Support for site verification meta tag

Yes please! An option to specify the meta name, and a text box to add the description, which could be defined for a specific content type and/or on a per node basis.

And for version 5.x.

Presumably I could do this by creating my own metadata.inc file in the metatags folder? If I took abstract.inc as a template, I could just copy and amend it to produce my own tags?

Yes, iantresman, i'm also interested to do that... How can i add a new name tag form a .inc file ????

ok, i've create a new custom meta tag to create a tag named "subject" :
1 - i've made a copy of the file metatags/description.inc
2 - i've rename the copy of : metatags/subect.inc
3 - i've rename the functions :
- nodewords_description_prepare => nodewords_subject_prepare
- nodewords_description_form => nodewords_subject_form
and the line :
- '#title' => t('Description') => '#title' => t('Subject')
saving, and it works fine.

Here is the file attached... (
Now, i'd like to add a DC.subject meta tag, but it doesn't work : I don't know where the Name argument is defined ?

I will see if the Google site verification meta tag can be easily implemented, and in that case, I will implement it.

FYI if you just want the google site verification there is also the Site verification module. But if you're currently using the Meta tags module, it would make sense to have custom meta tag support for a case like this.

This is also useful for adding the set of Dublin Core metadata, whose meta tags are summarized here (see section Dublin Core (DC)). See also

• "Dublin Core and Head link tags"
• "Dublin Core Meta Tags"

The support for more Dublin Core meta tags is already reported in #518274: Add more Dublin Core meta tags.

>The support for more Dublin Core meta tags is already reported

Brilliant.

The support for the site verification meta tags as required by the main search engines has been implemented. If there is the need to add the support for a verification code as requested by other web services, feel free to re-open this report.

I am setting the status to fixed.

I am tagging this report to add it in the list of the differences between version 6.x-1.0 and the next official release.