[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-vandesompel-identifier) 00 01 02 03 04

Network Working Group                                   H. Van de Sompel
Internet-Draft                            Los Alamos National Laboratory
Intended status: Informational                                 M. Nelson
Expires: December 27, 2018                       Old Dominion University
                                                               G. Bilder
                                                                Crossref
                                                                J. Kunze
                                              California Digital Library
                                                               S. Warner
                                                      Cornell University
                                                           June 25, 2018


   cite-as: A Link Relation to Convey a Preferred URI for Referencing
                      draft-vandesompel-citeas-03

Abstract

   A web resource is routinely referenced by means of the URI with which
   it is directly accessed.  But cases exist where referencing a
   resource by means of a URI, different than that access URI, is
   preferred.  This specification defines a link relation type that can
   be used to convey such a preference.

Note to Readers

   Please discuss this draft on the ART mailing list
   (<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/art>).

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   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."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on December 27, 2018.






Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 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
   (https://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.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  Persistent Identifiers  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.2.  Version Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.3.  Preferred Social Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.4.  Multi-Resource Publications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  The "cite-as" Relation Type for Expressing a Preferred URI
       for the Purpose of Referencing  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  Distinction with Other Relation Types . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     5.1.  bookmark  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     5.2.  canonical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  Examples  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     6.1.  Persistent HTTP URI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     6.2.  Version URIs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     6.3.  Preferred Profile URI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     6.4.  Multi-Resource Publication  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     7.1.  Link Relation Type: cite-as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   Appendix A.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16

1.  Introduction

   A web resource is routinely referenced (e.g. linked, bookmarked) by
   means of the URI with which it is directly accessed.  But cases exist
   where referencing a resource by means of a different URI is



Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


   preferred, for example because the latter URI is intended to be more
   persistent over time.  Currently, there is no link relation type to
   convey such alternative referencing preference; this specification
   addresses this deficit by introducing a link relation type intended
   for that purpose.

2.  Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

   This specification uses the terms "link context" and "link target" as
   defined in [RFC8288].  These terms respectively correspond with
   "Context IRI" and "Target IRI" as used in [RFC5988].  Although
   defined as IRIs, in common scenarios they are also URIs.

   Additionally, this specification uses the following terms:

   o  "access URI": A URI at which a user agent accesses a web resource.

   o  "reference URI": A URI, other than the access URI, that should
      preferentially be used for referencing.

   By interacting with the access URI, the user agent may discover typed
   links.  For such links, the access URI is the link context.

3.  Scenarios

3.1.  Persistent Identifiers

   Despite sound advice regarding the design of Cool URIs [CoolURIs],
   link rot ("HTTP 404 Not Found") is a common phenomena when following
   links on the web.  Certain communities of practice have introduced
   solutions to combat this problem that typically consist of:

   o  Accepting the reality that the web location of a resource - the
      access URI - may change over time.

   o  Minting an additional URI for the resource - the reference URI -
      that is specifically intended to remain persistent over time.

   o  Redirecting (typically "HTTP 301 Moved Permanently", "HTTP 302
      Found", or "HTTP 303 See Other") from the reference URI to the
      access URI.

   o  As a community, committing to adjust that redirection whenever the
      access URI changes over time.



Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


   This approach is, for example, used by:

   o  Scholarly publishers that use DOIs [DOIs] to identify articles and
      DOI URLs [DOI-URLs] as a means to keep cross-publisher article-to-
      article links operational, even when the journals in which the
      articles are published change hands from one publisher to another,
      for example, as a result of an acquisition.

   o  Authors of controlled vocabularies that use PURLs [PURLs] for
      vocabulary terms to ensure that the term URIs remain stable even
      if management of the vocabulary is transfered to a new custodian.

   o  A variety of organizations, including libraries, archives, and
      museums that assign ARK URLs [draft-kunze-ark-18] to information
      objects in order to support long-term access.

   In order for the investments in infrastructure involved in these
   approaches to pay off, and hence for links to effectively remain
   operational as intended, it is crucial that a resource be referenced
   by means of its reference URI.  However, the access URI is where a
   user agent actually accesses the resource (e.g., it is the URI in the
   browser's address bar).  As such, there is a considerable risk that
   the access URI instead of the reference URI is used for referencing
   [PIDs-must-be-used].

