XRD Document Structure

I find it helpful to think about an XRD in terms of its three distinct sections.

The first section describes the XRD document itself (what it is about and when it expires). The second section describes the resource (its aliases and types). The third section lists other related resources (links) that can help utilize or understand the resource.

When put together, it looks like this:



XRD document


<Property type=’http://example.net/ns/version’>1.2</Property&gt;
<Property type=’http://example.net/ns/ext’>lang</Property&gt;

Resource Properties

<Link rel=’author’ type=’text/html’

<Link rel=’http://example.net/ns/relation/main_photo&#8217;

Related Resources

3 thoughts on “XRD Document Structure

  1. Eran, I really like this conceptual view of an XRD. I think it’s a great tool for understanding the format and how simple it is. I know you’re not a fan of RDF, but I’m going to put together an RDF analysis of XRD structure just to show how clean it is from that perspective too.
    Thanks — these blogs posts on XRD are terrific.

  2. To be fair, I have nothing against RDF. I just don’t see the added value for *my* use cases. I am happy to assume there are plenty of use cases in which people find RDF extremely useful. I think an RDF analysis would be a good idea as a way to help folks from the semantic web community better understand this format.

  3. Yes, I agree RDF doesn’t add value in this type of application, which is why I’m such a fan of the simplicity of XRD. But you’re right that from the SemWeb perspective, being able to cast data or metadata of any kind into RDF is very useful, so the analysis will help build this bridge. (RDF gurus out there, please do contact me at http://xri.net/=drummond if you want to help.)

Comments are closed.