Network Working Group A. Swartz
Internet-Draft AaronSw.com
Expires: September 28, 2004 March 30, 2004
application/rdf+xml Media Type Registration
draft-swartz-rdfcore-rdfxml-mediatype-05
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://
www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 28, 2004.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
This document describes a media type (application/rdf+xml) for use
with the XML serialization of the Resource Description Framework
(RDF). RDF is a language designed to support the Semantic Web, by
facilitating resource description and data exchange on the Web. RDF
provides common structures that can be used for interoperable data
exchange and follows the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) design
principles of interoperability, evolution, and decentralization.
Discussion of this Document
Please send comments to <mailto:www-rdf-comments@w3.org>. To
subscribe, send a message with the body 'subscribe' to
<mailto:www-rdf-comments-request@w3.org>. The mailing list is
Swartz Expires September 28, 2004 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft application/rdf+xml March 2004
publically archived at <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/
www-rdf-comments/>.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. application/rdf+xml Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Fragment Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Historical Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . 8
Swartz Expires September 28, 2004 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft application/rdf+xml March 2004
1. Introduction
RDF is a language designed to support the Semantic Web, by
facilitating resource description and data exchange on the Web. RDF
provides common structures that can be used for interoperable data
exchange and follows the W3C design principles of interoperability,
evolution, and decentralization.
While the RDF data model [2] can be serialized in many ways, the W3C
has defined the RDF/XML syntax [1] to allow RDF to be serialized in
an XML format. The application/rdf+xml media type allows RDF
consumers to identify RDF/XML documents so that they can be processed
properly.
2. application/rdf+xml Registration
This is a media type registration as defined in RFC 2048,
"Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration
Procedures" [5]
MIME media type name: application
MIME subtype name: rdf+xml
Required parameters: none
Optional parameters: charset
Same as charset parameter of application/xml, defined in RFC
3023 [4].
Encoding considerations:
Same as charset parameter of application/xml, defined in RFC
3023 [4].
Security considerations:
See "Security Considerations" (Section 6).
Interoperability considerations:
It is recommended that RDF documents follow the newer RDF/XML
Syntax Grammar [1] as opposed to the older RDF Model and Syntax
specification [7].
RDF is intended to allow common information to be exchanged
between disparate applications. A basis for building common
Swartz Expires September 28, 2004 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft application/rdf+xml March 2004
understanding is provided by a formal semantics [3], and
applications that use RDF should do so in ways that are
consistent with this.
Published specification:
see RDF/XML Syntax Grammar [1] and RDF: Concepts and Abstract
Syntax [2] and the older RDF Model and Syntax [7]
Applications which use this media type:
RDF is device-, platform-, and vendor-neutral and is supported
by a range of Web user agents and authoring tools.
Additional information:
Magic number(s): none
Although no byte sequences can be counted on to consistently
identify RDF, RDF documents will have the sequence "http://
www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" to identify the RDF
namespace. This will usually be towards the top of the
document.
File extension(s): .rdf
Macintosh File Type Code(s): "rdf "
For further information:
Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
RDF Interest Group <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
More information may be found on the RDF website:
<http://www.w3.org/RDF/>
Intended usage: COMMON
Author/Change controller:
The RDF specification is a work product of the World Wide Web
Consortium. The W3C and the W3C RDF Core Working Group have
change control over the specification.
Swartz Expires September 28, 2004 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft application/rdf+xml March 2004
3. Fragment Identifiers
The rdf:ID and rdf:about attributes can be used to define fragments
in an RDF document.
Section 4.1 of the URI specification [8] notes that the semantics of
a fragment identifier (part of a URI after a "#") is a property of
the data resulting from a retrieval action, and that the format and
interpretation of fragment identifiers is dependent on the media type
of the retrieval result.
In RDF, the thing identified by a URI with fragment identifier does
not necessarily bear any particular relationship to the thing
identified by the URI alone. This differs from some readings of the
URI specification [8], so attention is recommended when creating new
RDF terms which use fragment identifiers.
More details on RDF's treatment of fragment identifiers can be found
in the section "Fragment Identifiers" of the RDF Concepts document
[2].
4. Historical Considerations
This media type was reserved in RFC 3023 [4], saying:
RDF documents identified using this MIME type are XML documents
whose content describes metadata, as defined by [RDF]. As a format
based on XML, RDF documents SHOULD use the '+xml' suffix
convention in their MIME content-type identifier. However, no
content type has yet been registered for RDF and so this media
type should not be used until such registration has been
completed.
5. IANA Considerations
This document calls for registration of a new MIME media type,
according to the registration in Section 2.
6. Security Considerations
RDF is a generic format for exchanging application information, but
application designers must not assume that it provides generic
protection against security threats. RFC 3023 [4], section 10,
discusses security concerns for generic XML, which are also
applicable to RDF.
RDF data can be secured for integrity, authenticity and
confidentiality using any of the mechanisms available for MIME and
Swartz Expires September 28, 2004 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft application/rdf+xml March 2004
XML data, including XML signature, XML encryption, S/MIME, OpenPGP or
transport or session level security (e.g. see [9], esp. sections 3.4,
3.5 3.10, [10], [11], [12]).
RDF is intended to be used in documents that may make assertions
about anything, and to this end includes a specification of formal
semantics [3]. The semantics provide a basis for combining
information from a variety of sources, which may lead to RDF
assertions of facts (either by direct assertion, or via logical
deduction) that are false, or whose veracity is unclear. RDF
application designers should not omit consideration of the
reliability of processed information. The formal semantics of RDF can
help to enhance reliability, since RDF assertions may be linked to a
formal description of their derivation. There is ongoing exploration
of mechanisms to record and handle provenance of RDF information. As
far as general techniques are concerned, these are still areas of
ongoing research, and application designers must be aware, as always,
of "Garbage-in, Garbage-out".
7. Acknowledgements
Thanks to Dan Connolly for writing the first version of this draft
[13], to Andy Powell for <http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/
#mime-types-for-rdf-docs>, to Marshall Rose for his <http://
xml.resource.org/> converter, and to Graham Klyne, Jan Grant, and
Dave Beckett for their helpful comments on early versions of this
document.
Normative References
[1] Beckett, D., "RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised)", W3C
rdf-syntax-grammar, February 2004, <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/
REC-rdf-syntax-grammar-20040210/>.
[2] Klyne, G. and J. Carroll, "Resource Description Framework (RDF):
Concepts and Abstract Syntax", W3C rdf-concepts, February 2004,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/>.
[3] Hayes, P., "RDF Model Theory", W3C rdf-mt, February 2004,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/>.
[4] Murata, M., St.Laurent, S. and D. Kohn, "XML Media Types", RFC
3023, January 2001.
[5] Freed, N., Klensin, J. and J. Postel, "Multipurpose Internet
Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures", BCP
13, RFC 2048, November 1996.
Swartz Expires September 28, 2004 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft application/rdf+xml March 2004
[6] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
Informative References
[7] Lassila, O. and R. Swick, "Resource Description Framework (RDF)
Model and Syntax Specification", W3C REC-rdf-syntax, February
1999, <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax>.
[8] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R. and L. Masinter, "Uniform
Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", RFC 2396, August
1998.
[9] Bellovin, S., Schiller, J. and C. Kaufman, "Security Mechanisms
for the Internet", RFC 3631, December 2003.
[10] Rescorla, E., "HTTP Over TLS", RFC 2818, May 2000.
[11] Eastlake, D., Reagle, J. and D. Solo, "(Extensible Markup
Language) XML-Signature Syntax and Processing", RFC 3275, March
2002.
[12] Eastlake, D. and J. Reagle, "XML Encryption Syntax and
Processing", W3C xmlenc-core, December 2002, <http://
www.w3.org/TR/xmlenc-core/>.
[13] Connolly, D., "A media type for Resource Description Framework
(RDF)", March 2001, <http://www.w3.org/2001/03mr/rdf_mt>.
Author's Address
Aaron Swartz
AaronSw.com
349 Marshman
Highland Park, IL 60035
USA
Phone: +1 847 432 8857
EMail: me@aaronsw.com
URI: http://www.aaronsw.com/
Swartz Expires September 28, 2004 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft application/rdf+xml March 2004
Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it
has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the
IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of
claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of
licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to
obtain a general license or permission for the use of such
proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can
be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive
Director.
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
Swartz Expires September 28, 2004 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft application/rdf+xml March 2004
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Swartz Expires September 28, 2004 [Page 9]