   The link relation type defined in this specification allows to convey
   to user agents that the reference URI is the preferred URI for
   referencing.

3.2.  Version Identifiers

   Resource versioning systems often use a naming approach whereby:

   o  The most recent version of a resource is at any time available at
      the same, generic URI.

   o  Each version of the resource - including the most recent one - has
      a distinct version URI.

   For example, Wikipedia uses generic URIs of the form
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Doe and version URIs of the form
   https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Doe&oldid=776253882.

   While the current version of a resource is accessed at the generic
   URI, some versioning systems adhere to a policy that favors linking
   and referencing a specific version URI.  To express this using the
   terminology of Section 2, these policies intend that the generic URI
   is the access URI, and that the version URI is the reference URI.



Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


   These policies are informed by the understanding that the content at
   the generic URI is likely to evolve over time, and that accurate
   links or references should lead to the content as it was at the time
   of referencing.  To that end, Wikipedia's "Permanent link" and "Cite
   this page" functionalities promote the version URI, not the generic
   URI.

   The link relation type defined in this specification allows to convey
   to user agents that the version URI is preferred over the generic URI
   for referencing.

3.3.  Preferred Social Identifier

   A web user commonly has multiple profiles on the web, for example,
   one per social network, a personal homepage, a professional homepage,
   a FOAF profile [FOAF], etc.  Each of these profiles is accessible at
   a distinct URI.  But the user may have a preference for one of those
   profiles, for example, because it is most complete, kept up-to-date,
   or expected to be long-lived.  As an example, the first author of
   this document has, among others, the following profile URIs:

   o  https://hvdsomp.info

   o  http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/

   o  https://www.linkedin.com/in/herbertvandesompel/

   o  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126

   Of these, from the perspective of the person described by these
   profiles, the first URI may be the preferred profile URI for the
   purpose of referencing because the domain is not under the
   custodianship of a third party.  When an agent accesses another
   profile URI, such as http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/, this
   preference for referencing by means of the first URI could be
   expressed.

   The link relation type defined in this specification allows to convey
   to user agents that a profile URI - the reference URI - other than
   the one the agent is accessing - the access URI - is preferred for
   referencing.

3.4.  Multi-Resource Publications

   When publishing on the web, it is not uncommon to make distinct
   components of a publication available as different web resources,
   each with their own URI.  For example:




Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


   o  Contemporary scholarly publications routinely consists of a
      traditional article as well as additional materials that are
      considered an integral part of the publication such as
      supplementary information, high-resolution images, a video
      recording of an experiment.

   o  Scientific or governmental open data sets frequently consist of
      multiple files.

   o  Online books typically consist of multiple chapters.

   While each of these components are accessible at their distinct URI -
   the access URI - they often also share a URI assigned to the
   intellectual publication of which they are components - the reference
   URI.

   The link relation type defined in this specification allows to convey
   to user agents that, for the purpose of referencing, the reference
   URI of the intellectual publication is preferred over an access URI
   of a component of the publication.

4.  The "cite-as" Relation Type for Expressing a Preferred URI for the
    Purpose of Referencing

   A link with the "cite-as" relation type indicates that, for
   referencing the link context, use of the URI of the link target is
   preferred over use of the URI of the link context.  It allows the
   resource identified by the access URI (link context) to unambiguously
   link to its corresponding reference URI (link target), thereby
   expressing that the link target is preferred over the link context
   for the purpose of permanent citation.

   The link target of a "cite-as" link SHOULD support protocol-based
   access as a means to ensure that applications that store them can
   effectively re-use them for access.

   The link target of a "cite-as" link SHOULD provide the ability for a
   user agent to follow its nose back to the context of the link, e.g.
   by following redirects and/or links.  This helps a user agent to
   establish trust in the target URI.

   Because a link with the "cite-as" relation type expresses a preferred
   URI for the purpose of referencing, the access URI SHOULD only
   provide one link with that relation type.  If more than one "cite-as"
   link is provided, the user agent may decide to select one (e.g. an
   HTTP URI over a mailto URI), for example, based on the purpose that
   the reference URI will serve.




Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


   Providing a link with the "cite-as" relation type does not prevent
   using the access URI for the purpose of referencing if such
   specificity is needed for the application at hand.  For example, in
   the case of scenario Section 3.4 the access URI is likely required
   for the purpose of annotating a specific component of an intellectual
   publication.  Yet, the annotation application may also want to
   appropriately include the reference URI in the annotation.

   Applications can leverage the information provided by a "cite-as"
   link in a variety of ways, for example:

   o  Bookmarking tools and citation managers can take this preference
      into account when recording a URI.

   o  Webometrics applications that trace URIs can trace both the access
      URI and the reference URI.

   o  Discovery tools can support look-up by means of both the access
      and the reference URI.  This includes web archives that typically
      make archived versions of web resources discoverable by means of
      the original access URI of the archived resource; they can
      additionally make these archived resources discoverable by means
      of the associated reference URI.

5.  Distinction with Other Relation Types

   Some existing IANA-registered relationships intuitively resemble the
   relationship that "cite-as" is intended to convey.  But a closer
   inspection of these candidates provided in the blog posts
   [identifier-blog], [canonical-blog], and [bookmark-blog] shows that
   they are not appropriate for various reasons and that a new relation
   type is required.  The remainder of this section provides a summary
   of the detailed explanations provided in the referenced blog posts.

   It can readily be seen that the following relation types are not fit
   for purpose:

   o  "alternate" [RFC4287]: The link target provides an alternate
      version of the content at the link context.  These are typically
      variants according to dimensions that are subject to content
      negotiation, for example the same content with varying Content-
      Type (e.g., application/pdf vs. text/html) and/or Content-Language
      (e.g., en vs. fr).  The representations provided by the context
      URIs and target URIs in the scenarios of Section 3.1 through
      Section 3.4 are not variants in the sense intended by [RFC4287],
      and, as such, the use of "alternate" is not appropriate.





Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


   o  "duplicate" [RFC6249]: The link target is a resource whose
      available representations are byte-for-byte identical with the
      corresponding representations of the link context, for example, an
      identical file on a mirror site.  In none of the above scenarios
      do the link context and the link target provide identical content.
      As such, the use of "duplicate" is not appropriate.

   o  "related" [RFC4287]: The link target is a resource that is related
      to the link context.  While "related" could be used in all of the
      above scenarios, its semantics are too vague to convey the
      specific semantics intended by "cite-as".

   Two existing IANA-registered relationships deserve closer attention
   and are discussed in the remainder of this section.

5.1.  bookmark

   "bookmark" [W3C.REC-html5-20151028]: The link target provides a URI
   for the purpose of bookmarking the link context.

   The intent of "bookmark" is closest to that of "cite-as" in that the
   link target is intended to be a permalink for the link context, for
   bookmarking purposes.  The relation type dates back to the earliest
   days of news syndication, before blogs and news feeds had permalinks
   to identify individual resources that were aggregated into a single
   page.  As such, its intent is to provide permalinks for different
   sections of an HTML document.  It was originally used with HTML
   elements such as <div>, <h1>, <h2>, etc. and, more recently, HTML5
   revised it to be exclusively used with the <article> element.
   Moreover, it is explictly excluded from use in the <link> element in
   HTML <head>, and, as a consequence, in the HTTP Link header that is
   semantically equivalent.  For these technical and semantic reasons,
   the use of "bookmark" to convey the relationship intented by "cite-
   as" is not appropriate.

   A more detailed justification regarding the inappropriatenss of
   "bookmark", including a thorough overview of its turbulent history,
   is provided in [bookmark-blog].

5.2.  canonical

   "canonical" [RFC6596]: The meaning of "canonical" is commonly
   misunderstood on the basis of its brief definition as being "the
   preferred version of a resource."  The description in the abstract of
   [RFC6596] is more helpful and states that "canonical" is intended to
   link to a resource that is preferred over resources with duplicative
   content.  A more detailed reading of [RFC6596] clarifies that the
   intended meaning is preferred for the purpose of content indexing.  A



Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


   typical use case is linking from each page in a multi-page magazine
   article to a single page version of the article provided for indexing
   by search engines: the former pages provide content that is
   duplicative to the superset content that is available at the latter
   page.

