There is some initial thinking of a "Skin Browser" going on, where we could create a 3rd party tool to browse and organize skins. In support of this, it would be desirable to have a new [Section] in the skin where a set of standard (but probably growing over time) "metadata" could be stored. Prefer not to use [Variables] or [Rainmeter] as these already have a meaning and are used by the code. The only change I see to the code to support this is to detect and ignore any section called [Metadata] so a "Metadata is not a measure or meter!" error is not generated. No actual parsing or reacting to this section is anticipated for the code.

Can't it substitute writing as a comment for it? Although I don't know the details of "Skin Browser", does [Metadata] really need to be implemented in a program? I guess if browser just reads a text of metadata in the cofig file, a standardized comment is enough.

No, that won't work at all.

There is a standard, implemented in almost every programming language, to make it simple to read and write .ini and .xml files. I would be very opposed to not taking advantage of this and having to manually parse the .ini files looking for comments and then having to determine if a comment is meant to be a part of this process or is just a "comment".

This is not a big change, just have Rainmeter ignore any "section" called [Metadata]

Available in r190.