diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index 0f193c2e..778ea372 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
 # Jekyll products
 .sass-cache/
 _site/
+node_modules/
+.vscode/
+.jekyll-metadata
+vendor/
diff --git a/.gitmodules b/.gitmodules
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..d2f583c4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitmodules
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+[submodule "_includes/draft-00"]
+	path = _includes/draft-00
+	url = https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec.git
+[submodule "_includes/draft-01"]
+	path = _includes/draft-01
+	url = https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec.git
+[submodule "_includes/draft-02"]
+	path = _includes/draft-02
+	url = https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec.git
+[submodule "_includes/draft-03"]
+	path = _includes/draft-03
+	url = https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec.git
+	branch = draft-03
+[submodule "_includes/draft-04"]
+	path = _includes/draft-04
+	url = https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec.git
+	branch = draft-04
+[submodule "_includes/draft-05"]
+	path = _includes/draft-05
+	url = https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec.git
+[submodule "_includes/draft-06"]
+	path = _includes/draft-06
+	url = https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec.git
+	branch = draft-06
+[submodule "_includes/draft-07"]
+	path = _includes/draft-07
+	url = https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec.git
+	branch = draft-07
+[submodule "_includes/draft/2019-09"]
+	path = _includes/draft/2019-09
+	url = https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec.git
+	branch = 2019-09
+[submodule "_includes/draft/2020-12"]
+	path = _includes/draft/2020-12
+	url = https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec.git
+	branch = 2020-12
diff --git a/.ruby-version b/.ruby-version
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..94ff29cc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.ruby-version
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+3.1.1
diff --git a/.travis.yml b/.travis.yml
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..886aa1a0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.travis.yml
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+language: ruby
+dist: trusty
+sudo: false
+node_js:
+- node
+before_script:
+- npm install ajv-cli@5.0.0 ajv-formats@2.1.1
+- PATH="./node_modules/.bin/:$PATH"
+script:
+- bundle exec jekyll build
+- ajv compile --spec=draft2020 --strict=false -s learn/examples/geographical-location.schema.json -s learn/examples/address.schema.json -s learn/examples/card.schema.json -s learn/examples/calendar.schema.json
+- ajv compile --spec=draft2020 --strict=false -c ajv-formats -s _data/schema.yml
+- ajv --spec=draft2020 --strict=false -c ajv-formats test -s _data/schema.yml -d "_data/*-libraries-*.yml" --valid
diff --git a/404.html b/404.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..5e0616e3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/404.html
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+---
+layout: default
+permalink: /404.html
+---
+
+<style type="text/css" media="screen">
+  .container {
+    margin: 10px auto;
+    max-width: 600px;
+    text-align: center;
+  }
+  h1 {
+    margin: 30px 0;
+    font-size: 4em;
+    line-height: 1;
+    letter-spacing: -1px;
+  }
+</style>
+
+<div class="container">
+  <h1>404</h1>
+
+  <p><strong>Page not found :(</strong></p>
+  <p>The requested page could not be found.</p>
+</div>
diff --git a/CNAME b/CNAME
deleted file mode 100644
index 0d9c62bd..00000000
--- a/CNAME
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,2 +0,0 @@
-json-schema.org
-
diff --git a/CONTRIBUTING.md b/CONTRIBUTING.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..bd6dde57
--- /dev/null
+++ b/CONTRIBUTING.md
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+Thank you for your interest in contributing to JSON Schema!  Your participation is appreciated!
+
+If your question/request/change concerns the [JSON Schema Website](https://json-schema.org/) you are in the right place.  If your question/request/change concerns the JSON Schema specification drafts or meta-schemas, please go to [the JSON Schema specification repository](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec).
diff --git a/Gemfile b/Gemfile
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..a3a27a46
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Gemfile
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+source 'https://rubygems.org'
+ruby '3.1.1'
+gem 'github-pages', group: :jekyll_plugins
+gem 'webrick', '~> 1.7'
diff --git a/Gemfile.lock b/Gemfile.lock
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..9111ff7b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Gemfile.lock
@@ -0,0 +1,263 @@
+GEM
+  remote: https://rubygems.org/
+  specs:
+    activesupport (7.0.4.2)
+      concurrent-ruby (~> 1.0, >= 1.0.2)
+      i18n (>= 1.6, < 2)
+      minitest (>= 5.1)
+      tzinfo (~> 2.0)
+    addressable (2.8.1)
+      public_suffix (>= 2.0.2, < 6.0)
+    coffee-script (2.4.1)
+      coffee-script-source
+      execjs
+    coffee-script-source (1.11.1)
+    colorator (1.1.0)
+    commonmarker (0.23.8)
+    concurrent-ruby (1.2.0)
+    dnsruby (1.61.9)
+      simpleidn (~> 0.1)
+    em-websocket (0.5.3)
+      eventmachine (>= 0.12.9)
+      http_parser.rb (~> 0)
+    ethon (0.16.0)
+      ffi (>= 1.15.0)
+    eventmachine (1.2.7)
+    execjs (2.8.1)
+    faraday (2.7.4)
+      faraday-net_http (>= 2.0, < 3.1)
+      ruby2_keywords (>= 0.0.4)
+    faraday-net_http (3.0.2)
+    ffi (1.15.5)
+    forwardable-extended (2.6.0)
+    gemoji (3.0.1)
+    github-pages (228)
+      github-pages-health-check (= 1.17.9)
+      jekyll (= 3.9.3)
+      jekyll-avatar (= 0.7.0)
+      jekyll-coffeescript (= 1.1.1)
+      jekyll-commonmark-ghpages (= 0.4.0)
+      jekyll-default-layout (= 0.1.4)
+      jekyll-feed (= 0.15.1)
+      jekyll-gist (= 1.5.0)
+      jekyll-github-metadata (= 2.13.0)
+      jekyll-include-cache (= 0.2.1)
+      jekyll-mentions (= 1.6.0)
+      jekyll-optional-front-matter (= 0.3.2)
+      jekyll-paginate (= 1.1.0)
+      jekyll-readme-index (= 0.3.0)
+      jekyll-redirect-from (= 0.16.0)
+      jekyll-relative-links (= 0.6.1)
+      jekyll-remote-theme (= 0.4.3)
+      jekyll-sass-converter (= 1.5.2)
+      jekyll-seo-tag (= 2.8.0)
+      jekyll-sitemap (= 1.4.0)
+      jekyll-swiss (= 1.0.0)
+      jekyll-theme-architect (= 0.2.0)
+      jekyll-theme-cayman (= 0.2.0)
+      jekyll-theme-dinky (= 0.2.0)
+      jekyll-theme-hacker (= 0.2.0)
+      jekyll-theme-leap-day (= 0.2.0)
+      jekyll-theme-merlot (= 0.2.0)
+      jekyll-theme-midnight (= 0.2.0)
+      jekyll-theme-minimal (= 0.2.0)
+      jekyll-theme-modernist (= 0.2.0)
+      jekyll-theme-primer (= 0.6.0)
+      jekyll-theme-slate (= 0.2.0)
+      jekyll-theme-tactile (= 0.2.0)
+      jekyll-theme-time-machine (= 0.2.0)
+      jekyll-titles-from-headings (= 0.5.3)
+      jemoji (= 0.12.0)
+      kramdown (= 2.3.2)
+      kramdown-parser-gfm (= 1.1.0)
+      liquid (= 4.0.4)
+      mercenary (~> 0.3)
+      minima (= 2.5.1)
+      nokogiri (>= 1.13.6, < 2.0)
+      rouge (= 3.26.0)
+      terminal-table (~> 1.4)
+    github-pages-health-check (1.17.9)
+      addressable (~> 2.3)
+      dnsruby (~> 1.60)
+      octokit (~> 4.0)
+      public_suffix (>= 3.0, < 5.0)
+      typhoeus (~> 1.3)
+    html-pipeline (2.14.3)
+      activesupport (>= 2)
+      nokogiri (>= 1.4)
+    http_parser.rb (0.8.0)
+    i18n (1.12.0)
+      concurrent-ruby (~> 1.0)
+    jekyll (3.9.3)
+      addressable (~> 2.4)
+      colorator (~> 1.0)
+      em-websocket (~> 0.5)
+      i18n (>= 0.7, < 2)
+      jekyll-sass-converter (~> 1.0)
+      jekyll-watch (~> 2.0)
+      kramdown (>= 1.17, < 3)
+      liquid (~> 4.0)
+      mercenary (~> 0.3.3)
+      pathutil (~> 0.9)
+      rouge (>= 1.7, < 4)
+      safe_yaml (~> 1.0)
+    jekyll-avatar (0.7.0)
+      jekyll (>= 3.0, < 5.0)
+    jekyll-coffeescript (1.1.1)
+      coffee-script (~> 2.2)
+      coffee-script-source (~> 1.11.1)
+    jekyll-commonmark (1.4.0)
+      commonmarker (~> 0.22)
+    jekyll-commonmark-ghpages (0.4.0)
+      commonmarker (~> 0.23.7)
+      jekyll (~> 3.9.0)
+      jekyll-commonmark (~> 1.4.0)
+      rouge (>= 2.0, < 5.0)
+    jekyll-default-layout (0.1.4)
+      jekyll (~> 3.0)
+    jekyll-feed (0.15.1)
+      jekyll (>= 3.7, < 5.0)
+    jekyll-gist (1.5.0)
+      octokit (~> 4.2)
+    jekyll-github-metadata (2.13.0)
+      jekyll (>= 3.4, < 5.0)
+      octokit (~> 4.0, != 4.4.0)
+    jekyll-include-cache (0.2.1)
+      jekyll (>= 3.7, < 5.0)
+    jekyll-mentions (1.6.0)
+      html-pipeline (~> 2.3)
+      jekyll (>= 3.7, < 5.0)
+    jekyll-optional-front-matter (0.3.2)
+      jekyll (>= 3.0, < 5.0)
+    jekyll-paginate (1.1.0)
+    jekyll-readme-index (0.3.0)
+      jekyll (>= 3.0, < 5.0)
+    jekyll-redirect-from (0.16.0)
+      jekyll (>= 3.3, < 5.0)
+    jekyll-relative-links (0.6.1)
+      jekyll (>= 3.3, < 5.0)
+    jekyll-remote-theme (0.4.3)
+      addressable (~> 2.0)
+      jekyll (>= 3.5, < 5.0)
+      jekyll-sass-converter (>= 1.0, <= 3.0.0, != 2.0.0)
+      rubyzip (>= 1.3.0, < 3.0)
+    jekyll-sass-converter (1.5.2)
+      sass (~> 3.4)
+    jekyll-seo-tag (2.8.0)
+      jekyll (>= 3.8, < 5.0)
+    jekyll-sitemap (1.4.0)
+      jekyll (>= 3.7, < 5.0)
+    jekyll-swiss (1.0.0)
+    jekyll-theme-architect (0.2.0)
+      jekyll (> 3.5, < 5.0)
+      jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.0)
+    jekyll-theme-cayman (0.2.0)
+      jekyll (> 3.5, < 5.0)
+      jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.0)
+    jekyll-theme-dinky (0.2.0)
+      jekyll (> 3.5, < 5.0)
+      jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.0)
+    jekyll-theme-hacker (0.2.0)
+      jekyll (> 3.5, < 5.0)
+      jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.0)
+    jekyll-theme-leap-day (0.2.0)
+      jekyll (> 3.5, < 5.0)
+      jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.0)
+    jekyll-theme-merlot (0.2.0)
+      jekyll (> 3.5, < 5.0)
+      jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.0)
+    jekyll-theme-midnight (0.2.0)
+      jekyll (> 3.5, < 5.0)
+      jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.0)
+    jekyll-theme-minimal (0.2.0)
+      jekyll (> 3.5, < 5.0)
+      jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.0)
+    jekyll-theme-modernist (0.2.0)
+      jekyll (> 3.5, < 5.0)
+      jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.0)
+    jekyll-theme-primer (0.6.0)
+      jekyll (> 3.5, < 5.0)
+      jekyll-github-metadata (~> 2.9)
+      jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.0)
+    jekyll-theme-slate (0.2.0)
+      jekyll (> 3.5, < 5.0)
+      jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.0)
+    jekyll-theme-tactile (0.2.0)
+      jekyll (> 3.5, < 5.0)
+      jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.0)
+    jekyll-theme-time-machine (0.2.0)
+      jekyll (> 3.5, < 5.0)
+      jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.0)
+    jekyll-titles-from-headings (0.5.3)
+      jekyll (>= 3.3, < 5.0)
+    jekyll-watch (2.2.1)
+      listen (~> 3.0)
+    jemoji (0.12.0)
+      gemoji (~> 3.0)
+      html-pipeline (~> 2.2)
+      jekyll (>= 3.0, < 5.0)
+    kramdown (2.3.2)
+      rexml
+    kramdown-parser-gfm (1.1.0)
+      kramdown (~> 2.0)
+    liquid (4.0.4)
+    listen (3.8.0)
+      rb-fsevent (~> 0.10, >= 0.10.3)
+      rb-inotify (~> 0.9, >= 0.9.10)
+    mercenary (0.3.6)
+    minima (2.5.1)
+      jekyll (>= 3.5, < 5.0)
+      jekyll-feed (~> 0.9)
+      jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.1)
+    minitest (5.17.0)
+    nokogiri (1.14.2-x86_64-linux)
+      racc (~> 1.4)
+    octokit (4.25.1)
+      faraday (>= 1, < 3)
+      sawyer (~> 0.9)
+    pathutil (0.16.2)
+      forwardable-extended (~> 2.6)
+    public_suffix (4.0.7)
+    racc (1.6.2)
+    rb-fsevent (0.11.2)
+    rb-inotify (0.10.1)
+      ffi (~> 1.0)
+    rexml (3.2.5)
+    rouge (3.26.0)
+    ruby2_keywords (0.0.5)
+    rubyzip (2.3.2)
+    safe_yaml (1.0.5)
+    sass (3.7.4)
+      sass-listen (~> 4.0.0)
+    sass-listen (4.0.0)
+      rb-fsevent (~> 0.9, >= 0.9.4)
+      rb-inotify (~> 0.9, >= 0.9.7)
+    sawyer (0.9.2)
+      addressable (>= 2.3.5)
+      faraday (>= 0.17.3, < 3)
+    simpleidn (0.2.1)
+      unf (~> 0.1.4)
+    terminal-table (1.8.0)
+      unicode-display_width (~> 1.1, >= 1.1.1)
+    typhoeus (1.4.0)
+      ethon (>= 0.9.0)
+    tzinfo (2.0.6)
+      concurrent-ruby (~> 1.0)
+    unf (0.1.4)
+      unf_ext
+    unf_ext (0.0.8.2)
+    unicode-display_width (1.8.0)
+    webrick (1.8.1)
+
+PLATFORMS
+  x86_64-linux-musl
+
+DEPENDENCIES
+  github-pages
+  webrick (~> 1.7)
+
+RUBY VERSION
+   ruby 3.1.1p18
+
+BUNDLED WITH
+   2.3.25
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
index 6a307b24..5ee11859 100644
--- a/README.md
+++ b/README.md
@@ -1,22 +1,48 @@
-## Repo for the JSON Schema website!
+---
+📌 **Deprecation Notice** 📌
 
