This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
This is a reminder that the removal of meta/@scheme needs to be reviewed. Note that RFC 2731 ("Encoding Dublin Core Metadata in HTML") recommends using this attribute for type information, and that <http://code.google.com/webstats/2005-12/metadata.html> indicates "Continuing up the chart we see scheme and lang. Further research will be needed to find out how scheme is used.". Further note that RFC 2731 seems to propose a solution to a problem that RDFa also covers. So adoption of a RDFa compatible format may also take care of this problem.
Was this bug intended for me or for the working group in general? It's not clear who the "reminder" is for. <meta scheme> was studied years ago, before the W3C got involved I think. I don't plan to study it again unless there's some new data that needs considering.
(In reply to comment #1) > Was this bug intended for me or for the working group in general? It's not > clear who the "reminder" is for. It's a reminder for all of us. > <meta scheme> was studied years ago, before the W3C got involved I think. I > don't plan to study it again unless there's some new data that needs > considering. Then it would be totally useful if you could add a pointer to that research.
I've no idea where it was documented. A search in the archives for "scheme attribute" would probably find it, if it was done in response to e-mails sent to the WHATWG list. If it was done without prompting then I doubt there's any public record of it. Reassigning to Mike to get it off my list -- FWIW, I believe the correct procedure here for working group reminders is to use the tracker tool rather than Bugzilla, but Mike can probably give better guidance here.
meta/@scheme is not defined in HTML5, but it was in HTML4. Note that the text under "12.2 Non-conforming features": "scheme on meta elements Use only one scheme per field, or make the scheme declaration part of the value." can't be considered a proper description. On the other hand, the document currently claims in the IANA registration for text/html to be a complete definition.
Note: Changes should be requested only when there are serious omissions or errors in the published specification. When review is required, a change request may be denied if it renders entities that were valid under the previous definition invalid under the new definition. <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4288#section-9>
It looks like this has an overdue request to create a tracker issue. Mike?
(In reply to comment #6) > It looks like this has an overdue request to create a tracker issue. Mike? I'll try to get it added today, but I would be happy if somebody else were to do it in the mean time. Julian?
putting this bug in RESOLVED state since that's the right state for a tracker request.
Re-opening until we actually do have a related tracker issue.
(In reply to comment #9) > Re-opening until we actually do have a related tracker issue. > The need for a tracker issue is indicated by the TrackerRequest keyword. Per the process, it's correct for a bug awaiting a tracker issue to be resolved and marked TrackerRequest. See <http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html>. Note: I have a query for all bugs tagged with TrackerRequest and I will make sure they all get into the tracker.
Raised as http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/99