Re: [whatwg] date meta-tag invalid
On Tue, 2011-07-26 at 11:27 +, aykut.sen...@bild.de wrote: http://www.google.com/support/news_pub/bin/answer.py?answer=93994 See Link above, Google says, that they provide DC.date.issued, but this is also not part auf the whatwg metaextensions list. It's part of the list now. I wonder what possessed the Google News team to use dc.date.issued instead of dc.issued or dcterms.issued. -- Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Re: [whatwg] date meta-tag invalid
http://www.google.com/support/news_pub/bin/answer.py?answer=93994 See Link above, Google says, that they provide DC.date.issued, but this is also not part auf the whatwg metaextensions list. kind regards Aykut Am 18.07.11 16:11 schrieb Julian Reschke unter julian.resc...@gmx.de: On 2011-07-18 15:59, aykut.sen...@bild.de wrote: hi julian, i have asked one from the seo team and he says for example the freshness factor is important for google. is it possible to use the time-tag in the head instead (i mean invisible)? dc:created is also not in the Meta Extensions List, see: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions I *believe* the SEO time is misguided when it thinks that meta/@name=date affects Google. But only Google can tell us. I mentioned dc:created not because it's valid, but because it's at least *specified* and in more wider use. Best regards, Julian
[whatwg] date meta-tag invalid
According to the w3c Validator the metaname=datecontent=# / tag is invalid. In the WHATWG MetaExtensions List there is no registered extension, no specification and no proposal for the date meta-tag. The only alternative for date is a proposal called created, which however doesn't meet the requirements for registration . For our SEO team the date meta-tag contains some of the most important information about a webpage. What would be a w3c-valid way to implement a creation date meta-tag in html5? Kind Regards Aykut Sensoy
Re: [whatwg] date meta-tag invalid
I'm not aware of the context, but is your problem the lack of spaces? You said: metaname=datecontent=# / Did you mean: meta name=date content=# / Mat Carey On 18 Jul 2011, at 13:54, aykut.sen...@bild.de wrote: According to the w3c Validator the metaname=datecontent=# / tag is invalid. In the WHATWG MetaExtensions List there is no registered extension, no specification and no proposal for the date meta-tag. The only alternative for date is a proposal called created, which however doesn't meet the requirements for registration . For our SEO team the date meta-tag contains some of the most important information about a webpage. What would be a w3c-valid way to implement a creation date meta-tag in html5? Kind Regards Aykut Sensoy
Re: [whatwg] date meta-tag invalid
On 2011-07-18 14:54, aykut.sen...@bild.de wrote: According to the w3c Validator themetaname=datecontent=# / tag is invalid. In the WHATWG MetaExtensions List there is no registered extension, no specification and no proposal for the date meta-tag. The only alternative for date is a proposal called created, which however doesn't meet the requirements for registration . For our SEO team the date meta-tag contains some of the most important information about a webpage. What would be a w3c-valid way to implement a creation date meta-tag in html5? Out of curiosity: who is processing the tag? And what does this have to do with SEO? Do search engines do anything with it? From HTML5's point of view the suggest replace is probably time pubdate... Did you look at that already? Also: there seems to be overlap with Dublin Core's dc:created? Best regards, Julian
Re: [whatwg] date meta-tag invalid
hi, this was only a mistake in the e-mail. you can see the meta-tag in the source code live at www.stylebook.de aykut Am 18.07.11 15:06 schrieb Mat Carey unter m...@matcarey.co.uk: I'm not aware of the context, but is your problem the lack of spaces? You said: metaname=datecontent=# / Did you mean: meta name=date content=# / Mat Carey On 18 Jul 2011, at 13:54, aykut.sen...@bild.de wrote: According to the w3c Validator the metaname=datecontent=# / tag is invalid. In the WHATWG MetaExtensions List there is no registered extension, no specification and no proposal for the date meta-tag. The only alternative for date is a proposal called created, which however doesn't meet the requirements for registration . For our SEO team the date meta-tag contains some of the most important information about a webpage. What would be a w3c-valid way to implement a creation date meta-tag in html5? Kind Regards Aykut Sensoy
Re: [whatwg] date meta-tag invalid
On 2011-07-18 15:59, aykut.sen...@bild.de wrote: hi julian, i have asked one from the seo team and he says for example the freshness factor is important for google. is it possible to use the time-tag in the head instead (i mean invisible)? dc:created is also not in the Meta Extensions List, see: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions I *believe* the SEO time is misguided when it thinks that meta/@name=date affects Google. But only Google can tell us. I mentioned dc:created not because it's valid, but because it's at least *specified* and in more wider use. Best regards, Julian
Re: [whatwg] date meta-tag invalid
On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 13:59 +, aykut.sen...@bild.de wrote: i have asked one from the seo team and he says for example the freshness factor is important for google. Is there evidence of meta name=date content=... being part of Google's freshness factor? Is there public documentation explaining what meta name=date content=... means, what date format expected in the content attribute is and what software does something useful with it? is it possible to use the time-tag in the head instead (i mean invisible)? No, it's not. dc:created is also not in the Meta Extensions List, see: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions It simply hasn't been registered yet. Is there any evidence of consuming software that does something useful with dc:created? -- Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
