Network Working Group                                     T. Berners-Lee
Request for Comments: 1630                                          CERN
Category: Informational                                        June 1994


                Universal Resource Identifiers in WWW

               A Unifying Syntax for the Expression of
            Names and Addresses of Objects on the Network
                    as used in the World-Wide Web

Status of this Memo

  This memo provides information for the Internet community.  This memo
  does not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of
  this memo is unlimited.

IESG Note:

  Note that the work contained in this memo does not describe an
  Internet standard.  An Internet standard for general Resource
  Identifiers is under development within the IETF.

Introduction

  This document defines the syntax used by the World-Wide Web
  initiative to encode the names and addresses of objects on the
  Internet.  The web is considered to include objects accessed using an
  extendable number of protocols, existing, invented for the web
  itself, or to be invented in the future.  Access instructions for an
  individual object under a given protocol are encoded into forms of
  address string.  Other protocols allow the use of object names of
  various forms.  In order to abstract the idea of a generic object,
  the web needs the concepts of the universal set of objects, and of
  the universal set of names or addresses of objects.

  A Universal Resource Identifier (URI) is a member of this universal
  set of names in registered name spaces and addresses referring to
  registered protocols or name spaces.  A Uniform Resource Locator
  (URL), defined elsewhere, is a form of URI which expresses an address
  which maps onto an access algorithm using network protocols. Existing
  URI schemes which correspond to the (still mutating) concept of IETF
  URLs are listed here. The Uniform Resource Name (URN) debate attempts
  to define a name space (and presumably resolution protocols) for
  persistent object names. This area is not addressed by this document,
  which is written in order to document existing practice and provide a
  reference point for URL and URN discussions.




Berners-Lee                                                     [Page 1]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


  The world-wide web protocols are discussed on the mailing list www-
  [email protected] and the newsgroup comp.infosystems.www is
  preferable for beginner's questions. The mailing list uri-
  [email protected] has discussion related particularly to the URI
  issue.  The author may be contacted as [email protected].

  This document is available in hypertext form at:

  http://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/Addressing/URL/URI_Overview.html

The Need For a Universal Syntax

  This section describes the concept of the URI and does not form part
  of the specification.

  Many protocols and systems for document search and retrieval are
  currently in use, and many more protocols or refinements of existing
  protocols are to be expected in a field whose expansion is explosive.

  These systems are aiming to achieve global search and readership of
  documents across differing computing platforms, and despite a
  plethora of protocols and data formats.  As protocols evolve,
  gateways can allow global access to remain possible. As data formats
  evolve, format conversion programs can preserve global access.  There
  is one area, however, in which it is impractical to make conversions,
  and that is in the names and addresses used to identify objects.
  This is because names and addresses of objects are passed on in so
  many ways, from the backs of envelopes to hypertext objects, and may
  have a long life.

  A common feature of almost all the data models of past and proposed
  systems is something which can be mapped onto a concept of "object"
  and some kind of name, address, or identifier for that object.  One
  can therefore define a set of name spaces in which these objects can
  be said to exist.

  Practical systems need to access and mix objects which are part of
  different existing and proposed systems.  Therefore, the concept of
  the universal set of all objects, and hence the universal set of
  names and addresses, in all name spaces, becomes important.  This
  allows names in different spaces to be treated in a common way, even
  though names in different spaces have differing characteristics, as
  do the objects to which they refer.








Berners-Lee                                                     [Page 2]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


  URIs

     This document defines a way to encapsulate a name in any
     registered name space, and label it with the the name space,
     producing a member of the universal set.  Such an encoded and
     labelled member of this set is known as a Universal Resource
     Identifier, or URI.

     The universal syntax allows access of objects available using
     existing protocols, and may be extended with technology.

     The specification of the URI syntax does not imply anything about
     the properties of names and addresses in the various name spaces
     which are mapped onto the set of URI strings.  The properties
     follow from the specifications of the protocols and the associated
     usage conventions for each scheme.

  URLs

     For existing Internet access protocols, it is necessary in most
     cases to define the encoding of the access algorithm into
     something concise enough to be termed address.  URIs which refer
     to objects accessed with existing protocols are known as "Uniform
     Resource Locators" (URLs) and are listed here as used in WWW, but
     to be formally defined in a separate document.

  URNs

     There is currently a drive to define a space of more persistent
     names than any URLs.  These "Uniform Resource Names" are the
     subject of an IETF working group's discussions.  (See Sollins and
     Masinter, Functional Specifications for URNs, circulated
     informally.)

     The URI syntax and URL forms have been in widespread use by
     World-Wide Web software since 1990.















Berners-Lee                                                     [Page 3]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


Design Criteria and Choices

  This section is not part of the specification: it is simply an
  explanation of the way in which the specification was derived.

  Design criteria

     The syntax was designed to be:

     Extensible              New naming schemes may be added later.

     Complete                It is possible to encode any naming
                             scheme.

     Printable               It is possible to express any URI using
                             7-bit ASCII characters so that URIs may,
                             if necessary, be passed using pen and ink.

  Choices for a universal syntax

     For the syntax itself there is little choice except for the order
     and punctuation of the elements, and the acceptable characters and
     escaping rules.

     The extensibility requirement is met by allowing an arbitrary (but
     registered) string to be used as a prefix.  A prefix is chosen as
     left to right parsing is more common than right to left.  The
     choice of a colon as separator of the prefix from the rest of the
     URI was arbitrary.

