(registered 2018-04-06, last updated 2018-04-06)

Name: Chet Ensign

Email: chet.ensign&oasis-open.org

Media type name: application

Media subtype name: xliff+xml

Required parameters: N/A

Optional parameters: N/A

Encoding considerations: binary

   Same as encoding considerations of application/xml as specified in 
   RFC 7303, Section 3 "Encoding Considerations"

Security considerations: XLIFF is a format used for localization and 
   translation of textual data, and as such does not itself include 
   facilities for executable content.

   Apart from all of the security considerations described in 
   RFC 7303 Section 10 ("Security Considerations"), XLIFF Version 2.0 
   and higher has the following Security considerations:

   Extensibility: XLIFF permits extensions. Hence it is possible 
   that application xliff+xml may describe content that has security 
   implications beyond those described here.

   Direct external reference mechanisms: An XLIFF document has a 
   number of attributes of the type URI or IRI, all of which may be 
   dereferenced and some of them should be dereferenced. Therefore, 
   the security issues of RFC 3987 Section 8 should be considered. 
   In addition, the contents of resources identified by file: URIs 
   can in some cases be accessed, processed and returned as results.

   More details can be found in the Detailed Security Considerations 
   section of the specification "A.1.1 Detailed Security 
   Considerations".
   http://docs.oasis-open.org/xliff/xliff-core/v2.1/os/xliff-core-v2.1-os.html#Detailed_Security_Considerations 

   The XLIFF format does not offer any internal mechanisms to provide 
   privacy, convey trust or verify the integrity of XLIFF documents. 
   If such features are needed varies from case to case. 
   Implementations that will process documents in cases where one or 
   more of these features are required need to implement that outside 
   of the XLIFF format. Transport privacy may for example be provided 
   by SSL/TLS. Storage privacy could be implemented by encrypting the 
   XLIFF content using XML encryption or some other appropriate 
   means. Likewise the trust and integrity checks could be 
   implemented using XML signatures or by some other technology that 
   is appropriate for the particular implementation.

Interoperability considerations: Same as interoperability 
   considerations described in RFC 7303

   Also, interoperability requirements are specified throughout the 
   specification and summarized in its Conformance Section.
   http://docs.oasis-open.org/xliff/xliff-core/v2.1/os/xliff-core-v2.1-os.html#Conformance

Published specification: XLIFF Version 2.1 (OASIS Standard, 
   13-February-2018) at 
   http://docs.oasis-open.org/xliff/xliff-core/v2.1/os/xliff-core-v2.1-os.html

Applications which use this media: XLIFF conformant applications, 
   according to the Conformance Section of the specification
   http://docs.oasis-open.org/xliff/xliff-core/v2.1/os/xliff-core-v2.1-os.html#Conformance

Fragment identifier considerations: Generic XML processors won't be 
   able to resolve XLIFF fragment identifiers, as the fragment 
   identification syntax is specific for XLIFF and has been defined 
   in its Fragment Identification section as of csd03/csprd03 of 
   XLIFF Version 2.0; 
   http://docs.oasis-open.org/xliff/xliff-core/v2.1/os/xliff-core-v2.1-os.html#fragid

Restrictions on usage:: N/A

Additional information:

   1. Deprecated alias names for this type: N/A
   2. Magic number(s): N/A
   3. File extension(s): xlf
   4. Macintosh file type code: "TEXT"
   5. Object Identifiers: N/A

General Comments: N/A

Person to contact for further information:

   1. Name: Chet Ensign
   2. Email: chet.ensign&oasis-open.org

Intended usage: Common

Author/Change controller: OASIS