-This repo is currently undergoing a complete restructuring and removing of content not related to the website.
-It was a copy of the gh-pages branch over on the old org repo.
+This repository is now deprecated. To contribute to JSON Schema's website please use the new repository ➡️ [https://github.com/json-schema-org/website](https://github.com/json-schema-org/website).
 
-For current work on JSON Schema, please see https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec
+---
 
-The JSON Schema web site is at http://json-schema.org
+# JSON Schema Website
+
+[![Project Status: Moved/Deprecated to https://github.com/json-schema-org/website – The project has been moved to a new location, and the version at that location should be considered authoritative.](https://www.repostatus.org/badges/latest/moved.svg)](https://www.repostatus.org/#moved) to [https://github.com/json-schema-org/website](https://github.com/json-schema-org/websitem)
+
+[![Contributor Covenant](https://img.shields.io/badge/Contributor%20Covenant-2.1-4baaaa.svg)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/.github/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md)
+[![Financial Contributors on Open Collective](https://opencollective.com/json-schema/all/badge.svg?label=financial+contributors)](https://opencollective.com/json-schema) 
+
+This is the repository for the [JSON Schema website](https://json-schema.org).
+
+For issues, discussion, and changes to the JSON Schema specification, please use the [json-schema-spec](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec) repository.
 
 ## Status
-For the current status of issues and pull requests, please see the following labels
+For the current status of issues and pull requests, please see the following badges
+
+[![Issues](https://img.shields.io/github/issues-raw/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io.svg)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/issues)
 
-[![Available](https://img.shields.io/waffle/label/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/Status:%20Available.svg?style=flat)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22Status%3A+Available%22) [![In Progress](https://img.shields.io/waffle/label/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/Status:%20In%20Progress.svg?style=flat)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/labels/Status:%20In%20Progress) [![Review Needed](https://img.shields.io/waffle/label/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/Status:%20Review%20Needed.svg?style=flat)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/labels/Status%3A%20Review%20Needed)
+[![Available](https://img.shields.io/github/issues/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/Status:%20Available.svg?color=brightgreen)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22Status%3A+Available%22) [![In Progress](https://img.shields.io/github/issues/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/Status:%20In%20Progress.svg)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/labels/Status:%20In%20Progress) [![Review Needed](https://img.shields.io/github/issues/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/Status:%20Review%20Needed.svg)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/labels/Status%3A%20Review%20Needed)
 
-[![Critical](https://img.shields.io/waffle/label/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/Priority:%20Critical.svg?style=flat
-)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/labels/Priority%3A%20Critical) [![High](https://img.shields.io/waffle/label/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/Priority:%20High.svg?style=flat)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/labels/Priority%3A%20High) [![Medium](https://img.shields.io/waffle/label/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/Priority:%20Medium.svg?style=flat)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/labels/Priority%3A%20Medium) [![Low](https://img.shields.io/waffle/label/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/Priority:%20Low.svg?style=flat)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/labels/Priority%3A%20Low) 
+[![Critical](https://img.shields.io/github/issues/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/Priority:%20Critical.svg?color=critical
+)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/labels/Priority%3A%20Critical) [![High](https://img.shields.io/github/issues/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/Priority:%20High.svg?color=important)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/labels/Priority%3A%20High) [![Medium](https://img.shields.io/github/issues/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/Priority:%20Medium.svg)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/labels/Priority%3A%20Medium) [![Low](https://img.shields.io/github/issues/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/Priority:%20Low.svg)](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/labels/Priority%3A%20Low)
 
 Labels are assigned based on [Sensible Github Labels](https://github.com/Relequestual/sensible-github-labels).
 
+## Compile and run locally
+
+This site runs via github pages, with automatically building PR previews via netlify.
+
+This project uses git submodules, so you will need to run the following commands
+to fully clone the repo.
+
+```bash
+git submodule init
+git submodule update
+```
+
+You can run the site locally using `docker-compose up` and browse to
+http://localhost:4000
+
 ## License
 
-The source material in this repository is licensed under the AFL or BSD license. 
+The source material in this repository is licensed under the AFL or BSD license.
diff --git a/_config.yml b/_config.yml
index ac4cbf71..3fd3064f 100644
--- a/_config.yml
+++ b/_config.yml
@@ -18,17 +18,27 @@ title: JSON Schema
 description: The home of JSON Schema
 baseurl: "" # the subpath of your site, e.g. /blog
 url: "" # the base hostname & protocol for your site
-#twitter_username: jekyllrb
+twitter_username: jsonschema
 github_username:  json-schema-org
+google_analytics: UA-99695987-1
 
 # Build settings
 markdown: kramdown
-#theme: minima
+theme: minima
 
-collections:
-  docs:
-    output: true
-    permalink: "/:title:output_ext"
+header_pages:
+- specification.md
+- learn/index.md
+- implementations.md
 
-gems:
+exclude:
+- README.md
+- Gemfile
+- node_modules
+- vendor
+- cache
+- docker-compose.yml
+
+plugins:
   - jekyll-relative-links
+  - jekyll-redirect-from
diff --git a/_data/hyper-libraries-modern.yml b/_data/hyper-libraries-modern.yml
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..68587ab8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_data/hyper-libraries-modern.yml
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+- name: JavaScript
+  implementations:
+    - name: mokkabonna/json-hyper-schema
+      url: "https://github.com/mokkabonna/json-hyper-schema"
+      license: MIT
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7]
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
diff --git a/_data/hyper-libraries-obsolete.yml b/_data/hyper-libraries-obsolete.yml
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..10a55c4a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_data/hyper-libraries-obsolete.yml
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+- name: JavaScript
+  implementations:
+    - name: Jsonary
+      url: "http://jsonary.com/"
+      license: MIT
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+- name: Python
+  implementations:
+    - name: Core API Hyper-Schema codec
+      url: "https://github.com/core-api/python-jsonhyperschema-codec"
+      notes: "Draft-06+ progress: issue [12](https://github.com/core-api/python-jsonhyperschema-codec/issues/12)"
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: BSD-2-Clause
diff --git a/_data/schema.yml b/_data/schema.yml
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..43a2cdb9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_data/schema.yml
@@ -0,0 +1,183 @@
+$schema: https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema
+$id: https://json-schema.org/implementations/schema
+type: array
+items:
+    $ref: "#/$defs/language"
+$comment: |
+    The following if/then ensures that if last-updated is used
+    anywhere, then it is required everywhere.  This allows it
+    to be required in the modern data files and unused in the
+    obsolete data files.
+if:
+   contains:
+       required: [implementations]
+       properties:
+           implementations:
+               contains:
+                   required: [last-updated]
+then:
+    properties:
+        implementations:
+            items:
+                required: [last-updated]
+$defs:
+    language:
+        description: |
+            A group of implementations grouped by programming language or
+            runtime environment.
+        type: object
+        unevaluatedProperties: false
+        required: [name]
+        oneOf:
+          - required: [implementations]
+          - required: [notes]
+        $ref: "#/$defs/name-and-anchor-name"
+        properties:
+            implementations:
+                description: |
+                    The list of implementations for this language/environment,
+                    sorted with those supporting the most recent
+                    drafts/versions first.
+                type: array
+                items:
+                    $ref: "#/$defs/implementation"
+                $comment: |
+                    The following if/then ensures that if the first
+                if:
+                    prefixItems:
+                      - required: [last-updated]
+                then:
+                    items:
+                        required: [last-updated]
+            notes:
+                type: [string, "null"]
+    name-and-anchor-name:
+        $comment: |
+            Require an anchor-name if the name is not suitable for
+            use as an anchor (HTML id attribute)
+        if:
+            required: [name]
+            not:
+                properties:
+                    name:
+                        $ref: "#/$defs/anchor-name"
+        then:
+            required: [anchor-name]
+        properties:
+            name:
+                type: string
+            anchor-name:
+                $ref: "#/$defs/anchor-name"
+    anchor-name:
+        description: |
+            A name suitable for us as an HTML id, if the regular name
+            is not a vald id.  The regex is looser than the HTML spec
+            but is based on what was already working on the page.
+        type: string
+        pattern: '^[A-Za-z][A-Za-z0-9+-_:./ ()]*$'
+    implementation:
+        description: |
+            An implementation and its associated information.
+        type: object
+        unevaluatedProperties: false
+        required: [name, url]
+        anyOf:
+          - required: [draft]
+          - required: [date-draft]
+        $ref: "#/$defs/name-and-anchor-name"
+        properties:
+            url:
+                description: |
+                    The URL of the implementation's repository or documentation
+                type: string
+                format: uri
+            draft:
+                description: The supported drafts (up through draft-07)
+                type: array
+                items:
+                    type: integer
+                    enum: [1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7]
+            date-draft:
+                description: The supported drafts (2019-09+)
+                type: array
+                items:
+                    type: string
+                    enum: [2019-09, 2020-12]
+            license:
+                description: |
+                    The software license under which the implementation
+                    is available
+                type: string
+            notes:
+                description: |
+                    Additional information.  Overly promotional (or critical)
+                    wording should be avoided.
+                type: string
+            built-on:
+                description: |
+                    Indicates that this implementation is built on another
+                    implementation, typically to make it available through
+                    a web page, CLI, or a different programming language.
+                type: object
+                $ref: "#/$defs/name-and-anchor-name"
+            compliance:
+                $ref: "#/$defs/compliance"
+            last-updated:
+                description: |
+                    The date (in whatever timezone was relevant at the time)
+                    the information for this entry was last updated.  This
+                    should only be changed when the implementation's
+                    documentation has been checked against the entry, not
+                    when minor formatting or other updates are done.
+                $comment: |
+                    "pattern" does the validation work here, "format" is
+                    just for semantic clarity.
+                type: string
+                format: date
+                pattern: '^\d\d\d\d-[01]\d-[0123]\d$'
+    compliance:
+        description: |
+            The compliance section notes aspects of an implementation's
+            _default configuration_ that are non-compliant with the
+            specification in ways that are _not necessarily_ detected
+            by the test suite.  This information is provided based on
+            implementation documentation.
+        type: object
+        unevaluatedProperties: false
+        properties:
+            constraints:
+                description: |
+                    A brief note of design constraints that impacted choices
+                    regarding compliance.  This includes things like
+                    targeting memory-constrained environments, or trading
+                    off features for performance.  It does not include
+                    opinions regarding the value (or lack thereof) of
+                    the specification requirements.
+                type: string
+            config:
+                description: |
+                    Documents how to configure an implementation to produce
+                    the most specification-compliant behavior if it does
+                    not do so by default.  The resulting configuration
+                    may still have incomplete compliance (such as not
+                    having implemented all keywords), but will not
+                    have additional behavior that contradicts the
+                    specification (such as modifying the instance
+                    by filling in default values).
+                type: object
+                unevaluatedProperties: false
+                required: [instructions]
+                properties:
+                    docs:
+                        description: |
+                            A link to the implementation's configuration
+                            documentation, ideally to whatever part addresses
+                            configuration and compliance.
+                        type: string
+                        format: uri
+                    instructions:
+                        description: |
+                            Instructions to configure for compliance.  Will
+                            appear in a sentence after "you must" and before
+                            "to produce specification-compliant behavior."
+                        type: string
diff --git a/_data/validator-libraries-modern.yml b/_data/validator-libraries-modern.yml
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..04de6723
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_data/validator-libraries-modern.yml
@@ -0,0 +1,524 @@
+# NOTE: See schema.yml in this directory for the structure of this file.
+- name: .NET
+  anchor-name: dotnet
+  implementations:
+    - name: JsonSchema.Net
+      url: https://github.com/gregsdennis/json-everything
+      date-draft: [2020-12, 2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: Json.NET Schema
+      url: https://www.newtonsoft.com/jsonschema
+      date-draft: [2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4, 3]
+      license: "AGPL-3.0-only"
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: Corvus.JsonSchema
+      url: https://github.com/corvus-dotnet/corvus.jsonschema
+      date-draft: [2020-12, 2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6]
+      license: Apache License, Version 2.0
+      last-updated: "2023-02-14"
+- name: C
+  notes: No known implementations support draft-06 or later.
+- name: C++
+  implementations:
+    - name: f5-json-schema
+      url: https://github.com/KayEss/json-schema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7]
+      license: Boost Software License 1.0
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: JSON schema validator for JSON for Modern C++
+      url: https://github.com/pboettch/json-schema-validator
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: Valijson
+      url: https://github.com/tristanpenman/valijson
+      notes: header-only library, works with many JSON parser implementations
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7]
+      license: BSD-2-Clause
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: jsoncons
+      url: https://github.com/danielaparker/jsoncons/blob/master/doc/ref/jsonschema/jsonschema.md
+      notes: Header-only library
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7]
+      license: Boost Software License 1.0
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: Clojure
+  implementations:
+    - name: jinx
+      url: https://github.com/juxt/jinx
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: json-schema (luposlip)
+      url: https://github.com/luposlip/json-schema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4, 6, 7]
+      license: Apache License, Version 2.0
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: COM/ActiveX
+  implementations:
+    - name: JSON Essentials for COM/ActiveX
+      anchor-name: JSONEssentials
+      url: https://pinery.systems/json-essentials-com/index.html
+      draft: [7]
+      license: proprietary
+      notes: Language independent, includes JSON DOM parser, REST ready, 4 licensing options for free and business uses. For Windows platform only.
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: Common Lisp
+  implementations:
+    - name: json-schema (fisxoj)
+      url: https://github.com/fisxoj/json-schema
+      date-draft: [2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: LGPL
+      compliance:
+        config:
+          docs: https://github.com/fisxoj/json-schema/blob/master/README.rst
+          instructions: |
+            set `resolve-remote-references` to `nil`
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: Elixir
+  implementations:
+    - name: Exonerate
+      url: https://hexdocs.pm/exonerate/Exonerate.html
+      date-draft: [2020-12, 2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2023-04-04"
+    - name: JsonXema
+      url: https://github.com/hrzndhrn/json_xema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: Erlang
+  implementations:
+    - name: JeSSE
+      url: https://github.com/for-GET/jesse
+      draft: [6, 4, 3]
+      license: "Apache 2.0"
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: Go
+  implementations:
+    - name: santhosh-tekuri/jsonschema
+      url: https://github.com/santhosh-tekuri/jsonschema
+      notes: includes custom keywords, output formats
+      date-draft: [2020-12, 2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: Apache License 2.0
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: qri-io/jsonschema
+      url: https://github.com/qri-io/jsonschema
+      date-draft: [2019-09]
+      draft: [7]
+      license: MIT
+      notes: includes custom validator support, rich error returns
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: gojsonschema
+      url: https://github.com/xeipuuv/gojsonschema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: "Apache 2.0"
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: Java
+  implementations:
+    - name: Vert.x Json Schema
+      url: https://github.com/eclipse-vertx/vertx-json-schema
+      notes: |
+        Validator for Eclipse Vert.x project JSON types.
+        Includes custom keywords support, custom dialect support, asynchronous validation
+      date-draft: [2020-12, 2019-09]
+      draft: [4, 7]
+      license: Apache License, Version 2.0
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: jsonschemafriend
+      url: https://github.com/jimblackler/jsonschemafriend
+      date-draft: [2020-12, 2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4, 3]
+      license: Apache License 2.0
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: networknt/json-schema-validator
+      url: https://github.com/networknt/json-schema-validator
+      notes: Support OpenAPI 3.0 with Jackson parser
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: Apache License 2.0
+      compliance:
+        config:
+            docs: https://github.com/networknt/json-schema-validator/blob/master/doc/config.md
+            instructions: "set `handleNullableField` to `false`"
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: erosb/json-sKema
+      url: https://github.com/erosb/json-sKema
+      notes: Successor of the everit-org/json-schema library
+      date-draft: [2020-12]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2023-04-10"
+    - name: Snow
+      url: https://github.com/ssilverman/snowy-json
+      notes: Uses Maven for the project and Gson under the hood.
+      date-draft: [2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6]
+      license: GNU Affero General Public License v3.0
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: everit-org/json-schema
+      url: https://github.com/everit-org/json-schema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: Apache License 2.0
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: Justify
+      url: https://github.com/leadpony/justify
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: Apache License 2.0
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: json-schema (dev.harrel)
+      url: https://github.com/harrel56/json-schema
+      notes: JSON library agnostic implementation. Supports custom keywords.
+      date-draft: [ 2020-12 ]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2023-06-29"
+    - name: Zuunr JSON
+      url: https://bitbucket.org/zuunr/json
+      notes: Immutable JSON representation in Java + validation and filtering based on JSON Schema
+      date-draft: [ 2020-12 ]
+      license: Apache 2.0
+      last-updated: 2023-09-04  
+- name: JavaScript
+  implementations:
+    - name: Hyperjump JSV
+      url: https://github.com/jdesrosiers/json-schema
+      notes: "Built for Node.js and browsers. Includes support for custom vocabularies."
+      date-draft: [2019-09, 2020-12]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: "@exodus/schemasafe"
+      url: https://github.com/ExodusMovement/schemasafe
+      notes: |
+        For Node.js and browsers, with security and speed being the main focus. Pre-compiles schemas to JS functions.
+        [Supports OpenAPI `discriminator`](https://github.com/ExodusMovement/schemasafe/blob/master/doc/Discriminator-support.md).
+        Default behavior is hardened with additional schema coherence validation.
+      date-draft: [2020-12, 2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: MIT
+      compliance:
+        config:
+          docs: https://github.com/ExodusMovement/schemasafe/blob/master/doc/Options.md
+          instructions: "disable schema coherence checks and `format` assertion by setting option `mode: 'spec'`"
+      last-updated: "2023-08-29"
+    - name: ajv
+      url: https://github.com/ajv-validator/ajv
+      notes: "for Node.js and browsers - supports [user-defined keywords](https://github.com/ajv-validator/ajv/blob/master/docs/keywords.md) and [$data reference](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues/51)"
+      date-draft: [2019-09, 2020-12]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: MIT
+      compliance:
+        config:
+          docs: https://ajv.js.org/strict-mode.html
+          instructions: "set option `strict: false`"
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: "@cfworker/json-schema"
+      anchor-name: cfworker
+      url: https://github.com/cfworker/cfworker/blob/master/packages/json-schema/README.md
+      notes: "Built for Cloudflare workers, browsers, and Node.js"
+      date-draft: [2019-09, 2020-12]
+      draft: [7, 4]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2023-02-28"
+    - name: JSON Schema Library
+      url: https://github.com/sagold/json-schema-library
+      notes: "Built for Node.js and browsers. Customizable json-validator and json-schema utilities for traversal, data generation and validation"
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: djv
+      url: https://github.com/korzio/djv
+      notes: "for Node.js and browsers"
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [6, 4]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: vue-vuelidate-jsonschema
+      url: https://github.com/mokkabonna/vue-vuelidate-jsonschema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [6]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: jema.js
+      url: https://github.com/nuxodin/jema.js
+      date-draft: [2020-12]
+      draft: []
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2023-03-28"
+- name: Kotlin
+  implementations:
+    - name: Medeia-validator
+      url: https://github.com/worldturner/medeia-validator
+      notes: streaming validator for Kotlin and Java clients; works with Jackson and Gson
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: Apache License 2.0
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: json-kotlin-schema
+      url: https://github.com/pwall567/json-kotlin-schema
+      notes: |
+        Kotlin implementation of JSON Schema.
+        (Currently supports most of Draft 7; see the README for details.
+        Full compliance with Draft 7 and later drafts in progress.)
+      date-draft: [2019-09]
+      draft: [7]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: json-schema-validator
+      url: https://github.com/OptimumCode/json-schema-validator
+      notes: |
+        Kotlin Muliplatform implementation of JSON schema to validate the JsonElement from kotlinx.serialization-json.
+        The library is 'work in progress' and new features/drafts will be added in the future.
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2023-08-01"
+- name: Perl
+  implementations:
+    - name: JSON::Schema::Modern
+      url: https://github.com/karenetheridge/JSON-Schema-Modern
+      date-draft: [2019-09, 2020-12]
+      draft: [7]
+      license: "GNU General Public License, Version 1 + The Artistic License 1.0"
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: JSON::Schema::Tiny
+      url: https://github.com/karenetheridge/JSON-Schema-Tiny
+      date-draft: [2019-09, 2020-12]
+      draft: [7]
+      license: "GNU General Public License, Version 1 + The Artistic License 1.0"
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: JSON::Validator
+      url: https://github.com/mojolicious/json-validator
+      date-draft: [2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: "The Artistic License 2.0 (GPL Compatible)"
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: JSONSchema::Validator
+      url: https://github.com/skbkontur/perl-jsonschema-validator
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: PHP
+  implementations:
+    - name: Opis Json Schema
+      url: https://github.com/opis/json-schema
+      date-draft: [2020-12, 2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6]
+      license: "Apache License 2.0"
+      compliance:
+        config:
+          docs: https://opis.io/json-schema/2.x/php-loader.html#parser-options
+          instructions: 'set several options to their "vanilla" values'
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: Swaggest Json Schema
+      url: https://github.com/swaggest/php-json-schema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: "MIT"
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: Python
+  implementations:
+    - name: jschon
+      url: https://github.com/marksparkza/jschon
+      date-draft: [2019-09, 2020-12]
+      draft: []
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: jsonschema
+      url: https://github.com/python-jsonschema/jsonschema
+      date-draft: [2019-09, 2020-12]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4, 3]
+      license: "MIT"
+      last-updated: "2022-11-09"
+    - name: fastjsonschema
+      url: https://github.com/horejsek/python-fastjsonschema
+      notes: Great performance thanks to code generation.
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: BSD-3-Clause
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: jsonschema-rs (Python)
+      url: https://github.com/Stranger6667/jsonschema-rs/tree/master/bindings/python
+      notes: Python bindings to Rust's jsonschema crate
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      built-on:
+        name: jsonschema-rs
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: Ruby
+  implementations:
+    - name: JSONSchemer
+      url: https://github.com/davishmcclurg/json_schemer
+      date-draft: [2020-12, 2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2023-08-20"
+    - name: JSI
+      url: https://rubydoc.info/gems/jsi
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: AGPL-3.0
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: Rust
+  implementations:
+    - name: boon
+      url: https://github.com/santhosh-tekuri/boon
+      date-draft: [2020-12, 2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: Apache License 2.0
+      last-updated: "2023-02-22"
+    - name: jsonschema-rs
+      url: https://github.com/Stranger6667/jsonschema-rs
+      notes: Fast due to compiling schema into a validation tree; 2019-09 and 2020-12 are partially supported
+      date-draft: [2019-09, 2020-12]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: Scala
+  implementations:
+    - name: Reactive Core Circe JSON Validator
+      url: https://github.com/reactivecore/rc-circe-json-schema
+      notes: Based on Circe-Library -Early state and API may not be stable. Not yet produciton ready.
+      date-draft: [2020-12, 2019-09]
+      draft: []
+      license: Apache License, Version 2.0
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: Objective-C
+  implementations:
+    - name: DSJSONSchemaValidation
+      url: https://github.com/dashevo/JSONSchemaValidation
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: Lua/LuaJIT
+  implementations:
+    - name: lua-resty-jsonschema
+      url: https://github.com/iresty/lua-resty-jsonschema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: MIT
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: Web (Online)
+  implementations:
+    - name: Hyperjump JSV (online)
+      url: https://json-schema.hyperjump.io
+      date-draft: [2020-12, 2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      notes: Supports multiple schemas and multiple instances; client-side validation
+      built-on:
+        name: Hyperjump JSV
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: json-everything
+      url: https://json-everything.net/json-schema
+      date-draft: [2020-12, 2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6]
+      notes: Powered by JsonSchema.Net in Blazor WASM for client-side validation
+      built-on:
+        name: JsonSchema.Net
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: jschon.dev
+      url: https://jschon.dev/
+      date-draft: [2020-12, 2019-09]
+      draft: []
+      built-on:
+        name: jschon
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: JSON Schema Validator
+      url: https://www.jsonschemavalidator.net/
+      date-draft: [2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4, 3]
+      notes: server-side validation
+      built-on:
+        name: Json.NET Schema
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: jsonschema.dev
+      url: https://jsonschema.dev
+      draft: [7]
+      notes: client-side validation
+      built-on:
+        name: ajv
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: JSON Schema Lint
+      url: http://jsonschemalint.com/
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4, 3, 2, 1]
+      built-on:
+        name: ajv
+      notes:  Uses JSV for draft-03 and earlier
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: ExtendsClass's JSON Schema Validator
+      anchor-name: ExtendsClass
+      url: https://extendsclass.com/json-schema-validator.html
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7]
+      built-on:
+        name: ajv
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+- name: Command Line
+  implementations:
+    - name: valbuddy
+      license: Free and commercial versions (proprietary)
+      url: 'https://www.json-buddy.com/json-validator-command-line-tool.htm'
+      date-draft: [2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      notes: JSONBuddy cli tool. Windows platform. Support for large data and streaming validation.
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: ajv-cli
+      license: MIT
+      url: 'https://www.npmjs.com/package/ajv-cli'
+      date-draft: [2020-12, 2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      compliance:
+        config:
+          docs: https://github.com/ajv-validator/ajv-cli#ajv-options
+          instructions: "pass `--strict=false`"
+      built-on:
+        name: ajv
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: yajsv
+      license: MIT
+      url: 'https://github.com/neilpa/yajsv'
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      built-on:
+        name: gojsonschema
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+    - name: Polyglottal JSON Schema Validator
+      license: MIT
+      url: 'https://www.npmjs.com/package/pajv'
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [6, 4]
+      notes: can be used with YAML and many other formats besides JSON
+      last-updated: "2022-08-31"
+      built-on:
+        name: ajv
+- name: Github Actions
+  implementations:
+    - name: Validate JSON Action
+      license: MIT
+      url: 'https://github.com/OrRosenblatt/validate-json-action'
+      date-draft: [2019-09, 2020-12]
+      draft: []
+      built-on:
+        name: ajv
+      last-updated: "2023-02-01"
diff --git a/_data/validator-libraries-obsolete.yml b/_data/validator-libraries-obsolete.yml
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..127fb16e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_data/validator-libraries-obsolete.yml
@@ -0,0 +1,250 @@
+- name: .NET
+  anchor-name: dotnet
+  implementations:
+    - name: NJsonSchema
+      url: http://NJsonSchema.org
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: Ms-PL
+    - name: Manatee.Json
+      url: https://github.com/gregsdennis/Manatee.Json
+      date-draft: [2019-09]
+      draft: [7, 6, 4]
+      license: MIT
+- name: C
+  implementations:
+    - name: WJElement
+      url: https://github.com/netmail-open/wjelement
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4, 3]
+      license: LGPL-3.0
+      notes: "Draft-06+ progress: issue [17](https://github.com/netmail-open/wjelement/issues/17#issuecomment-390899432)"
+- name: C++
+  anchor-name: cpp
+  implementations:
+    - name: wjelement-cpp
+      url: https://github.com/petehug/wjelement-cpp
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: LGPLv3
+    - name: Header-only C++ library for JSON Schema validation
+      url: https://github.com/tristanpenman/valijson
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4, 3]
+      license: BSD-2-Clause
+    - name: Modern C++ JSON schema validator
+      url: https://github.com/pboettch/json-schema-validator
+      notes: "based on JSON for Modern C++"
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: "MIT"
+- name: Clojure
+  implementations:
+    - name: scjsv
+      url: https://github.com/metosin/scjsv
+      notes: "(wrapper for [java-json-tools/json-schema-validator](https://github.com/java-json-tools/json-schema-validator))"
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: Eclipse Public License v1.0
+    - name: json-schema validator
+      url: https://github.com/tatut/json-schema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [3, 4]
+      license: MIT
+- name:  CoffeeScript
+  implementations:
+    - name: JSCK
+      url: https://github.com/pandastrike/jsck
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4, 3]
+      license: MIT
+- name:  Dart
+  implementations:
+    - name: json_schema
+      url: https://github.com/patefacio/json_schema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: BSL-1.0
+- name: Elixir
+  implementations:
+    - name: Elixir JSON Schema validator
+      url: https://github.com/jonasschmidt/ex_json_schema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      notes: "Draft-06+ progress: issue [24](https://github.com/jonasschmidt/ex_json_schema/issues/24); branch [multi-draft-support](https://github.com/jonasschmidt/ex_json_schema/tree/multi-draft-support)"
+      license: MIT
+- name: Go
+  implementations:
+    - name: validate-json
+      url: https://github.com/cesanta/validate-json
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: GPLv2
+- name: Haskell
+  implementations:
+    - name: hjsonschema
+      url: https://github.com/seagreen/hjsonschema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: MIT
+- name: Java
+  implementations:
+    - name: json-schema-validator
+      url: https://github.com/java-json-tools/json-schema-validator
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: LGPLv3
+- name: JavaScript
+  implementations:
+    - name: jsonschema
+      url: https://github.com/tdegrunt/jsonschema
+      notes: "for Node.js"
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: MIT
+    - name: tv4
+      url: http://geraintluff.github.com/tv4/
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: Public Domain, MIT
+    - name: is-my-json-valid
+      url: https://github.com/mafintosh/is-my-json-valid
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: MIT
+    - name: JaySchema
+      url: https://github.com/natesilva/jayschema
+      notes: "for Node.js"
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: BSD
+    - name: z-schema
+      url: https://github.com/zaggino/z-schema
+      notes: "for Node.js"
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: MIT
+    - name: direct-schema
+      url: http://github.com/IreneKnapp/direct-schema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [3]
+      license: "BSD"
+    - name: JSV
+      url: http://github.com/garycourt/JSV
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [1, 2, 3]
+      license: "BSD"
+    - name: json-schema
+      url: https://github.com/kriszyp/json-schema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      notes: "part of the [Persevere](http://github.com/kriszyp/json-schema) project"
+      license: AFL, BSD
+    - name: schema.js
+      url: https://github.com/akidee/schema.js
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [2]
+      license: "MIT"
+    - name: json-gate
+      url: https://github.com/oferei/json-gate
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [3]
+      license: "MIT"
+    - name: JSEN
+      url: https://github.com/bugventure/jsen
+      notes: "for Node.js"
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: "MIT"
+    - name: Skeemas
+      url: https://github.com/ericgj/json-schema-valid
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [3, 4]
+      license: MIT
+    - name: Jassi
+      url: https://github.com/iclanzan/jassi
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: GPLv3
+    - name: json-schema-valid
+      url: https://github.com/ericgj/json-schema-valid
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: MIT
+- name: PHP
+  implementations:
+    - name: json-schema
+      url: https://github.com/justinrainbow/json-schema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4, 3]
+      license: "Berkeley"
+    - name: jsv4-php
+      url: https://github.com/geraintluff/jsv4-php
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: Public Domain, MIT
+    - name: JVal
+      url: https://github.com/stefk/jval
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: "MIT"
+    - name: JSON Guard
+      url: https://github.com/thephpleague/json-guard
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: "MIT"
+    - name: Swaggest Json Schema
+      url: https://github.com/swaggest/php-json-schema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: "MIT"
+- name: Perl
+  implementations:
+    - name: JSV::Validator
+      url: https://metacpan.org/module/JSV::Validator
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: "MIT"
+- name: PostgreSQL
+  implementations:
+    - name: postgres-json-schema
+      url: https://github.com/gavinwahl/postgres-json-schema
+      notes: "PL/pgSQL implementation, no remote (http) references"
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: PostgreSQL
+- name: Ruby
+  implementations:
+    - name: json_schema
+      url: https://github.com/brandur/json_schema
+      notes: "Schema parser and validator, with hyper-schema support"
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: MIT
+    - name: json-schema
+      url: https://github.com/hoxworth/json-schema
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4, 3, 2, 1]
+      license: MIT
+- name: Rust
+  implementations:
+    - name: valico
+      url: https://github.com/rustless/valico
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: MIT
+- name: Scala
+  implementations:
+    - name: json-schema-parser
+      url: https://github.com/VoxSupplyChain/json-schema-parser
+      notes: "Schema parser and validator"
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: Apache 2.0
+- name: Swift
+  implementations:
+    - name: JSONSchema
+      url: https://github.com/kylef/JSONSchema.swift
+      date-draft: []
+      draft: [4]
+      license: BSD-3-Clause
diff --git a/_includes/anchor_headings.html b/_includes/anchor_headings.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..f8e22d6a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_includes/anchor_headings.html
@@ -0,0 +1,172 @@
+{% capture headingsWorkspace %}
+  {% comment %}
+    Copyright (c) 2018 Vladimir "allejo" Jimenez
+
+    Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person
+    obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation
+    files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without
+    restriction, including without limitation the rights to use,
+    copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
+    copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the
+    Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following
+    conditions:
+
+    The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
+    included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
+
+    THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND,
+    EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES
+    OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND
+    NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT
+    HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY,
+    WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING
+    FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR
+    OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
+  {% endcomment %}
+  {% comment %}
+    Version 1.0.11
+      https://github.com/allejo/jekyll-anchor-headings
+
+    "Be the pull request you wish to see in the world." ~Ben Balter
+
+    Usage:
+      {% include anchor_headings.html html=content anchorBody="#" %}
+
+    Parameters:
+      * html          (string) - the HTML of compiled markdown generated by kramdown in Jekyll
+
+    Optional Parameters:
+      * beforeHeading (bool)   : false  - Set to true if the anchor should be placed _before_ the heading's content
+      * headerAttrs   (string) :  ''    - Any custom HTML attributes that will be added to the heading tag; you may NOT use `id`;
+                                          the `%heading%` and `%html_id%` placeholders are available
+      * anchorAttrs   (string) :  ''    - Any custom HTML attributes that will be added to the `<a>` tag; you may NOT use `href`, `class` or `title`;
+                                          the `%heading%` and `%html_id%` placeholders are available
+      * anchorBody    (string) :  ''    - The content that will be placed inside the anchor; the `%heading%` placeholder is available
+      * anchorClass   (string) :  ''    - The class(es) that will be used for each anchor. Separate multiple classes with a space
+      * anchorTitle   (string) :  ''    - The `title` attribute that will be used for anchors
+      * h_min         (int)    :  1     - The minimum header level to build an anchor for; any header lower than this value will be ignored
+      * h_max         (int)    :  6     - The maximum header level to build an anchor for; any header greater than this value will be ignored
+      * bodyPrefix    (string) :  ''    - Anything that should be inserted inside of the heading tag _before_ its anchor and content
+      * bodySuffix    (string) :  ''    - Anything that should be inserted inside of the heading tag _after_ its anchor and content
+      * generateId    (true)   :  false - Set to true if a header without id should generate an id to use.
+
+    Output:
+      The original HTML with the addition of anchors inside of all of the h1-h6 headings.
+  {% endcomment %}
+
+  {% assign minHeader = include.h_min | default: 1 %}
+  {% assign maxHeader = include.h_max | default: 6 %}
+  {% assign beforeHeading = include.beforeHeading %}
+  {% assign headerAttrs = include.headerAttrs %}
+  {% assign nodes = include.html | split: '<h' %}
+
+  {% capture edited_headings %}{% endcapture %}
+
+  {% for _node in nodes %}
+    {% capture node %}{{ _node | strip }}{% endcapture %}
+
+    {% if node == "" %}
+      {% continue %}
+    {% endif %}
+
+    {% assign nextChar = node | replace: '"', '' | strip | slice: 0, 1 %}
+    {% assign headerLevel = nextChar | times: 1 %}
+
+    <!-- If the level is cast to 0, it means it's not a h1-h6 tag, so let's see if we need to fix it -->
+    {% if headerLevel == 0 %}
+      <!-- Split up the node based on closing angle brackets and get the first one. -->
+      {% assign firstChunk = node | split: '>' | first %}
+
+      <!-- If the first chunk does NOT contain a '<', that means we've broken another HTML tag that starts with 'h' -->
+      {% unless firstChunk contains '<' %}
+        {% capture node %}<h{{ node }}{% endcapture %}
+      {% endunless %}
+
+      {% capture edited_headings %}{{ edited_headings }}{{ node }}{% endcapture %}
+      {% continue %}
+    {% endif %}
+
+    {% capture _closingTag %}</h{{ headerLevel }}>{% endcapture %}
+    {% assign _workspace = node | split: _closingTag %}
+    {% capture _hAttrToStrip %}{{ _workspace[0] | split: '>' | first }}>{% endcapture %}
+    {% assign header = _workspace[0] | replace: _hAttrToStrip, '' %}
+    {% assign escaped_header = header | strip_html | strip %}
+
+    {% assign _classWorkspace = _workspace[0] | split: 'class="' %}
+    {% assign _classWorkspace = _classWorkspace[1] | split: '"' %}
+    {% assign _html_class = _classWorkspace[0] %}
+
+    {% if _html_class contains "no_anchor" %}
+      {% assign skip_anchor = true %}
+    {% else %}
+      {% assign skip_anchor = false %}
+    {% endif %}
+
+    {% assign _idWorkspace = _workspace[0] | split: 'id="' %}
+    {% if _idWorkspace[1] %}
+      {% assign _idWorkspace = _idWorkspace[1] | split: '"' %}
+      {% assign html_id = _idWorkspace[0] %}
+    {% elsif include.generateId %}
+      <!-- If the header did not have an id we create one. -->
+      {% assign html_id = escaped_header | slugify %}
+      {% if html_id == "" %}
+        {% assign html_id = false %}
+      {% endif %}
+      {% capture headerAttrs %}{{ headerAttrs }} id="%html_id%"{% endcapture %}
+    {% endif %}
+
+    <!-- Build the anchor to inject for our heading -->
+    {% capture anchor %}{% endcapture %}
+
+    {% if skip_anchor == false and html_id and headerLevel >= minHeader and headerLevel <= maxHeader %}
+      {% if headerAttrs %}
+        {% capture _hAttrToStrip %}{{ _hAttrToStrip | split: '>' | first }} {{ headerAttrs | replace: '%heading%', escaped_header | replace: '%html_id%', html_id }}>{% endcapture %}
+      {% endif %}
+
+      {% capture anchor %}href="#{{ html_id }}"{% endcapture %}
+
+      {% if include.anchorClass %}
+        {% capture anchor %}{{ anchor }} class="{{ include.anchorClass }}"{% endcapture %}
+      {% endif %}
+
+      {% if include.anchorTitle %}
+        {% capture anchor %}{{ anchor }} title="{{ include.anchorTitle | replace: '%heading%', escaped_header }}"{% endcapture %}
+      {% endif %}
+
+      {% if include.anchorAttrs %}
+        {% capture anchor %}{{ anchor }} {{ include.anchorAttrs | replace: '%heading%', escaped_header | replace: '%html_id%', html_id }}{% endcapture %}
+      {% endif %}
+
+      {% capture anchor %}<a {{ anchor }}>{{ include.anchorBody | replace: '%heading%', escaped_header | default: '' }}</a>{% endcapture %}
+
+      <!-- In order to prevent adding extra space after a heading, we'll let the 'anchor' value contain it -->
+      {% if beforeHeading %}
+        {% capture anchor %}{{ anchor }} {% endcapture %}
+      {% else %}
+        {% capture anchor %} {{ anchor }}{% endcapture %}
+      {% endif %}
+    {% endif %}
+
+    {% capture new_heading %}
+      <h{{ _hAttrToStrip }}
+        {{ include.bodyPrefix }}
+        {% if beforeHeading %}
+          {{ anchor }}{{ header }}
+        {% else %}
+          {{ header }}{{ anchor }}
+        {% endif %}
+        {{ include.bodySuffix }}
+      </h{{ headerLevel }}>
+    {% endcapture %}
+
+    <!--
+    If we have content after the `</hX>` tag, then we'll want to append that here so we don't lost any content.
+    -->
+    {% assign chunkCount = _workspace | size %}
+    {% if chunkCount > 1 %}
+      {% capture new_heading %}{{ new_heading }}{{ _workspace | last }}{% endcapture %}
+    {% endif %}
+
+    {% capture edited_headings %}{{ edited_headings }}{{ new_heading }}{% endcapture %}
+  {% endfor %}
+{% endcapture %}{% assign headingsWorkspace = '' %}{{ edited_headings | strip }}
diff --git a/_includes/draft-00 b/_includes/draft-00
new file mode 160000
index 00000000..7ea575ae
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_includes/draft-00
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+Subproject commit 7ea575aef8d5c0183acbe6ff65b4c98ee9c236ec
diff --git a/_includes/draft-01 b/_includes/draft-01
new file mode 160000
index 00000000..2072feec
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_includes/draft-01
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+Subproject commit 2072feec9fc7a7ff0b2bb5b02c2d6742c554cc4a
diff --git a/_includes/draft-02 b/_includes/draft-02
new file mode 160000
index 00000000..707f6507
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_includes/draft-02
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+Subproject commit 707f65070d09fe5baa1315bce4d31a66ff124171
diff --git a/_includes/draft-03 b/_includes/draft-03
new file mode 160000
index 00000000..89912ad6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_includes/draft-03
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+Subproject commit 89912ad69fe15e006e8336a59e93bf7a1e46fa54
diff --git a/_includes/draft-04 b/_includes/draft-04
new file mode 160000
index 00000000..dba92b70
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_includes/draft-04
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+Subproject commit dba92b702c94858162f653590230e7573c8b7dd0
diff --git a/_includes/draft-05 b/_includes/draft-05
new file mode 160000
index 00000000..88d3cff3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_includes/draft-05
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+Subproject commit 88d3cff344e32611e23cfdd44117b28723a8393d
diff --git a/_includes/draft-06 b/_includes/draft-06
new file mode 160000
index 00000000..59ed5f6f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_includes/draft-06
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+Subproject commit 59ed5f6fc6f6386e23ca51d7f31d7fe9cf696713
diff --git a/_includes/draft-07 b/_includes/draft-07
new file mode 160000
index 00000000..567f7685
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_includes/draft-07
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+Subproject commit 567f768506aaa33a38e552c85bf0586029ef1b32
diff --git a/_includes/draft/2019-09 b/_includes/draft/2019-09
new file mode 160000
index 00000000..41014ea7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_includes/draft/2019-09
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+Subproject commit 41014ea723120ce70b314d72f863c6929d9f3cfd
diff --git a/_includes/draft/2020-12 b/_includes/draft/2020-12
new file mode 160000
index 00000000..769daad7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_includes/draft/2020-12
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+Subproject commit 769daad75a9553562333a8937a187741cb708c72
diff --git a/_includes/footer.html b/_includes/footer.html
index c6c55d24..46fe6fac 100644
--- a/_includes/footer.html
+++ b/_includes/footer.html
@@ -12,16 +12,24 @@ <h2 class="footer-heading">{{ site.title | escape }}</h2>
             {% include icon-github.html username=site.github_username %}
           </li>
           {% endif %}
-          <li>Discussion: <a href="https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/json-schema">Google Groups</a></li>
+          <li>Discussion: <a href="/slack">Slack</a> | <a href="https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/json-schema">Google Groups</a></li>
+          <li><a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/community/discussions">GitHub Discussions</a></li>
           <li>Site edits: <a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io">GitHub repo for site</a></li>
         </ul>
       </div>
 
       <div class="footer-col footer-col-3">
-        <p>{{ site.description | escape }}</p>
+        <p>
+        <a href="https://openjsf.org"><img alt="Logo of the OpenJS Foundation" src="/assets/openjs_foundation-logo.svg" class="custom-logo-link"></a>
+        </p>
       </div>
     </div>
-
+    <div class="footer-col-wrapper">
+      <div class="footer-col footer-col-4">
+        <p>Copyright <a href="https://openjsf.org">OpenJS Foundation</a> and {{ site.title }} contributors. All rights reserved. The <a href="https://openjsf.org">OpenJS Foundation</a> has registered trademarks and uses trademarks.  For a list of trademarks of the <a href="https://openjsf.org">OpenJS Foundation</a>, please see our <a href="https://trademark-policy.openjsf.org">Trademark Policy</a> and <a href="https://trademark-list.openjsf.org">Trademark List</a>.  Trademarks and logos not indicated on the <a href="https://trademark-list.openjsf.org">list of OpenJS Foundation trademarks</a> are trademarks&trade; or registered&reg; trademarks of their respective holders. Use of them does not imply any affiliation with or endorsement by them.</p>
+        <p><a href="https://openjsf.org">The OpenJS Foundation</a> | <a href="https://terms-of-use.openjsf.org">Terms of Use</a> | <a href="https://privacy-policy.openjsf.org">Privacy Policy</a> | <a href="https://bylaws.openjsf.org">Bylaws</a> | <a href="https://code-of-conduct.openjsf.org">Code of Conduct</a> | <a href="https://trademark-policy.openjsf.org">Trademark Policy</a> | <a href="https://trademark-list.openjsf.org">Trademark List</a> | <a href="https://www.linuxfoundation.org/cookies">Cookie Policy</a></p>      
+      </div>      
+    </div>
   </div>
 
 </footer>
diff --git a/_includes/head.html b/_includes/head.html
deleted file mode 100644
index b2dba5e3..00000000
--- a/_includes/head.html
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,20 +0,0 @@
-<head>
-  <meta charset="utf-8"/>
-  <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge"/>
-  <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1"/>
-
-  <title>{% if page.title %}{{ page.title | escape }}{% else %}{{ site.title | escape }}{% endif %}</title>
-  <meta name="description" content="{{ page.excerpt | default: site.description | strip_html | normalize_whitespace | truncate: 160 | escape }}"/>
-
-  {% assign custom_url = site.url | append: site.baseurl %}
-  {% assign full_base_url = site.github.url | default: custom_url %}
-  <link rel="stylesheet" href="{{ "/css/main.css" | prepend: full_base_url }}"/>
-  <link rel="canonical" href="{{ page.url | replace:'index.html','' | prepend: full_base_url }}"/>
-  <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="{{ site.title | escape }}" href="{{ "/feed.xml" | prepend: full_base_url }}"/>
-
-  <script src="{{ "/js/prism.js" | prepend: full_base_url }}" defer async></script>
-
-  {% if jekyll.environment == 'production' and site.google_analytics %}
-  {% include google-analytics.html %}
-  {% endif %}
-</head>
diff --git a/_includes/header.html b/_includes/header.html
index cfa75de9..3aa58e9b 100644
--- a/_includes/header.html
+++ b/_includes/header.html
@@ -1,32 +1,34 @@
 <header class="site-header" role="banner">
 