     The decoding of the rest of the string is defined as a function of
     the prefix.  New prefixed are introduced for new schemes as
     necessary, in agreement with the registration authority.  The
     registration of a new scheme clearly requires the definition of
     the decoding of the URI into a given name space, and a definition
     of the properties and, where applicable, resolution protocols, for
     the name space.

     The completeness requirement is easily met by allowing
     particularly strange or plain binary names to be encoded in base
     16 or 64 using the acceptable characters.

     The printability requirement could have been met by requiring all
     schemes to encode characters not part of a basic set.  This led to
     many discussions of what the basic set should be.  A difficult
     case, for example, is when an ISO latin 1 string appears in a URL,
     and within an application with ISO Latin-1 capability, it can be
     handled intact.  However, for transport in general, the non-ASCII



Berners-Lee                                                     [Page 4]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


     characters need to be escaped.

     The solution to this was to specify a safe set of characters, and
     a general escaping scheme which may be used for encoding "unsafe"
     characters.  This "safe" set is suitable, for example, for use in
     electronic mail.  This is the canonical form of a URI.

     The choice of escape character for introducing representations of
     non-allowed characters also tends to be a matter of taste.  An
     ANSI standard exists in the C language, using the back-slash
     character "\".  The use of this character on unix command lines,
     however, can be a problem as it is interpreted by many shell
     programs, and would have itself to be escaped.  It is also a
     character which is not available on certain keyboards.  The equals
     sign is commonly used in the encoding of names having
     attribute=value pairs.  The percent sign was eventually chosen as
     a suitable escape character.

     There is a conflict between the need to be able to represent many
     characters including spaces within a URI directly, and the need to
     be able to use a URI in environments which have limited character
     sets or in which certain characters are prone to corruption.  This
     conflict has been resolved by use of an hexadecimal escaping
     method which may be applied to any characters forbidden in a given
     context.  When URLs are moved between contexts, the set of
     characters escaped may be enlarged or reduced unambiguously.

     The use of white space characters is risky in URIs to be printed
     or sent by electronic mail, and the use of multiple white space
     characters is very risky.  This is because of the frequent
     introduction of extraneous white space when lines are wrapped by
     systems such as mail, or sheer necessity of narrow column width,
     and because of the inter-conversion of various forms of white
     space which occurs during character code conversion and the
     transfer of text between applications.  This is why the canonical
     form for URIs has all white spaces encoded.

Reommendations

  This section describes the syntax for URIs as used in the WorldWide
  Web initiative.  The generic syntax provides a framework for new
  schemes for names to be resolved using as yet undefined protocols.

URI syntax

  A complete URI consists of a naming scheme specifier followed by a
  string whose format is a function of the naming scheme.  For locators
  of information on the Internet, a common syntax is used for the IP



Berners-Lee                                                     [Page 5]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


  address part. A BNF description of the URL syntax is given in an a
  later section. The components are as follows.  Fragment identifiers
  and relative URIs are not involved in the basic URL definition.

  SCHEME

     Within the URI of a object, the first element is the name of the
     scheme, separated from the rest of the object by a colon.

  PATH

     The rest of the URI follows the colon in a format depending on the
     scheme. The path is interpreted in a manner dependent on the
     protocol being used.  However, when it contains slashes, these
     must imply a hierarchical structure.

Reserved characters

  The path in the URI has a significance defined by the particular
  scheme.  Typically, it is used to encode a name in a given name
  space, or an algorithm for accessing an object.  In either case, the
  encoding may use those characters allowed by the BNF syntax, or
  hexadecimal encoding of other characters.

  Some of the reserved characters have special uses as defined here.

  THE PERCENT SIGN

     The percent sign ("%", ASCII 25 hex) is used as the escape
     character in the encoding scheme and is never allowed for anything
     else.

  HIERARCHICAL FORMS

     The slash ("/", ASCII 2F hex) character is reserved for the
     delimiting of substrings whose relationship is hierarchical.  This
     enables partial forms of the URI.  Substrings consisting of single
     or double dots ("." or "..") are similarly reserved.

     The significance of the slash between two segments is that the
     segment of the path to the left is more significant than the
     segment of the path to the right.  ("Significance" in this case
     refers solely to closeness to the root of the hierarchical
     structure and makes no value judgement!)







Berners-Lee                                                     [Page 6]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


     Note

        The similarity to unix and other disk operating system filename
        conventions should be taken as purely coincidental, and should
        not be taken to indicate that URIs should be interpreted as
        file names.

  HASH FOR FRAGMENT IDENTIFIERS

     The hash ("#", ASCII 23 hex) character is reserved as a delimiter
     to separate the URI of an object from a fragment identifier .

  QUERY STRINGS

     The question mark ("?", ASCII 3F hex) is used to delimit the
     boundary between the URI of a queryable object, and a set of words
     used to express a query on that object.  When this form is used,
     the combined URI stands for the object which results from the
     query being applied to the original object.

     Within the query string, the plus sign is reserved as shorthand
     notation for a space.  Therefore, real plus signs must be encoded.
     This method was used to make query URIs easier to pass in systems
     which did not allow spaces.

     The query string represents some operation applied to the object,
     but this specification gives no common syntax or semantics for it.
     In practice the syntax and sematics may depend on the scheme and
     may even on the base URI.

  OTHER RESERVED CHARACTERS

     The astersik ("*", ASCII 2A hex) and exclamation mark ("!" , ASCII
     21 hex) are reserved for use as having special signifiance within
     specific schemes.

Unsafe characters

  In canonical form, certain characters such as spaces, control
  characters, some characters whose ASCII code is used differently in
  different national character variant 7 bit sets, and all 8bit
  characters beyond DEL (7F hex) of the ISO Latin-1 set, shall not be
  used unencoded. This is a recommendation for trouble-free
  interchange, and as indicated below, the encoded set may be extended
  or reduced.






Berners-Lee                                                     [Page 7]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


Encoding reserved characters

  When a system uses a local addressing scheme, it is useful to provide
  a mapping from local addresses into URIs so that references to
  objects within the addressing scheme may be referred to globally, and
  possibly accessed through gateway servers.

  For a new naming scheme, any mapping scheme may be defined provided
  it is unambiguous, reversible, and provides valid URIs.  It is
  recommended that where hierarchical aspects to the local naming
  scheme exist, they be mapped onto the hierarchical URL path syntax in
  order to allow the partial form to be used.

  It is also recommended that the conventional scheme below be used in
  all cases except for any scheme which encodes binary data as opposed
  to text, in which case a more compact encoding such as pure
  hexadecimal or base 64 might be more appropriate.  For example, the
  conventional URI encoding method is used for mapping WAIS, FTP,
  Prospero and Gopher addresses in the URI specification.

  CONVENTIONAL URI ENCODING SCHEME

     Where the local naming scheme uses ASCII characters which are not
     allowed in the URI, these may be represented in the URL by a
     percent sign "%" immediately followed by two hexadecimal digits
     (0-9, A-F) giving the ISO Latin 1 code for that character.
     Character codes other than those allowed by the syntax shall not
     be used unencoded in a URI.

  REDUCED OR INCREASED SAFE CHARACTER SETS

     The same encoding method may be used for encoding characters whose
     use, although technically allowed in a URI, would be unwise due to
     problems of corruption by imperfect gateways or misrepresentation
     due to the use of variant character sets, or which would simply be
     awkward in a given environment.  Because a % sign always indicates
     an encoded character, a URI may be made "safer" simply by encoding
     any characters considered unsafe, while leaving already encoded
     characters still encoded.  Similarly, in cases where a larger set
     of characters is acceptable, % signs can be selectively and
     reversibly expanded.

     Before two URIs can be compared, it is therefore necessary to
     bring them to the same encoding level.

     However, the reserved characters mentioned above have a quite
     different significance when encoded, and so may NEVER be encoded
     and unencoded in this way.



Berners-Lee                                                     [Page 8]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


     The percent sign intended as such must always be encoded, as its
     presence otherwise always indicates an encoding.  Sequences which
     start with a percent sign but are not followed by two hexadecimal
     characters are reserved for future extension.  (See Example 3.)

  Example 1

  The URIs

               http://info.cern.ch/albert/bertram/marie-claude

  and

               http://info.cern.ch/albert/bertram/marie%2Dclaude

  are identical, as the %2D encodes a hyphen character.

  Example 2

  The URIs

               http://info.cern.ch/albert/bertram/marie-claude

  and

               http://info.cern.ch/albert/bertram%2Fmarie-claude

  are NOT identical, as in the second case the encoded slash does not
  have hierarchical significance.

  Example 3

  The URIs

               fxqn:/us/va/reston/cnri/ietf/24/asdf%*.fred

  and

               news:12345667123%[email protected]

  are illegal, as all % characters imply encodings, and there is no
  decoding defined for "%*"  or "%as" in this recommendation.

Partial (relative) form

  Within a object whose URI is well defined, the URI of another object
  may be given in abbreviated form, where parts of the two URIs are the
  same. This allows objects within a group to refer to each other



Berners-Lee                                                     [Page 9]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


  without requiring the space for a complete reference, and it
  incidentally allows the group of objects to be moved without changing
  any references.  It must be emphasized that when a reference is
  passed in anything other than a well controlled context, the full
  form must always be used.

  In the World-Wide Web applications, the context URI is that of the
  document or object containing a reference. In this case partial URIs
  can be generated in virtual objects or stored in real objects,
  without the need for dramatic change if the higher-order parts of a
  hierarchical naming system are modified.  Apart from terseness, this
  gives greater robustness to practical systems, by enabling
  information hiding between system components.

  The partial form relies on a property of the URI syntax that certain
  characters ("/") and certain path elements ("..", ".") have a
  significance reserved for representing a hierarchical space, and must
  be recognized as such by both clients and servers.

  A partial form can be distinguished from an absolute form in that the
  latter must have a colon and that colon must occur before any slash
  characters. Systems not requiring partial forms should not use any
  unencoded slashes in their naming schemes.  If they do, absolute URIs
  will still work, but confusion may result. (See note on Gopher
  below.)

  The rules for the use of a partial name relative to the URI of the
  context are:

     If the scheme parts are different, the whole absolute URI must
     be given.  Otherwise, the scheme is omitted, and:

     If the partial URI starts with a non-zero number of consecutive
     slashes, then everything from the context URI up to (but not
     including) the first occurrence of exactly the same number of
     consecutive slashes which has no greater number of consecutive
     slashes anywhere to the right of it is taken to be the same and
     so prepended to the partial URL to form the full URL. Otherwise:

     The last part of the path of the context URI (anything following
     the rightmost slash) is removed, and the given partial URI
     appended in its place, and then:

     Within the result, all occurrences of "xxx/../" or "/." are
     recursively removed, where xxx, ".." and "." are complete path
     elements.





Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 10]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


     Note: Trailing slashes

  If a path of the context locator ends in slash, partial URIs are
  treated differently to the URI with the same path but without a
  trailing slash. The trailing slash indicates a void segment of the
  path.

     Note: Gopher

  The gopher system does not have the concept of relative URIs, and the
  gopher community currently allows / as data characters in gopher URIs
  without escaping them to %2F.  Relative forms may not in general be
  used for documents served by gopher servers.  If they are used, then
  WWW software assumes, normally correctly, that in fact they do have
  hierarchical significance despite the specifications. The use of HTTP
  rather than gopher protocol is however recommended.

  Examples

  In the context of URI

                       magic://a/b/c//d/e/f

  the partial URIs would expand as follows:

  g                       magic://a/b/c//d/e/g

  /g                      magic://a/g

  //g                     magic://g

  ../g                    magic://a/b/c//d/g

  g:h                     g:h

  and in the context of the URI

                          magic://a/b/c//d/e/

  the results would be exactly the same.

Fragment-id

  This represents a part of, fragment of, or a sub-function within, an
  object.  Its syntax and semantics are defined by the application
  responsible for the object, or the specification of the content type
  of the object.  The only definition here is of the allowed characters
  by which it may be represented in a URL.



Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 11]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


  Specific syntaxes for representing fragments in text documents by
  line and character range, or in graphics by coordinates, or in
  structured documents using ladders, are suitable for standardization
  but not defined here.

  The fragment-id follows the URL of the whole object from which it is
  separated by a hash sign (#).  If the fragment-id is void, the hash
  sign may be omitted: A void fragment-id with or without the hash sign
  means that the URL refers to the whole object.

  While this hook is allowed for identification of fragments, the
  question of addressing of parts of objects, or of the grouping of
  objects and relationship between continued and containing objects, is
  not addressed by this document.

  Fragment identifiers do NOT address the question of objects which are
  different versions of a "living" object, nor of expressing the
  relationships between different versions and the living object.

  There is no implication that a fragment identifier refers to anything
  which can be extracted as an object in its own right.  It may, for
  example, refer to an indivisible point within an object.

Specific Schemes

  The mapping for URIs onto some existing standard and experimental
  protocols is outlined in the BNF syntax definition.  Notes on
  particular protocols follow.  These URIs are frequently referred to
  as URLs, though the exact definition of the term URL is still under
  discussion (March 1993).  The schemes covered are:

  http                    Hypertext Transfer Protocol (examples)

  ftp                     File Transfer protocol

  gopher                  Gopher protocol

  mailto                  Electronic mail address

  news                    Usenet news

  telnet, rlogin and tn3270
                          Reference to interactive sessions

  wais                    Wide Area Information Servers

  file                    Local file access




Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 12]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


  The following schemes are proposed as essential to the unification of
  the web with electronic mail, but not currently (to the author's
  knowledge) implemented:

  mid                     Message identifiers for electronic mail

  cid                     Content identifiers for MIME body part

  The schemes for X.500, network management database, and Whois++ have
  not been specified and may be the subject of further study.  Schemes
  for Prospero, and restricted NNTP use are not currently implemented
  as far as the author is aware.

  The "urn" prefix is reserved for use in encoding a Uniform Resource
  Name when that has been developed by the IETF working group.

  New schemes may be registered at a later time.

HTTP

  The HTTP protocol specifies that the path is handled transparently by
  those who handle URLs, except for the servers which de-reference
  them.  The path is passed by the client to the server with any
  request, but is not otherwise understood by the client.

  The host details are not passed on to the client when the URL is an
  HTTP URL which refers to the server in question.  In this case the
  string sent starts with the slash which follows the host details.
  However, when an HTTP server is being used as a gateway (or "proxy")
  then the entire URI, whether HTTP or some other scheme, is passed on
  the HTTP command line.  The search part, if present, is sent as part
  of the HTTP command, and may in this respect be treated as part of
  the path.  No fragmentid part of a WWW URI (the hash sign and
  following) is sent with the request.  Spaces and control characters
  in URLs must be escaped for transmission in HTTP, as must other
  disallowed characters.

  EXAMPLES

     These examples are not part of the specification: they are
     provided as illustations only.  The URI of the "welcome" page to a
     server is conventionally

        http://www.my.work.com/

        As the rest of the URL (after the hostname an port) is opaque
        to the client, it shows great variety but the following are all
        fairly typical.



Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 13]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


http://www.my.uni.edu/info/matriculation/enroling.html

http://info.my.org/AboutUs/Phonebook

http://www.library.my.town.va.us/Catalogue/76523471236%2Fwen44--4.98

http://www.my.org/462F4F2D4241522A314159265358979323846

  A URL for a server on a different port to 80 looks like

       http://info.cern.ch:8000/imaginary/test

  A reference to a particular part of a document may, including the
  fragment identifier, look like

       http://www.myu.edu/org/admin/people#andy

  in which case the string "#andy" is not sent to the server, but is
  retained by the client and used when the whole object had been
  retrieved.

   A search on a text database might look like

       http://info.my.org/AboutUs/Index/Phonebook?dobbins

  and on another database

       http://info.cern.ch/RDB/EMP?*%20where%20name%%3Ddobbins

  In all cases the client passes the path string to the server
  uninterpreted, and for the client to deduce anything from

FTP

  The ftp: prefix indicates that the FTP protocol is used, as defined
  in STD 9, RFC 959 or any successor.  The port number, if present,
  gives the port of the FTP server if not the FTP default.

  User name and password

     The syntax allows for the inclusion of a user name and even a
     password for those systems which do not use the anonymous FTP
     convention. The default, however, if no user or password is
     supplied, will be to use that convention, viz. that the user name
     is "anonymous" and the password the user's Internet-style mail
     address.





Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 14]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


     Where possible, this mail address should correspond to a usable
     mail address for the user, and preferably give a DNS host name
     which resolves to the IP address of the client.  Note that servers
     currently vary in their treatment of the anonymous password.

  Path

     The FTP protocol allows for a sequence of CWD commands (change
     working directory) and a TYPE command prior to service commands
     such as RETR (retrieve) or NLIST (etc.) which actually access a
     file.

     The arguments of any CWD commands are successive segment parts of
     the URL delimited by slash, and the final segment is suitable as
     the filename argument to the RETR command for retrieval or the
     directory argument to NLIST.

     For some file systems (Unix in particular), the "/" used to denote
     the hierarchical structure of the URL corresponds to the delimiter
     used to construct a file name hierarchy, and thus, the filename
     will look the same as the URL path.  This does NOT mean that the
     URL is a Unix filename.

        Note: Retrieving subsequent URLs from the same host

     There is no common hierarchical model to the FTP protocol, so if a
     directory change command has been given, it is impossible in
     general to deduce what sequence should be given to navigate to
     another directory for a second retrieval, if the paths are
     different.  The only reliable algorithm is to disconnect and
     reestablish the control connection.

  Data type

     The data content type of a file can only, in the general FTP case,
     be deduced from the name, normally the suffix of the name.  This
     is not standardized. An alternative is for it to be transferred in
     information outside the URL.  A suitable FTP transfer type (for
     example binary "I" or text "A") must in turn be deduced from the
     data content type.  It is recommended that conventions for
     suffixes of public archives be established, but it is outside the
     scope of this standard.

     An FTP URL may optionally specify the FTP data transfer type by
     which an object is to be retrieved. Most of the methods correspond
     to the FTP "Data Types" ASCII and IMAGE for the retrieval of a
     document, as specified in FTP by the TYPE command.  One method
     indicates directory access.



Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 15]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


     The data type is specified by a suffix to the URL.  Possible
     suffixes are:

      ;type = <type-code>     Use FTP type as given to perform data
                              transfer.

      /                       Use FTP directory list commands to read
                              directory

     The type code is in the format defined in RFC 959 except that THE
     SPACE IS OMITTED FROM THE URL.

  Transfer Mode

     Stream Mode is always used.

Gopher

  The gopher URL specifies the host and optionally the port to which
  the client should connect. This is followed by a slash and a single
  gopher type code. This type code is used by the client to determine
  how to interpret the server's reply and is is not for sending to
  server.  The command string to be sent to the server immediately
  follows the gopher type character.  It consists of the gopher
  selector string followed by any "Gopher plus" syntax, but always
  omitting the trainling CR LF pair.

  When the gopher command string contains characters (such a embedded
  CR LF and HT characters) not allowed in a URL, these are encoded
  using the conventional encoding.

  Note that some gopher selector strings begin with a copy of the
  gopher type character, in which case that character will occur twice
  consecutively.  Also note that the gopher selector string may be an
  empty string since this is how gopher clients refer to the top-level
  directory on a gopher server.

  If the encoded command string (with trailing CR LF stripped) would be
  void then the gopher type character may be omiited and "1" (ASCII 31
  hex) is assumed.

  Note that slash "/" in gopher selector strings may not correspond to
  a level in a hierarchical structure.








Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 16]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


Mailto

  This allows a URL to specify an RFC822 addr-spec mail address.  Note
  that use of % , for example as used in forming a gatewayed mail
  address, requires conversion to %25 in a URL.

News

  The news locators refer to either news group names or article message
  identifiers which must conform to the rules for a Message-Id of RFC
  1036 (Horton 1987).  A message identifier may be distinguished from a
  news group name by the presence of the commercial at "@" character.
  These rules imply that within an article, a reference to a news group
  or to another article will be a valid URL (in the partial form).

  A news URL may be dereferenced using NNTP (RFC 977, Kantor 1986)
  (The ARTICLE by message-id command ) or using any other protocol for
  the conveyance of usenet news articles, or by reference to a body of
  news articles already received.

  Note 1:

     Among URLs the "news" URLs are anomalous in that they are
     location-independent. They are unsuitable as URN candidates
     because the NNTP architecture relies on the expiry of articles and
     therefore a small number of articles being available at any time.
     When a news: URL is quoted, the assumption is that the reader will
     fetch the article or group from his or her local news host.  News
     host names are NOT part of news URLs.

  Note 2:

     An outstanding problem is that the message identifier is
     insufficient to allow the retrieval of an expired article, as no
     algorithm exists for deriving an archive site and file name.  The
     addition of the date and news group set to the article's URL would
     allow this if a directory existed of archive sites by news group.

     Suggested subject of study in conjunction with NNTP working group.
     Further extension possible may be to allow the naming of subject
     threads as addressable objects.

Telnet, rlogin, tn3270

  The use of URLs to represent interactive sessions is a convenient
  extension to their uses for objects.  This allows access to
  information systems which only provide an interactive service, and no
  information server.  As information within the service cannot be



Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 17]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


  addressed individually or, in general, automatically retrieved, this
  is a less desirable, though currently common, solution.

URN

  The "Universal Resource Name" is currently (March 1993) under
  development in the IETF.  A requirements specification is in
  preparation. It currently looks as though it will be a short string
  suitable for encoding in URI syntax, for which case the "urn:" prefix
  is reserved.  The URN shall be encoded precisely as defined in the
  (future) URN standard, except in that:

     If the official description of the URN syntax includes any
     constant wrapper characters, then they shall not be omitted from
     the URI encoding of the URN;

     If the URN has a hierarchical nature, then the slash delimiter
     shall be used in the URI encoding;

     If the URN has a hierarchical nature, the most significant part
     shall be encoded on the left in the URI encoding;

     Any characters with reserved meanings in the URI syntax shall be
     escape encoded

  These rules of course apply to any URI scheme.  It is of course
  possible that the URN syntax will be chosen such that the URI
  encoding will be a 1-1 transcription.

  An example might be a name such as

        urn:/iana/dns/ch/cern/cn/techdoc/94/1642-3

  but the reader should refer to the latest URN drafts or
  specifications.

WAIS

  The current WAIS implementation public domain requires that a client
  know the "type" of a object prior to retrieval. This value is
  returned along with the internal object identifier in the search
  response. It has been encoded into the path part of the URL in order
  to make the URL sufficient for the retrieval of the object.

  Within the WAIS world, names do not of course need to be prefixed by
  "wais:" (by the partial form rules).





Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 18]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


  The wpath of a WAIS URL consists of encoded fields of the WAIS
  identifier, in the same order as inthe WAIS identifier. For each
  field, the identifier field number is the digits before the equals
  sign, and the field contents follow, encoded in the conventional
  encoding, terminated by ";".

file

  The other URI schemes (except nntp) share the property that they are
  equally valid at any geographical place.

  There is however a real practical requirement to be able to generate
  a URL for an object in a machine's local file system.

  The syntax is similar to the ftp syntax, but in this case the slash
  is used to donate boundaries between directory levels of a
  hierarchical file system is used.  The "client" software converts the
  file URL into a file name in the local file name conventions.  This
  allows local files to be treated just as network objects without any
  necessity to use a network server for access.  This may be used for
  example for defining a user's "home" document in WWW.

  There is clearly a danger of confusion that a link made to a local
  file should be followed by someone on a different system, with
  unexpected and possibly harmful results.  Therefore, the convention
  is that even a "file" URL is provided with a host part.  This allows
  a client on another system to know that it cannot access the file
  system, or perhaps to use some other local mecahnism to access the
  file.

  The special value "localhost" is used in the host field to indicate
  that the filename should really be used on whatever host one is.
  This for example allows links to be made to files which are
  distribted on many machines, or to "your unix local password file"
  subject of course to consistency across the users of the data.

  A void host field is equivalent to "localhost".

Message-Id

  For systems which include information transferred using mail
  protocols, there is a need to be able to make cross-references
  between different items of information, even though, by the nature of
  mail, those items are only available to a restricted set of people.

  Two schemes are defined.  The first, "mid:", refers to the STD 11,
  RFC 822 Message-Id of a mail message.  This Identifier is already
  used in RFC 822 in for example the References and In-Reply-to field.



Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 19]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


  The rest of the URL after the "mid:" is the RFC822 msg-id with the
  constant <> wrapper removed, leaving an identifier whose format in
  fact happens to be the same as addr-spec format for mailboxes (though
  the semantics are different).

  The use of a "mid" URL implies access to a body of mail already
  received. If a message has been distributed using NNTP or other
  usenet protocols over the news system, then the "news:" form should
  be used.

Content-Id

  The second scheme, "cid:", is similar to "mid:", but makes reference
  to a body part of a MIME message by the value of its content-id
  field.  This allows, for example, a master document being the first
  part of a multipart/related MIME message to refer to component parts
  which are transferred in the same message.

  Note

     Beware however, that content identifiers are only required to be
     unique within the context of a given MIME message, and so the cid:
     URL is only meaningful with the context the same MIME message. For
     a reference outside the message, it would need to be appended to
     the message-id of the whole message.  A syntax for this has not
     been defined.

Schemes for Further Study

  X500

     The mapping of x500 names onto URLs is not defined here.  A
     decision is required as to whether "distinguished names" or "user
     friendly names" (ufn), or both, should be allowed.  If any
     punctuation conversions are needed from the adopted x500
     representation (such as the use of slashes between parts of a ufn)
     they must be defined.  This is a subject for study.

  WHOIS

     This prefix describes the access using the "whois++" scheme in the
     process of definition.  The host name part is the same as for
     other IP based schemes.  The path part can be either a whois
     handle for a whois object, or it can be a valid whois query
     string. This is a subject for further study.






Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 20]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


  NETWORK MANAGEMENT DATABASE

     This is a subject for study.

  NNTP

     This is an alternative form of reference for news articles,
     specifically to be used with NNTP servers, and particularly those
     incomplete server implementations which do not allow retrieval by
     message identifier.  In all other cases the "news" scheme should
     be used.

     The news server name, newsgroup name, and index number of an
     article within the newsgroup on that particular server are given.
     The NNTP protocol must be used.

     Note 1.

        This form of URL is not of global accessability, as typically
        NNTP servers only allow access from local clients.   Note that
        the article numbers within groups vary from server to server.

