You are here: irt.org | RFCs | RFC7284 [ previous next ]
Independent Submission M. Lanthaler
Request for Comments: 7284
Category: Informational June 2014
ISSN: 2070-1721
The Profile URI Registry
Abstract
This document defines a registry for profile URIs to be used in
specifications standardizing profiles.
Status of This Memo
This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
published for informational purposes.
This is a contribution to the RFC Series, independently of any other
RFC stream. The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at
its discretion and makes no statement about its value for
implementation or deployment. Documents approved for publication by
the RFC Editor are not a candidate for any level of Internet
Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7284.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document.
Lanthaler Informational [Page 1]
RFC 7284 The Profile URI Registry June 2014 Table of Contents 1. Introduction ....................................................2 2. Registration Process ............................................2 3. Example Registration Request ....................................2 4. IANA Considerations .............................................3 4.1. Initial Registry Contents ..................................4 5. Security Considerations .........................................4 6. Acknowledgements ................................................4 7. Normative References ............................................5 1. Introduction Profiles, as defined by [RFC6906], can be used to signal support for additional semantics, such as constraints, conventions, extensions, or any other aspects that do not alter the basic media type semantics. Profiles are identified by a URI and can thus be created without central coordination. Similar to media types and link relation types, it is, in some cases, beneficial to centrally manage profile URIs to ensure interoperability and decrease the coupling between clients and servers. This allows the independent evolution of clients and servers as both are coupled to these central contracts instead of being coupled to each other. Therefore, this document establishes an IANA registry for profile URIs. 2. Registration Process All elements in this registry require a URI in order to be registered. The meaning of the profile URI should be documented in a permanent and readily available public specification in sufficient detail so that interoperability between independent implementations is possible (see the registration template in Section 4). An example registration request can be found in Section 3. 3. Example Registration Request The following is an example registration request for the profile URI http://example.com/profiles/example. This is a request to IANA to please register the profile URI "http://example.com/profiles/example" in the "Profile URIs" registry according [RFC7284]. Lanthaler Informational [Page 2]
RFC 7284 The Profile URI Registry June 2014 o Profile URI: http://example.com/profiles/example o Common Name: My Profile o Description: An exemplary profile URI registration. o Reference: [the relevant specification] 4. IANA Considerations This document establishes the "Profile URIs" registry. The registration procedure for new entries requires a request in the form of the following template and is "First Come First Served" per [RFC5226]. Instructions for a registrant to request the registration of a profile URI are in Section 2. The underlying registry data (e.g., the XML file) must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions [TRUST]. The registration template is: o Profile URI: The URI that identifies the registered profile. o Common Name: The name by which the profile being registered is generally known. o Description: A relatively short description of the profile. For simple profiles, this might be all the documentation that is required and there might be no reference document. In those cases, be sure this description adequately documents the profile and is suitable for interoperable implementation. o Reference: Reference to the document that specifies the URI, preferably including a URI that can be used to retrieve a copy of the document. An indication of the relevant sections may also be included. This is recommended but can be left blank if the "Description" field provides sufficient documentation. o Notes: [optional] Lanthaler Informational [Page 3]
RFC 7284 The Profile URI Registry June 2014 4.1. Initial Registry Contents The "Profile URIs" registry's initial contents are: o Profile URI: urn:example:profile-uri o Common Name: Exemplary Profile o Description: A profile to be used in examples, in accordance with [RFC6963]. o Reference: [RFC7284] o Profile URI: http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/ o Common Name: Dublin Core HTML metadata profile o Description: A set of conventions by which a Dublin Core metadata description set can be can be represented within an (X)HTML web page using (X)HTML elements and attributes. o Reference: [DC-HTML] o Profile URI: http://www.w3.org/ns/json-ld#expanded o Common Name: Expanded JSON-LD o Description: A profile URI to request or signal expanded JSON-LD document form. o Reference: [JSON-LD] o Profile URI: http://www.w3.org/ns/json-ld#compacted o Common Name: Compacted JSON-LD o Description: A profile URI to request or signal compacted JSON-LD document form. o Reference: [JSON-LD] o Profile URI: http://www.w3.org/ns/json-ld#flattened o Common Name: Flattened JSON-LD o Description: A profile URI to request or signal flattened JSON-LD document form. o Reference: [JSON-LD] 5. Security Considerations There are no additional security considerations beyond those already inherent to using URIs. Security considerations for URIs in general can be found in [RFC3986]. 6. Acknowledgements Thanks to Dave Cridland, Barry Leiba, Nevil Brownlee, and Peter Saint-Andre for valuable comments and suggestions. Lanthaler Informational [Page 4]
RFC 7284 The Profile URI Registry June 2014 7. Normative References [DC-HTML] Johnston, P. and A. Powell, "Expressing Dublin Core metadata using HTML/XHTML meta and link elements", Dublin Core Metadata Initiative Recommendation, August 2008, <http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/>. [JSON-LD] Sporny, M., Kellogg, G., and M. Lanthaler, "JSON-LD 1.0", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation, January 2014, <http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/>. [RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC 3986, January 2005. [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, May 2008. [RFC6906] Wilde, E., "The 'profile' Link Relation Type", RFC 6906, March 2013. [RFC6963] Saint-Andre, P., "A Uniform Resource Name (URN) Namespace for Examples", BCP 183, RFC 6963, May 2013. [TRUST] IETF, "Trust Legal Provisions (TLP)", <http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info>. Author's Address Markus Lanthaler EMail: mail@markus-lanthaler.com URI: http://www.markus-lanthaler.com/ Lanthaler Informational [Page 5]