   The semantics intended by "canonical" as preferred for the purpose of
   content indexing differ from the semantics intended by "cite-as" as
   preferred for the purpose of referencing.  A further exploration of
   the various scenarios shows that the use of "canonical" is not
   appropriate to convey the semantics intended by "cite-as":

   o  Scenario of Section 3.1: The reference URI that is intended to be
      persistent over time does not serve content that needs to be
      indexed, it merely redirects to the access URI.  Since the meaning
      intended by "canonical" is "preferred for the purpose of content
      indexing", it is not appropriate to point at the reference URI
      (persistent identifier) using the "canonical" relation type.
      Moreover, Section 6.1 shows that scholarly publishers that assign
      persistent identifiers, already use the "canonical" relation type
      for search engine optimization, and how that use contrasts with
      the intended use of "cite-as".

   o  Scenario of Section 3.2: In most common cases, custodians of
      resource versioning systems want search engines to index the most
      recent version of a page and hence would use a "canonical" link to
      point from version URIs of a resource to the associated generic
      URI.  Wikipedia effectively does this.  However, for some resource
      versioning systems, including Wikipedia, for the purpose of
      referencing, version URIs are preferred.  As such, a "cite-as"
      link would point from the generic URI to the most recent version
      URI.  That is, in the opposite direction of the "canonical" link.

   o  Scenario of Section 3.3: The content at the link target and the
      link context are different profiles for a same person.  Each
      profile, not just a preferred one, should be indexed.  But a
      single one could be preferred for referencing.

   o  Scenario of Section 3.4: The content at the link target, if any,
      would typically be a landing page that includes descriptive
      metadata pertaining to the multi-resource publication and links to
      its component resources.  Each component resource provides content
      that is different, not duplicative, to the landing page.

   A more detailed justification regarding the inappropriatenss of
   "canonical", including examples, is provided in [canonical-blog].





Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


6.  Examples

   Sections Section 6.1 through Section 6.4 show examples of the use of
   links with the "cite-as" relation type.  They illustrate how the
   typed links can be used in a response header and/or response body.

6.1.  Persistent HTTP URI

   PLOS ONE is one of many scholarly publishers that assigns DOIs to the
   articles it publishes.  For example, https://doi.org/10.1371/
   journal.pone.0171057 is the persistent identifier for such an
   article.  Via the DOI resolver, this persistent identifier redirects
   to http://journals.plos.org/plosone/doi?id=10.1371/
   journal.pone.0171057 in the plos.org domain.  This URI itself
   redirects to http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/
   journal.pone.0171057, which delivers the actual article in HTML.

   The HTML article contains a <link> element with the "canonical"
   relation type pointing at itself,
   http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/
   journal.pone.0167475.  As per Section 5.2, this indicates that the
   article content at that URI should be indexed by search engines.

   PLOS ONE can additionally provide a link with the "cite-as" relation
   type pointing at the persistent identifier to indicate it is the
   preferred URI for permanent citation of the article.  Figure 1 shows
   the addition of the "cite-as" link both in the HTTP header and the
   HTML that results from an HTTP GET on the article URI
   http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/
   journal.pone.0167475.





















Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Link: <https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171057> ; rel="cite-as"
Content-Type: text/html;charset=utf-8

<html>
 <head>
 ...
  <link rel="cite-as" href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171057" />
  <link rel="canonical"
   href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0167475" />
 ...
 </head>
 <body>
  ...
 </body>
</html>


     Figure 1: Response to HTTP GET on the URI of a scholarly article

6.2.  Version URIs

   The preprint server arXiv.org has a versioning approach like the one
   described in Section 3.2:

   o  The most recent version of a preprint is at any time available at
      the same, generic URI.  Consider the preprint with generic URI
      https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.03787.

   o  Each version of the preprint - including the most recent one - has
      a distinct version URI.  The considered preprint has two versions
      with respective version URIs https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.03787v1
      (published 10 November 2017) and https://arxiv.org/
      abs/1711.03787v2 (published 24 January 2018).

   A reader who accessed https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.03787 between 10
   November 2017 and 23 January 2018, obtained the first version of the
   preprint.  Starting 24 January 2018, the second version was served at
   that URI.  In order to support accurate referencing, arXiv.org could
   implement the "cite-as" link to point from the generic URI to the
   most recent version URI.  In doing so, assuming the existence of
   reference manager tools that consume "cite-as" links:

   o  The reader who accesses https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.03787 between
      10 November 2017 and 23 January 2018 would reference
      https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.03787v1.





Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018              [Page 11]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


   o  The reader who accesses https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.03787 starting
      24 January 2018 would reference https://arxiv.org/
      abs/1711.03787v2.

   Figure 2 shows the header that arXiv.org would have returned in the
   first case, in response to a HTTP HEAD on the generic URI
   https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.03787.

   HTTP/1.1 200 OK
   Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2017 16:12:43 GMT
   Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
   Link: <https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.03787v1> ; rel="cite-as"
   Vary: Accept-Encoding,User-Agent


     Figure 2: Response to HTTP HEAD on the generic URI of the landing
                       page of an arXiv.org preprint

6.3.  Preferred Profile URI

   If the access URI is the home page of John Doe, John can add a link
   with the "cite-as" relation type to it, as a means to convey that he
   would preferably be referenced by means of the URI of his FOAF
   profile.  Figure 3 shows the response to an HTTP GET on the URI of
   John's home page.

   HTTP/1.1 200 OK
   Content-Type: text/html;charset=utf-8

   <html>
    <head>
    ...
     <link rel="cite-as" href="http://johndoe.example.com/foaf"
           type="text/ttl"/>
    ...
    </head>
    <body>
     ...
    </body>
   </html>


     Figure 3: Response to HTTP GET on the URI of John Doe's home page








Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018              [Page 12]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


6.4.  Multi-Resource Publication

   The Dryad Digital Repository at datadryad.org specializes in hosting
   and preserving scientific datasets.  Each dataset typically consists
   of multiple resources.  For example, the dataset "Data from: Climate,
   demography, and lek stability in an Amazonian bird" consists of an
   Excel spreadsheet, a csv file, and a zip file.  Each of these
   resources have different content and are accessible at their
   respective URIs.  In addition, the dataset has a landing page at
   https://datadryad.org/resource/doi:10.5061/dryad.5d23f.

   Each of these resources should be permanently cited by means of the
   persistent identifier that was assigned to the entire dataset as an
   intellectual publication, i.e.  https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.5d23f.
   To that end, the Dryad Digital Repository can add "cite-as" links
   pointing from the URIs of each of these resources to
   https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.5d23f.  This is shown in Figure 4 for
   the csv file that is a component resource of the dataset, through use
   of the HTTP Link header.

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 19:19:22 GMT
Last-Modified: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 18:37:02 GMT
Content-Type: text/csv;charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 25414
Link: <https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.5d23f> ; rel="cite-as"

DATE,Year,PLOT/TRAIL,LOCATION,SPECIES CODE,BAND NUM,COLOR,SEX,AGE,TAIL,WING,
 TARSUS,NARES,DEPTH,WIDTH,WEIGHT
6/26/02,2002,DANTA,325,PIPFIL,969,B/O,M,AHY,80,63,16,7.3,3.9,4.1,14.4
...
2/3/13,2013,LAGO,,PIPFIL,BR-5095,O/YPI,M,SCB,78,65.5,14.2,7.5,3.8,3.7,14.3


     Figure 4: Response to HTTP GET on the URI of a csv file that is a
                     component of a scientfic dataset

7.  IANA Considerations

7.1.  Link Relation Type: cite-as

   The link relation type below has been registered by IANA per
   Section 2.1.1 of [RFC8288]:

      Relation Name: cite-as






Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018              [Page 13]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


      Description: A link with the "cite-as" relation type indicates
      that the link target is preferred over the link context for the
      purpose of permanent citation.

      Reference: [[ This document ]]

8.  Security Considerations

   In cases where there is no way for the agent to automatically verify
   the correctness of the reference URI (cf.  Section 4), out-of-band
   mechanisms might be required to establish trust.

   If a trusted site is compromised, the "cite-as" link relation could
   be used with malicious intent to supply misleading URIs for
   referencing.  Use of these links might direct user agents to an
   attacker's site, break the referencing record they are intended to
   support, or corrupt algorithmic interpretation of referencing data.

9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC4287]  Nottingham, M., Ed. and R. Sayre, Ed., "The Atom
              Syndication Format", RFC 4287, DOI 10.17487/RFC4287,
              December 2005, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4287>.

   [RFC5988]  Nottingham, M., "Web Linking", RFC 5988,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5988, October 2010,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5988>.

   [RFC6249]  Bryan, A., McNab, N., Tsujikawa, T., Poeml, P., and H.
              Nordstrom, "Metalink/HTTP: Mirrors and Hashes", RFC 6249,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6249, June 2011,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6249>.

   [RFC6596]  Ohye, M. and J. Kupke, "The Canonical Link Relation",
              RFC 6596, DOI 10.17487/RFC6596, April 2012,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6596>.

   [RFC8288]  Nottingham, M., "Web Linking", RFC 8288,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8288, October 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8288>.




Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018              [Page 14]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


   [W3C.REC-html5-20151028]
              Hickson, I., Berjon, R., Faulkner, S., Leithead, T., Doyle
              Navara, E., O'Connor, E., and S. Pfeiffer, "HTML5", World
              Wide Web Consortium Recommendation REC-HTML5-20141028,
              October 2014,
              <https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-html5-20141028/>.

9.2.  Informative References

   [bookmark-blog]
              Nelson, M. and H. Van de Sompel, "rel=bookmark also does
              not mean what you think it means", August 2017,
              <http://ws-dl.blogspot.com/2017/08/2017-08-26-relbookmark-
              also-does-not.html>.

   [canonical-blog]
              Nelson, M. and H. Van de Sompel, "rel=canonical does not
              mean what you think it means", August 2017, <http://ws-
              dl.blogspot.nl/2017/08/2017-08-07-relcanonical-does-not-
              mean.html>.

   [CoolURIs]
              Berners-Lee, T., "Cool URIs don't change", World Wide Web
              Consortium Style, 1998,
              <https://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html>.

   [DOI-URLs]
              Hendricks, G., "Display guidelines for Crossref DOIs",
              June 2017,
              <https://blog.crossref.org/display-guidelines/>.

   [DOIs]     "Information and documentation - Digital object identifier
              system", ISO 26324:2012(en), 2012,
              <https://www.iso.org/obp/
              ui/#iso:std:iso:26324:ed-1:v1:en>.

   [draft-kunze-ark-18]
              Kunze, J. and R. Rodgers, "The ARK Identifier Scheme",
              Internet Draft draft-kunze-ark-18, April 2013,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-kunze-ark>.

   [FOAF]     Brickley, D. and L. Miller, "FOAF Vocabulary Specification
              0.99", January 2014, <http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/>.








Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018              [Page 15]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


   [identifier-blog]
              Nelson, M. and H. Van de Sompel, "Linking to Persistent
              Identifiers with rel=identifier", July 2016, <http://ws-
              dl.blogspot.com/2016/11/2016-11-07-linking-to-
              persistent.html>.

   [PIDs-must-be-used]
              Van de Sompel, H., Klein, M., and S. Jones, "Persistent
              URIs Must Be Used To Be Persistent", February 2016,
              <https://arxiv.org/abs/1602.09102>.

   [PURLs]    "Persistent uniform resource locator", April 2017,
              <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
              Persistent_uniform_resource_locator>.

Appendix A.  Acknowledgements

   Thanks for comments and suggestions provided by Martin Klein, Harihar
   Shankar, Peter Williams, John Howard, Mark Nottingham, Graham Klyne.

Authors' Addresses

   Herbert Van de Sompel
   Los Alamos National Laboratory

   Email: herbertv@lanl.gov
   URI:   https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126


   Michael Nelson
   Old Dominion University

   Email: mln@cs.odu.edu
   URI:   http://www.cs.odu.edu/~mln/


   Geoffrey Bilder
   Crossref

   Email: gbilder@crossref.org
   URI:   https://www.crossref.org/authors/geoffrey-bilder/


   John Kunze
   California Digital Library

   Email: jak@ucop.edu
   URI:   https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7604-8041



Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018              [Page 16]


Internet-Draft              cite-as relation                   June 2018


   Simeon Warner
   Cornell University

   Email: simeon.warner@cornell.edu
   URI:   https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7970-7855














































Van de Sompel, et al.   Expires December 27, 2018              [Page 17]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129c, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/