        This form or URL should not be quoted outside this local area.
        It should not be used within news articles for wider
        circulation than the one server.  This is a local identifier
        for a resource which is often available globally, and so is not
        recommended except in the case in which incomplete NNTP
        implementations on the local server force its adoption.

Prospero

  The Prospero (Neuman, 1991) directory service is used to resolve the
  URL yielding an access method for the object (which can then itself
  be represented as a URL if translated).  The host part contains a
  host name or internet address.  The port part is optional.

  The path part contains a host specific object name and an optional
  version number. If present, the version number is separated from the
  host specific object name by the characters "%00" (percent zero
  zero), this being an escaped string terminator (null).  External
  Prospero links are represented as URLs of the underlying access
  method and are not represented as Prospero URLs.

Registration of naming schemes

  A new naming scheme may be introduced by defining a mapping onto a
  conforming URL syntax, using a new prefix.  Experimental prefixes may
  be used by mutual agreement between parties, and must start with the



Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 21]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


  characters "x-".  The scheme name "urn:" is reserved for the work in
  progress on a scheme for more persistent names.

  It is proposed that the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)
  perform the function of registration of new schemes. Any submission
  of a new URI scheme must include a definition of an algorithm for the
  retrieval of any object within that scheme. The algorithm must take
  the URI and produce either a set of URL(s) which will lead to the
  desired object, or the object itself, in a well-defined or
  determinable format.

  It is recommended that those proposing a new scheme demonstrate its
  utility and operability by the provision of a gateway which will
  provide images of objects in the new scheme for clients using an
  existing protocol. If the new scheme is not a locator scheme, then
  the properties of names in the new space should be clearly defined.
  It is likewise recommended that, where a protocol allows for
  retrieval by URL, that the client software have provision for being
  configured to use specific gateway locators for indirect access
  through new naming schemes.

BNF of Generic URI Syntax

  This is a BNF-like description of the URI syntax. at the level at
  which specific schemes are not considered.

  A vertical line "|" indicates alternatives, and [brackets] indicate
  optional parts.  Spaces are represented by the word "space", and the
  vertical line character by "vline".  Single letters stand for single
  letters.  All words of more than one letter below are entities
  described somewhere in this description.

  The "generic" production gives a higher level parsing of the same
  URIs as the other productions.  The "national" and "punctuation"
  characters do not appear in any productions and therefore may not
  appear in URIs.

    fragmentaddress        uri [ # fragmentid ]

    uri                    scheme :  path [ ? search ]

    scheme                 ialpha

    path                   void |  xpalphas  [  / path ]

    search                 xalphas [ + search ]

    fragmentid             xalphas



Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 22]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994



    xalpha                 alpha | digit | safe | extra | escape

    xalphas                xalpha [ xalphas ]

    xpalpha                xalpha | +

    xpalphas               xpalpha [ xpalpha ]

    ialpha                 alpha [ xalphas ]

    alpha                  a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | i | j | k |
                           l | m | n | o  | p | q | r | s | t | u | v |
                           w | x | y | z | A | B | C  | D | E | F | G |
                           H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P |  Q | R |
                           S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

    digit                  0 |1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9

    safe                   $ | - | _ | @ | . | &

    extra                  ! | * | " |  ' | ( | ) | ,

    reserved               = | ; | / | # | ? | : | space

    escape                 % hex hex

    hex                    digit | a | b | c | d | e | f | A | B | C |
                           D | E | F

    national               { | } | vline | [ | ] | \ | ^ | ~

    punctuation            < | >

    void

     (end of URI BNF)

BNF for specific URL schemes

  This is a BNF-like description of the Uniform Resource Locator
  syntax.  A vertical line "|" indicates alternatives, and [brackets]
  indicate optional parts.  Spaces are represented by the word "space",
  and the vertical line character by "vline".  Single letters stand for
  single letters.  All words of more than one letter below are entities
  described somewhere in this description.





Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 23]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


  The current IETF URI Working Group preference is for the prefixedurl
  production. (Nov 1993. July 93: url).

  The "national" and "punctuation" characters do not appear in any
  productions and therefore may not appear in URLs.

  The "afsaddress" is left in as historical note, but is not a url
  production.

 prefixedurl            u r l : url

 url                    httpaddress | ftpaddress | newsaddress |
                        nntpaddress | prosperoaddress | telnetaddress
                        | gopheraddress | waisaddress |
                        mailtoaddress  | midaddress | cidaddress

 scheme                 ialpha

 httpaddress            h t t p :   / / hostport [  / path ] [ ?
                        search ]

 ftpaddress             f t p : / / login / path [  ftptype ]

 afsaddress             a f s : / / cellname / path

 newsaddress            n e w s : groupart

 nntpaddress            n n t p : group /  digits

 midaddress             m i d  :  addr-spec

 cidaddress             c i d : content-identifier

 mailtoaddress          m a i l t o : xalphas @ hostname

 waisaddress            waisindex | waisdoc

 waisindex              w a i s : / / hostport / database [ ? search
                        ]

 waisdoc                w a i s : / / hostport / database / wtype  /
                        wpath

 wpath                  digits = path ;  [ wpath ]

 groupart               * | group | article

 group                  ialpha [ . group ]



Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 24]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994



 article                xalphas @ host

 database               xalphas

 wtype                  xalphas

 prosperoaddress        prosperolink

 prosperolink           p r o s p e r o : / / hostport / hsoname [ %
                        0 0 version [ attributes ] ]

 hsoname                path

 version                digits

 attributes             attribute [ attributes ]

 attribute              alphanums

 telnetaddress          t e l n e t : / / login

 gopheraddress          g o p h e r : / / hostport [/ gtype  [
                        gcommand ] ]

 login                  [ user [ : password ] @ ] hostport

 hostport               host [ : port ]

 host                   hostname | hostnumber

 ftptype                A formcode | E formcode | I | L digits

 formcode               N | T | C

 cellname               hostname

 hostname               ialpha [  .  hostname ]

 hostnumber             digits . digits . digits . digits

 port                   digits

 gcommand               path

 path                   void |  segment  [  / path ]

 segment                xpalphas



Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 25]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994



 search                 xalphas [ + search ]

 user                   alphanum2 [ user ]

 password               alphanum2 [ password ]

 fragmentid             xalphas

 gtype                  xalpha

 alphanum2              alpha | digit | - | _ | . | +

 xalpha                 alpha | digit | safe | extra | escape

 xalphas                xalpha [ xalphas ]

 xpalpha                xalpha | +

 xpalphas               xpalpha [ xpalphas ]

 ialpha                 alpha [ xalphas ]

 alpha                  a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | i | j | k |
                        l | m | n | o  | p | q | r | s | t | u | v |
                        w | x | y | z | A | B | C  | D | E | F | G |
                        H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P |  Q | R |
                        S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

 digit                  0 |1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9

 safe                   $ | - | _ | @ | . | &  | + | -

 extra                  ! | * |  " |  ' | ( | )  | ,

 reserved               =  |  ;  |  /  |  #  | ? |  : | space

 escape                 % hex hex

 hex                    digit | a | b | c | d | e | f | A | B | C |
                        D | E | F

 national               { | } | vline | [ | ] | \ | ^ | ~

 punctuation            < | >

 digits                 digit [ digits ]




Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 26]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


 alphanum               alpha | digit

 alphanums              alphanum [ alphanums ]

 void

  (end of URL BNF)

References

 Alberti, R., et.al., "Notes on the Internet Gopher Protocol",
    University of Minnesota, December 1991,
    <ftp://boombox.micro.umn.edu/pub/gopher/ gopher_protocol>. See also
    <gopher://gopher.micro.umn.edu/00/Information About Gopher/About
    Gopher>

 Berners-Lee, T., "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP)", CERN, December
    1991, as updated from time to time,
    <ftp://info.cern.ch/pub/www/doc/http-spec.txt>

 Crocker, D., "Standard for ARPA Internet Text Messages" STD 11, RFC
    822, UDel, August 1982.

 Davis, F, et  al., "WAIS Interface Protocol: Prototype Functional
    Specification", Thinking Machines Corporation, April 23, 1990.
    <ftp://quake.think.com/pub/wa is/doc/protspec.txt>

 International Standards Organization, Information and Documentation -
    Search and Retrieve Application Protocol Specification for open
    Systems Interconnection, ISO-10163.

 Horton, M., and R. Adams, "Standard for Interchange of USENET
    messages", RFC 1036, AT&T Bell Laboratories, Center for Seismic
    Studies, December 1987.

 Huitema, C., "Naming: strategies and techniques", Computer Networks
    and ISDN Systems 23 (1991) 107-110.

 Kahle, B., "Document Identifiers, or International Standard Book
    Numbers for the Electronic Age", <ftp:
    //quake.think.com/pub/wais/doc/doc-ids.txt>

 Kantor, B., and P. Lapsley, Kantor, B., and P. Lapsley, "Network News
    Transfer Protocol", RFC 977, UC San Diego & UC Berkeley, February
    1986.  <ftp://ds.internic.net/rfc/rfc977.txt>

 Kunze, J., "Requirements for URLs", Work in Progress.




Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 27]

RFC 1630                      URIs in WWW                      June 1994


 Lynch, C., Coalition for Networked Information: "Workshop on ID and
    Reference Structures for Networked Information", November 1991. See
    <wais://quake.think.com/wais-discussion-archives?lynch>

 Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names - Concepts and Facilities", STD 13, RFC
    1034, USC/Information Sciences Institute, November 1987,
    <ftp://ds.internic.net/rfc/rfc1034.txt>

 Neuman, B. Clifford, "Prospero: A Tool for Organizing Internet
    Resources", Electronic Networking: Research, Applications and
    Policy, Vol 1 No 2, Meckler Westport CT USA, 1992.  See also
    <ftp://prospero.isi.edu/pub/prospero/oir.ps>

 Postel, J., and J. Reynolds, "File Transfer Protocol (FTP)", STD 9,
    RFC 959, USC/Information Sciences Institute, October 1985.
    <ftp://ds.internic.net/rfc/rfc959.txt>

 Sollins, K., and L. Masinter, "Requiremnets for URNs", Work in
    Progress.

 Yeong, W., "Towards Networked Information Retrieval", Technical report
    91-06-25-01, June 1991, Performance Systems International, Inc.
    <ftp://uu.psi.com/wp/nir.txt>

 Yeong, W., "Representing Public Archives in the Directory", Work in
    Progress, November 1991, now expired.

Security Considerations

  Security issues are not discussed in this memo.

Author's Address

  Tim Berners-Lee
  World-Wide Web project
  CERN
  1211 Geneva 23,
  Switzerland

  Phone: +41 (22)767 3755
  Fax:   +41 (22)767 7155
  EMail: [email protected]









Berners-Lee                                                    [Page 28]