idnits 2.17.1 draft-swartz-rdfcore-rdfxml-mediatype-05.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Looks like you're using RFC 2026 boilerplate. This must be updated to follow RFC 3978/3979, as updated by RFC 4748. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** There are 30 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 1 character in excess of 72. == There are 2 instances of lines with non-RFC2606-compliant FQDNs in the document. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year == The document seems to lack the recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC 2119 keywords. (The document does seem to have the reference to RFC 2119 which the ID-Checklist requires). -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (March 30, 2004) is 7331 days in the past. Is this intentional? -- Found something which looks like a code comment -- if you have code sections in the document, please surround them with '' and '' lines. Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: 'RDF' on line 187 == Unused Reference: '6' is defined on line 257, but no explicit reference was found in the text -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. '1' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. '2' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. '3' ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3023 (ref. '4') (Obsoleted by RFC 7303) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2048 (ref. '5') (Obsoleted by RFC 4288, RFC 4289) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2396 (ref. '8') (Obsoleted by RFC 3986) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2818 (ref. '10') (Obsoleted by RFC 9110) Summary: 4 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 5 warnings (==), 9 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group A. Swartz 3 Internet-Draft AaronSw.com 4 Expires: September 28, 2004 March 30, 2004 6 application/rdf+xml Media Type Registration 7 draft-swartz-rdfcore-rdfxml-mediatype-05 9 Status of this Memo 11 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 12 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. 14 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 15 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other 16 groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. 18 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 19 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 20 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 21 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 23 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http:// 24 www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 26 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 27 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 29 This Internet-Draft will expire on September 28, 2004. 31 Copyright Notice 33 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. 35 Abstract 37 This document describes a media type (application/rdf+xml) for use 38 with the XML serialization of the Resource Description Framework 39 (RDF). RDF is a language designed to support the Semantic Web, by 40 facilitating resource description and data exchange on the Web. RDF 41 provides common structures that can be used for interoperable data 42 exchange and follows the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) design 43 principles of interoperability, evolution, and decentralization. 45 Discussion of this Document 47 Please send comments to . To 48 subscribe, send a message with the body 'subscribe' to 49 . The mailing list is 50 publically archived at . 53 Table of Contents 55 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 56 2. application/rdf+xml Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 57 3. Fragment Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 58 4. Historical Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 59 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 60 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 61 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 62 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 63 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 64 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 65 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . 8 67 1. Introduction 69 RDF is a language designed to support the Semantic Web, by 70 facilitating resource description and data exchange on the Web. RDF 71 provides common structures that can be used for interoperable data 72 exchange and follows the W3C design principles of interoperability, 73 evolution, and decentralization. 75 While the RDF data model [2] can be serialized in many ways, the W3C 76 has defined the RDF/XML syntax [1] to allow RDF to be serialized in 77 an XML format. The application/rdf+xml media type allows RDF 78 consumers to identify RDF/XML documents so that they can be processed 79 properly. 81 2. application/rdf+xml Registration 83 This is a media type registration as defined in RFC 2048, 84 "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration 85 Procedures" [5] 87 MIME media type name: application 89 MIME subtype name: rdf+xml 91 Required parameters: none 93 Optional parameters: charset 95 Same as charset parameter of application/xml, defined in RFC 96 3023 [4]. 98 Encoding considerations: 100 Same as charset parameter of application/xml, defined in RFC 101 3023 [4]. 103 Security considerations: 105 See "Security Considerations" (Section 6). 107 Interoperability considerations: 109 It is recommended that RDF documents follow the newer RDF/XML 110 Syntax Grammar [1] as opposed to the older RDF Model and Syntax 111 specification [7]. 113 RDF is intended to allow common information to be exchanged 114 between disparate applications. A basis for building common 115 understanding is provided by a formal semantics [3], and 116 applications that use RDF should do so in ways that are 117 consistent with this. 119 Published specification: 121 see RDF/XML Syntax Grammar [1] and RDF: Concepts and Abstract 122 Syntax [2] and the older RDF Model and Syntax [7] 124 Applications which use this media type: 126 RDF is device-, platform-, and vendor-neutral and is supported 127 by a range of Web user agents and authoring tools. 129 Additional information: 131 Magic number(s): none 133 Although no byte sequences can be counted on to consistently 134 identify RDF, RDF documents will have the sequence "http:// 135 www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" to identify the RDF 136 namespace. This will usually be towards the top of the 137 document. 139 File extension(s): .rdf 141 Macintosh File Type Code(s): "rdf " 143 For further information: 145 Dan Brickley 147 RDF Interest Group 149 More information may be found on the RDF website: 151 153 Intended usage: COMMON 155 Author/Change controller: 157 The RDF specification is a work product of the World Wide Web 158 Consortium. The W3C and the W3C RDF Core Working Group have 159 change control over the specification. 161 3. Fragment Identifiers 163 The rdf:ID and rdf:about attributes can be used to define fragments 164 in an RDF document. 166 Section 4.1 of the URI specification [8] notes that the semantics of 167 a fragment identifier (part of a URI after a "#") is a property of 168 the data resulting from a retrieval action, and that the format and 169 interpretation of fragment identifiers is dependent on the media type 170 of the retrieval result. 172 In RDF, the thing identified by a URI with fragment identifier does 173 not necessarily bear any particular relationship to the thing 174 identified by the URI alone. This differs from some readings of the 175 URI specification [8], so attention is recommended when creating new 176 RDF terms which use fragment identifiers. 178 More details on RDF's treatment of fragment identifiers can be found 179 in the section "Fragment Identifiers" of the RDF Concepts document 180 [2]. 182 4. Historical Considerations 184 This media type was reserved in RFC 3023 [4], saying: 186 RDF documents identified using this MIME type are XML documents 187 whose content describes metadata, as defined by [RDF]. As a format 188 based on XML, RDF documents SHOULD use the '+xml' suffix 189 convention in their MIME content-type identifier. However, no 190 content type has yet been registered for RDF and so this media 191 type should not be used until such registration has been 192 completed. 194 5. IANA Considerations 196 This document calls for registration of a new MIME media type, 197 according to the registration in Section 2. 199 6. Security Considerations 201 RDF is a generic format for exchanging application information, but 202 application designers must not assume that it provides generic 203 protection against security threats. RFC 3023 [4], section 10, 204 discusses security concerns for generic XML, which are also 205 applicable to RDF. 207 RDF data can be secured for integrity, authenticity and 208 confidentiality using any of the mechanisms available for MIME and 209 XML data, including XML signature, XML encryption, S/MIME, OpenPGP or 210 transport or session level security (e.g. see [9], esp. sections 3.4, 211 3.5 3.10, [10], [11], [12]). 213 RDF is intended to be used in documents that may make assertions 214 about anything, and to this end includes a specification of formal 215 semantics [3]. The semantics provide a basis for combining 216 information from a variety of sources, which may lead to RDF 217 assertions of facts (either by direct assertion, or via logical 218 deduction) that are false, or whose veracity is unclear. RDF 219 application designers should not omit consideration of the 220 reliability of processed information. The formal semantics of RDF can 221 help to enhance reliability, since RDF assertions may be linked to a 222 formal description of their derivation. There is ongoing exploration 223 of mechanisms to record and handle provenance of RDF information. As 224 far as general techniques are concerned, these are still areas of 225 ongoing research, and application designers must be aware, as always, 226 of "Garbage-in, Garbage-out". 228 7. Acknowledgements 230 Thanks to Dan Connolly for writing the first version of this draft 231 [13], to Andy Powell for , to Marshall Rose for his converter, and to Graham Klyne, Jan Grant, and 234 Dave Beckett for their helpful comments on early versions of this 235 document. 237 Normative References 239 [1] Beckett, D., "RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised)", W3C 240 rdf-syntax-grammar, February 2004, . 243 [2] Klyne, G. and J. Carroll, "Resource Description Framework (RDF): 244 Concepts and Abstract Syntax", W3C rdf-concepts, February 2004, 245 . 247 [3] Hayes, P., "RDF Model Theory", W3C rdf-mt, February 2004, 248 . 250 [4] Murata, M., St.Laurent, S. and D. Kohn, "XML Media Types", RFC 251 3023, January 2001. 253 [5] Freed, N., Klensin, J. and J. Postel, "Multipurpose Internet 254 Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures", BCP 255 13, RFC 2048, November 1996. 257 [6] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement 258 Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 260 Informative References 262 [7] Lassila, O. and R. Swick, "Resource Description Framework (RDF) 263 Model and Syntax Specification", W3C REC-rdf-syntax, February 264 1999, . 266 [8] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R. and L. Masinter, "Uniform 267 Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", RFC 2396, August 268 1998. 270 [9] Bellovin, S., Schiller, J. and C. Kaufman, "Security Mechanisms 271 for the Internet", RFC 3631, December 2003. 273 [10] Rescorla, E., "HTTP Over TLS", RFC 2818, May 2000. 275 [11] Eastlake, D., Reagle, J. and D. Solo, "(Extensible Markup 276 Language) XML-Signature Syntax and Processing", RFC 3275, March 277 2002. 279 [12] Eastlake, D. and J. Reagle, "XML Encryption Syntax and 280 Processing", W3C xmlenc-core, December 2002, . 283 [13] Connolly, D., "A media type for Resource Description Framework 284 (RDF)", March 2001, . 286 Author's Address 288 Aaron Swartz 289 AaronSw.com 290 349 Marshman 291 Highland Park, IL 60035 292 USA 294 Phone: +1 847 432 8857 295 EMail: me@aaronsw.com 296 URI: http://www.aaronsw.com/ 298 Intellectual Property Statement 300 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 301 intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to 302 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 303 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 304 might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it 305 has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the 306 IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and 307 standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of 308 claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of 309 licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to 310 obtain a general license or permission for the use of such 311 proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can 312 be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. 314 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 315 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 316 rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice 317 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive 318 Director. 320 Full Copyright Statement 322 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. 324 This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to 325 others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it 326 or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published 327 and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any 328 kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are 329 included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this 330 document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing 331 the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other 332 Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of 333 developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for 334 copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be 335 followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than 336 English. 338 The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be 339 revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees. 341 This document and the information contained herein is provided on an 342 "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING 343 TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING 344 BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION 345 HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF 346 MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 348 Acknowledgment 350 Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the 351 Internet Society.