[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: please review "text/owl-functional" and "application/owl+xml"



Hello Sandro,

Any reason why your Unicode reference is the outdated 3.0
(currently 5.0)?

Regards,   Martin.

At 09:03 09/01/06, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>
>The following two media type registrations are currently published, each
>as part a of W3C Last Call Working Draft ([1] [2]), and will soon be
>submitted to the IESG for review, approval, and registration with IANA
>(as per [3]).
>
>At this point, we would appreciate comments on this registration
>information.  If you see any problems, please let us know; I'll act as a
>liason between these IETF lists and the W3C Working Group responsible
>for these specifications.
>
>      -- Sandro
>
>[1] 
>http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax/#Appendix:_Internet_Media_Type.2C_File_Extension.2C_and_Macintosh_File_Type
>[2] 
>http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-xml-serialization/#Appendix:_Internet_Media_Type.2C_File_Extension.2C_and_Macintosh_File_Type
>[3] http://www.w3.org/2002/06/registering-mediatype
>
>================================================================
>
>Type name
>
>    text 
>
>Subtype name
>
>    owl-functional 
>
>Required parameters
>
>    None 
>
>Optional parameters
>
>    charset 
>
>           This parameter may be required when transfering non-ASCII
>           data across some protocols. If present, the value of charset
>           should be UTF-8.
>
>Encoding considerations
>
>    The syntax of the OWL functional-style Syntax is expressed over code
>    points in Unicode [UNICODE]. The encoding should be UTF-8 [RFC3629],
>    but other encodings are allowed.
>
>    [[ UNICODE: The Unicode Standard Version 3.0, Addison Wesley, Reading
>    MA, 2000, ISBN: 0-201-61633-5,
>    http://www.unicode.org/unicode/standard/standard.html ]]
>
>Security considerations
>
>    The OWL functional-style Syntax uses IRIs as term
>    identifiers. Applications interpreting data expressed in the OWL
>    functional-style Syntax should address the security issues of
>    Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs) [RFC3987] Section 8,
>    as well as Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax
>    [RFC3986] Section 7. Multiple IRIs may have the same
>    appearance. Characters in different scripts may look similar (a
>    Cyrillic "o" may appear similar to a Latin "o"). A character
>    followed by combining characters may have the same visual
>    representation as another character (LATIN SMALL LETTER E followed
>    by COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT has the same visual representation as
>    LATIN SMALL LETTER E WITH ACUTE). Any person or application that is
>    writing or interpreting data in the OWL functional-style Syntax must
>    take care to use the IRI that matches the intended semantics, and
>    avoid IRIs that may look similar. Further information about matching
>    of similar characters can be found in Unicode Security
>    Considerations [UNISEC] and Internationalized Resource Identifiers
>    (IRIs) [RFC3987] Section 8.
>
>    [[ UNISEC: Unicode Security Considerations, Mark Davis and Michel
>    Suignard, July 2008, http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr36/ ]]
>
>Interoperability considerations
>
>    There are no known interoperability issues. 
>
>Published specification
>
>    This specification. 
>    
>    [[ http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax/ ]]
>
>Applications which use this media type
>
>    No widely deployed applications are known to currently use this
>    media type. It is expected that OWL tools will use this media type
>    in the future.
>
>Additional information
>
>    None. 
>
>Magic number(s)
>
>    OWL functional-style Syntax documents may have the strings
>    'Namespace:' or 'Ontology:' (case dependent) near the beginning of
>    the document.
>
>File extension(s)
>
>    ".ofn" 
>
>Base IRI
>
>    There are no constructs in the OWL functional-style Syntax to change
>    the Base IRI.
>
>Macintosh file type code(s)
>
>    "TEXT" 
>
>Person & email address to contact for further information
>
>    Sandro Hawke <sandro@xxxxxx> 
>
>Intended usage
>
>    COMMON 
>
>Restrictions on usage
>
>    None 
>
>Author/Change controller
>
>    The OWL functional-style Syntax is the product of the W3C OWL
>    Working Group; W3C reserves change control over this specification.
>
>================================================================
>
>Type name
>
>    application 
>
>Subtype name
>
>    owl+xml 
>
>Required parameters
>
>    None 
>
>Optional parameters
>
>    charset 
>
>           This parameter may be required when transfering non-ascii
>           data across some protocols.
>
>Encoding considerations
>
>    The syntax of the OWL XML Serialization is expressed over code
>    points in Unicode [UNICODE].
>
>    [[ UNICODE: The Unicode Standard Version 3.0, Addison Wesley, Reading
>    MA, 2000, ISBN: 0-201-61633-5,
>    http://www.unicode.org/unicode/standard/standard.html ]]
>
>Security considerations
>
>    The OWL XML Serialization uses IRIs as term
>    identifiers. Applications interpreting data expressed in the OWL XML
>    Serialization should address the security issues of
>    Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs) [RFC3987] Section 8,
>    as well as Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax
>    [RFC3986] Section 7. Multiple IRIs may have the same
>    appearance. Characters in different scripts may look similar (a
>    Cyrillic "o" may appear similar to a Latin "o"). A character
>    followed by combining characters may have the same visual
>    representation as another character (LATIN SMALL LETTER E followed
>    by COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT has the same visual representation as
>    LATIN SMALL LETTER E WITH ACUTE). Any person or application that is
>    writing or interpreting data in the OWL XML Serialization must take
>    care to use the IRI that matches the intended semantics, and avoid
>    IRIs that may look similar. Further information about matching of
>    similar characters can be found in Unicode Security Considerations
>    [UNISEC] and Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs) [RFC3987]
>    Section 8.
>
>    [[ UNISEC: Unicode Security Considerations, Mark Davis and Michel
>    Suignard, July 2008, http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr36/ ]]
>
>Interoperability considerations
>
>    There are no known interoperability issues. 
>
>Published specification
>
>    This specification. 
>
>    [[ http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-xml-serialization/ ]]
>
>Applications which use this media type
>
>    None at current time. 
>
>Additional information
>
>    None. 
>
>Magic number(s)
>
>    OWL XML documents are XML documents and thus may have initial
>    strings similar to any XML document.
>
>File extension(s)
>
>    ".owx" 
>
>Base URI
>
>    As in XML. 
>
>Macintosh file type code(s)
>
>    "TEXT" 
>
>Person & email address to contact for further information
>
>    Sandro Hawke <sandro@xxxxxx> 
>
>Intended usage
>
>    COMMON 
>
>Restrictions on usage
>
>    None 
>
>Author/Change controller
>
>    The OWL XML Serialization is the product of the W3C OWL Working
>    Group; W3C reserves change control over this specification.


#-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-#-#  http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp       mailto:duerst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx