SDTT gives
I'll do more testing, but I think modulo the apparent bug in Google of not reading the
value
attribute at all, I think we should align the value algorithm to match this behaviour. See also #20, #38The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: