Document: draft-swartz-rdfcore-rdfxml-mediatype-04 Reviewer: Spencer Dawkins Date: March 31, 2004 * This draft is basically ready for publication as an Informational RFC, but has nits that should be fixed before publication. The nits I noticed are extremely minor - could be fixed in AUTH48. ------------------------------------------------ 1. Introduction RDF is a language designed to support the Semantic Web, by Spencer: could you provide a reference for "the Semantic Web"? It would also be nice to expand the first usage of RDF in the body of the document. 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 Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures [7] MIME media type name: application MIME subtype name: rdf+xml Required parameters: none Optional parameters: charset Same as charset parameter of application/xml. Spencer: maybe include a reference pointer here? Encoding considerations: Same as charset parameter of application/xml. Spencer: and here? Security considerations: Security considerations include many of those described in section 10 of RFC 3023 [5] and more, due to the semantic nature of RDF. RDF documents may make assertions about anything and it is expected that future work with Digital Signature and "Web of Trust" will make it more clear how to build secure RDF systems. Spencer: this security considerations section seems light even for an Informational RFC - you seem to say that some of the considerations from [5] Section 10 don't apply, and some new ones do, but then shrug. Even a list of these considerations would be an improvement (leaving this investigation to the reader seems unwise). 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 [4]. RDF is intended to allow common information to be exchanged between disparate applications. A basis for building common 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 [4] 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 RDF Interest Group More information may be found on the RDF website: 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. Spencer: it would be nice to provide contact information here, as well as under "For further information:" 4. Historical Considerations This media type was reserved in RFC 3023 [5], 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. Spencer: so, does this registration remove this consideration from [5]? I'm not quite sure from the text what the point you're making is.