   <div class="wrapper">
+    {%- assign default_paths = site.pages | map: "path" -%}
+    {%- assign page_paths = site.header_pages | default: default_paths -%}
+    <a class="site-title" rel="author" href="{{ "/" | relative_url }}">{{ site.title | escape }}</a>
 
-    {% assign custom_url = site.url | append: site.baseurl %}
-    {% assign full_base_url = site.github.url | default: custom_url %}
-    <a class="site-title" href="{{ full_base_url }}/">{{ site.title | escape }}</a>
-
-    <nav class="site-nav">
-      <a href="#" class="menu-icon">
-        <svg viewBox="0 0 18 15" width="18px" height="15px">
-          <path fill="#424242" d="M18,1.484c0,0.82-0.665,1.484-1.484,1.484H1.484C0.665,2.969,0,2.304,0,1.484l0,0C0,0.665,0.665,0,1.484,0 h15.031C17.335,0,18,0.665,18,1.484L18,1.484z"/>
-          <path fill="#424242" d="M18,7.516C18,8.335,17.335,9,16.516,9H1.484C0.665,9,0,8.335,0,7.516l0,0c0-0.82,0.665-1.484,1.484-1.484 h15.031C17.335,6.031,18,6.696,18,7.516L18,7.516z"/>
-          <path fill="#424242" d="M18,13.516C18,14.335,17.335,15,16.516,15H1.484C0.665,15,0,14.335,0,13.516l0,0 c0-0.82,0.665-1.484,1.484-1.484h15.031C17.335,12.031,18,12.696,18,13.516L18,13.516z"/>
-        </svg>
-      </a>
-
-      <div class="trigger">
-        <a class="page-link" href="{{ full_base_url }}/documentation.html">Docs</a>
-        <a class="page-link" href="{{ full_base_url }}/examples.html">Examples</a>
-        <a class="page-link" href="{{ full_base_url }}/implementations.html">Software</a>
-        {% for my_page in site.pages %}
-          {% if my_page.menutitle %}
-          <a class="page-link" href="{{ my_page.url | prepend: full_base_url }}">{{ my_page.menutitle | escape }}</a>
-          {% endif %}
-        {% endfor %}
-      </div>
-    </nav>
+    {%- if page_paths -%}
+      <nav class="site-nav">
+        <input type="checkbox" id="nav-trigger" class="nav-trigger" />
+        <label for="nav-trigger">
+          <span class="menu-icon">
+            <svg viewBox="0 0 18 15" width="18px" height="15px">
+              <path fill="#424242" d="M18,1.484c0,0.82-0.665,1.484-1.484,1.484H1.484C0.665,2.969,0,2.304,0,1.484l0,0C0,0.665,0.665,0,1.484,0 h15.031C17.335,0,18,0.665,18,1.484L18,1.484z"/>
+              <path fill="#424242" d="M18,7.516C18,8.335,17.335,9,16.516,9H1.484C0.665,9,0,8.335,0,7.516l0,0c0-0.82,0.665-1.484,1.484-1.484 h15.031C17.335,6.031,18,6.696,18,7.516L18,7.516z"/>
+              <path fill="#424242" d="M18,13.516C18,14.335,17.335,15,16.516,15H1.484C0.665,15,0,14.335,0,13.516l0,0 c0-0.82,0.665-1.484,1.484-1.484h15.031C17.335,12.031,18,12.696,18,13.516L18,13.516z"/>
+            </svg>
+          </span>
+        </label>
 
+        <div class="trigger">
+          {%- for path in page_paths -%}
+            {%- assign my_page = site.pages | where: "path", path | first -%}
+            {%- if my_page.title -%}
+            <a class="page-link" href="{{ my_page.url | relative_url }}">{{ my_page.title | escape }}</a>
+            {%- endif -%}
+          {% endfor -%}
+          <a class="page-link" href="/blog">Blog</a>
+          <a class="page-link" href="/slack">Join our Slack</a>
+        </div>
+      </nav>
+    {%- endif -%}
   </div>
-
 </header>
diff --git a/_includes/icon-github.html b/_includes/icon-github.html
deleted file mode 100644
index e501a16b..00000000
--- a/_includes/icon-github.html
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1 +0,0 @@
-<a href="https://github.com/{{ include.username }}"><span class="icon icon--github">{% include icon-github.svg %}</span><span class="username">{{ include.username }}</span></a>
diff --git a/_includes/icon-github.svg b/_includes/icon-github.svg
deleted file mode 100644
index e6c5f6df..00000000
--- a/_includes/icon-github.svg
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1 +0,0 @@
-<svg viewBox="0 0 16 16" width="16px" height="16px"><path fill="#828282" d="M7.999,0.431c-4.285,0-7.76,3.474-7.76,7.761 c0,3.428,2.223,6.337,5.307,7.363c0.388,0.071,0.53-0.168,0.53-0.374c0-0.184-0.007-0.672-0.01-1.32 c-2.159,0.469-2.614-1.04-2.614-1.04c-0.353-0.896-0.862-1.135-0.862-1.135c-0.705-0.481,0.053-0.472,0.053-0.472 c0.779,0.055,1.189,0.8,1.189,0.8c0.692,1.186,1.816,0.843,2.258,0.645c0.071-0.502,0.271-0.843,0.493-1.037 C4.86,11.425,3.049,10.76,3.049,7.786c0-0.847,0.302-1.54,0.799-2.082C3.768,5.507,3.501,4.718,3.924,3.65 c0,0,0.652-0.209,2.134,0.796C6.677,4.273,7.34,4.187,8,4.184c0.659,0.003,1.323,0.089,1.943,0.261 c1.482-1.004,2.132-0.796,2.132-0.796c0.423,1.068,0.157,1.857,0.077,2.054c0.497,0.542,0.798,1.235,0.798,2.082 c0,2.981-1.814,3.637-3.543,3.829c0.279,0.24,0.527,0.713,0.527,1.437c0,1.037-0.01,1.874-0.01,2.129 c0,0.208,0.14,0.449,0.534,0.373c3.081-1.028,5.302-3.935,5.302-7.362C15.76,3.906,12.285,0.431,7.999,0.431z"/></svg>
diff --git a/_layouts/default.html b/_layouts/default.html
index 52085bfa..7796462a 100644
--- a/_layouts/default.html
+++ b/_layouts/default.html
@@ -1,19 +1,22 @@
 <!DOCTYPE html>
 <html lang="{{ page.lang | default: site.lang | default: "en" }}">
 
-  {% include head.html %}
+  {%- include head.html -%}
 
   <body>
 
-    {% include header.html %}
+    {%- include header.html -%}
 
     <main class="page-content" aria-label="Content">
+      {% if page.url != "/" %}
+      <script async type="text/javascript" src="//cdn.carbonads.com/carbon.js?serve=CE7I627Y&placement=json-schemaorg" id="_carbonads_js"></script>
+      {% endif %}
       <div class="wrapper">
-        {{ content }}
+        {% include anchor_headings.html html=content anchorBody="#" %}
       </div>
     </main>
 
-    {% include footer.html %}
+    {%- include footer.html -%}
 
   </body>
 
diff --git a/_layouts/page.html b/_layouts/page.html
deleted file mode 100644
index 01e4b2a9..00000000
--- a/_layouts/page.html
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,14 +0,0 @@
----
-layout: default
----
-<article class="post">
-
-  <header class="post-header">
-    <h1 class="post-title">{{ page.title | escape }}</h1>
-  </header>
-
-  <div class="post-content">
-    {{ content }}
-  </div>
-
-</article>
diff --git a/_layouts/redirect.html b/_layouts/redirect.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..03f78506
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_layouts/redirect.html
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html>
+<html lang="en-US">
+  <meta charset="utf-8">
+  <title>Redirecting&hellip;</title>
+  <link rel="canonical" href="{{ page.redirect.to }}">
+  <meta http-equiv="refresh" content="0; url={{ page.redirect.to }}">
+  <meta name="robots" content="noindex">
+  <h1>Redirecting&hellip;</h1>
+  <p>
+    Several redirections on json-schema.org are special cases:
+  </p>
+  <ul>
+    <li>The unversioned meta-schema URIs should no longer be used.</li>
+    <li>The vocabularies are represented by their specification text.</li>
+    <li>The "latest" specification URIs are for convenice of browser
+        bookmarking only.</li>
+  </ul>
+  <a href="{{ page.redirect.to }}">Click here if you are not redirected.</a>
+  <script>location="{{ page.redirect.to }}"</script>
+</html>
diff --git a/_sass/minima/_intra-navigation.scss b/_sass/_intra-navigation.scss
similarity index 100%
rename from _sass/minima/_intra-navigation.scss
rename to _sass/_intra-navigation.scss
diff --git a/_sass/_tables.scss b/_sass/_tables.scss
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..6cf83b93
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_sass/_tables.scss
@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+/* Pilfered from https://github.com/jekyll/minima/pull/144
+ * Once a new version of minima is released, this (an the include in `main.scss`
+ * can probably be deleted.
+ */
+$table-text-align: left !default;
+
+
+table {
+    margin-bottom: $spacing-unit;
+    width: 100%;
+    text-align: $table-text-align;
+    color: lighten($text-color, 18%);
+    border-collapse: collapse;
+    border: 1px solid $grey-color-light;
+    tr {
+        &:nth-child(even) {
+        background-color: lighten($grey-color-light, 6%);
+        }
+    }
+    th, td {
+        padding: ($spacing-unit / 3) ($spacing-unit / 2);
+    }
+    th {
+        background-color: lighten($grey-color-light, 3%);
+        border: 1px solid darken($grey-color-light, 4%);
+        border-bottom-color: darken($grey-color-light, 12%);
+    }
+    td {
+        border: 1px solid $grey-color-light;
+    }
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/_sass/minima.scss b/_sass/minima.scss
deleted file mode 100644
index 8b50f00f..00000000
--- a/_sass/minima.scss
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,44 +0,0 @@
-// Define defaults for each variable.
-
-$base-font-family: "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif !default;
-$base-font-size:   16px !default;
-$base-font-weight: 400 !default;
-$small-font-size:  $base-font-size * 0.875 !default;
-$base-line-height: 1.5 !default;
-
-$spacing-unit:     10px !default;
-
-$text-color:       #111 !default;
-$background-color: #fdfdfd !default;
-$brand-color:      #2a7ae2 !default;
-
-$grey-color:       #828282 !default;
-$grey-color-light: lighten($grey-color, 40%) !default;
-$grey-color-dark:  darken($grey-color, 25%) !default;
-
-// Width of the content area
-$content-width:    960px !default;
-
-$on-palm:          600px !default;
-$on-laptop:        800px !default;
-
-// Use media queries like this:
-// @include media-query($on-palm) {
-//     .wrapper {
-//         padding-right: $spacing-unit / 2;
-//         padding-left: $spacing-unit / 2;
-//     }
-// }
-@mixin media-query($device) {
-    @media screen and (max-width: $device) {
-        @content;
-    }
-}
-
-// Import partials.
-@import
-  "minima/base",
-  "minima/layout",
-  "minima/prism",
-  "minima/intra-navigation"
-;
diff --git a/_sass/minima/_base.scss b/_sass/minima/_base.scss
deleted file mode 100644
index 17e430b7..00000000
--- a/_sass/minima/_base.scss
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,189 +0,0 @@
-/**
- * Reset some basic elements
- */
-body, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6,
-p, blockquote, pre, hr,
-dl, dd, ol, ul, figure {
-    margin: 0;
-    padding: 0;
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Basic styling
- */
-body {
-    font: $base-font-weight #{$base-font-size}/#{$base-line-height} $base-font-family;
-    color: $text-color;
-    background-color: $background-color;
-    -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;
-    -webkit-font-feature-settings: "kern" 1;
-    -moz-font-feature-settings: "kern" 1;
-    -o-font-feature-settings: "kern" 1;
-    font-feature-settings: "kern" 1;
-    font-kerning: normal;
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Set `margin-bottom` to maintain vertical rhythm
- */
-h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6,
-p, blockquote, pre,
-ul, ol, dl, figure,
-%vertical-rhythm {
-    margin-bottom: $spacing-unit / 2;
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Images
- */
-img {
-    max-width: 100%;
-    vertical-align: middle;
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Figures
- */
-figure > img {
-    display: block;
-}
-
-figcaption {
-    font-size: $small-font-size;
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Lists
- */
-ul, ol {
-    margin-left: $spacing-unit;
-}
-
-li {
-    > ul,
-    > ol {
-         margin-bottom: 0;
-    }
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Headings
- */
-h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6 {
-    font-weight: $base-font-weight;
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Links
- */
-a {
-    color: $brand-color;
-    text-decoration: none;
-
-    &:visited {
-        color: darken($brand-color, 15%);
-    }
-
-    &:hover {
-        color: $text-color;
-        text-decoration: underline;
-    }
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Blockquotes
- */
-blockquote {
-    color: $grey-color;
-    border-left: 4px solid $grey-color-light;
-    padding-left: $spacing-unit / 2;
-    font-size: 18px;
-    letter-spacing: -1px;
-    font-style: italic;
-
-    > :last-child {
-        margin-bottom: 0;
-    }
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Code formatting
- */
-pre,
-code {
-    font-size: 15px;
-    border: 1px solid $grey-color-light;
-    border-radius: 3px;
-}
-
-code {
-    padding: 1px 5px;
-}
-
-pre {
-    padding: 8px 12px;
-    overflow-x: auto;
-
-    > code {
-        border: 0;
-        padding-right: 0;
-        padding-left: 0;
-    }
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Wrapper
- */
-.wrapper {
-    max-width: 760px;
-    margin-right: auto;
-    margin-left: auto;
-    padding-right: $spacing-unit;
-    padding-left: $spacing-unit;
-    @extend %clearfix;
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Clearfix
- */
-%clearfix:after {
-    content: "";
-    display: table;
-    clear: both;
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Icons
- */
-.icon > svg {
-    display: inline-block;
-    vertical-align: middle;
-
-    path {
-        fill: $grey-color;
-    }
-}
diff --git a/_sass/minima/_layout.scss b/_sass/minima/_layout.scss
deleted file mode 100644
index 44ccea9f..00000000
--- a/_sass/minima/_layout.scss
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,265 +0,0 @@
-/**
- * Site header
- */
-.site-header {
-    border-top: 5px solid $grey-color-dark;
-    border-bottom: 1px solid $grey-color-light;
-    min-height: 56px;
-
-    // Positioning context for the mobile navigation icon
-    position: relative;
-}
-
-.site-title {
-    font-size: 26px;
-    font-weight: 300;
-    line-height: 46px;
-    letter-spacing: -1px;
-    float: left;
-    margin: 10px 0;
-    padding-left: 56px;
-    background: url(../img/logo.png) center left no-repeat;
-    background-size: contain;
-
-    &,
-    &:visited {
-        color: $grey-color-dark;
-    }
-}
-
-.site-nav {
-    float: right;
-    line-height: 56px;
-    margin: 10px 0;
-
-    .menu-icon {
-        display: none;
-    }
-
-    .page-link {
-        color: $text-color;
-        line-height: $base-line-height;
-
-        // Gaps between nav items, but not on the last one
-        &:not(:last-child) {
-            margin-right: 20px;
-        }
-    }
-
-    @include media-query($on-palm) {
-        position: absolute;
-        top: 9px;
-        right: $spacing-unit / 2;
-        background-color: $background-color;
-        border: 1px solid $grey-color-light;
-        border-radius: 5px;
-        text-align: right;
-
-        .menu-icon {
-            display: block;
-            float: right;
-            width: 36px;
-            height: 26px;
-            line-height: 0;
-            padding-top: 10px;
-            text-align: center;
-
-            > svg path {
-                fill: $grey-color-dark;
-            }
-        }
-
-        .trigger {
-            clear: both;
-            display: none;
-        }
-
-        &:hover .trigger {
-            display: block;
-            padding-bottom: 5px;
-        }
-
-        .page-link {
-            display: block;
-            padding: 5px 10px;
-
-            &:not(:last-child) {
-                margin-right: 0;
-            }
-            margin-left: 20px;
-        }
-    }
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Site footer
- */
-.site-footer {
-    border-top: 1px solid $grey-color-light;
-    padding: $spacing-unit 0;
-}
-
-.footer-heading {
-    font-size: 18px;
-    margin-bottom: $spacing-unit / 2;
-}
-
-.contact-list,
-.social-media-list {
-    list-style: none;
-    margin-left: 0;
-}
-
-.footer-col-wrapper {
-    font-size: 15px;
-    color: $grey-color;
-    margin-left: -$spacing-unit / 2;
-    @extend %clearfix;
-}
-
-.footer-col {
-    float: left;
-    margin-bottom: $spacing-unit / 2;
-    padding-left: $spacing-unit / 2;
-}
-
-.footer-col-1 {
-    box-sizing: border-box;
-    width: 45%;
-}
-
-.footer-col-3 {
-    box-sizing: border-box;
-    width: 55%;
-    text-align: right;
-}
-
-@include media-query($on-laptop) {
-    .footer-col-1,
-    .footer-col-2 {
-        width: -webkit-calc(50% - (#{$spacing-unit} / 2));
-        width:         calc(50% - (#{$spacing-unit} / 2));
-    }
-
-    .footer-col-3 {
-        width: -webkit-calc(100% - (#{$spacing-unit} / 2));
-        width:         calc(100% - (#{$spacing-unit} / 2));
-    }
-}
-
-@include media-query($on-palm) {
-    .footer-col {
-        float: none;
-        width: -webkit-calc(100% - (#{$spacing-unit} / 2));
-        width:         calc(100% - (#{$spacing-unit} / 2));
-    }
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Page content
- */
-.page-content {
-    padding: $spacing-unit 0;
-}
-
-.page-heading {
-    font-size: 20px;
-}
-
-.post-list {
-    margin-left: 0;
-    list-style: none;
-
-    > li {
-        margin-bottom: $spacing-unit;
-    }
-}
-
-.post-meta {
-    font-size: $small-font-size;
-    color: $grey-color;
-}
-
-.post-link {
-    display: block;
-    font-size: 24px;
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Documentation page
- * These have a main content area and a navigation side-menu
- */
-.doc-nav {
-    float: left;
-    max-width: 200px;
-    margin-right: 20px;
-}
-.doc-nav > ul {
-    margin: 0;
-    padding: 0;
-    list-style-type: none;
-}
-.doc-nav > ul > li {
-    margin-bottom: 1em;
-}
-
-.doc-nav > ul > li a {
-    display: block;
-}
-
-.doc {
-    margin-left: 220px;
-}
-
-
-
-/**
- * Posts
- */
-.post-header {
-    margin-bottom: $spacing-unit;
-}
-
-.post-title {
-    font-size: 42px;
-    letter-spacing: -1px;
-    line-height: 1;
-
-    @include media-query($on-laptop) {
-        font-size: 36px;
-    }
-}
-
-.post-content {
-    margin-bottom: $spacing-unit;
-
-    h2 {
-        font-size: 32px;
-
-        @include media-query($on-laptop) {
-            font-size: 28px;
-        }
-    }
-
-    h3 {
-        font-size: 26px;
-
-        @include media-query($on-laptop) {
-            font-size: 22px;
-        }
-    }
-
-    h4 {
-        font-size: 20px;
-
-        @include media-query($on-laptop) {
-            font-size: 18px;
-        }
-    }
-}
diff --git a/_sass/minima/_syntax-highlighting.scss b/_sass/minima/_syntax-highlighting.scss
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..1ed90495
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_sass/minima/_syntax-highlighting.scss
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+/* Solarized Light 
+
+For use with Jekyll and Pygments
+
+Source: https://gist.github.com/nicolashery/5765395#file-solarized-light-css
+
+http://ethanschoonover.com/solarized
+
+SOLARIZED HEX      ROLE
+--------- -------- ------------------------------------------
+base01    #586e75  body text / default code / primary content
+base1     #93a1a1  comments / secondary content
+base3     #fdf6e3  background
+orange    #cb4b16  constants
+red       #dc322f  regex, special keywords
+blue      #268bd2  reserved keywords
+cyan      #2aa198  strings, numbers
+green     #859900  operators, other keywords
+*/
+
+.highlight{
+    .highlighter-rouge & {
+        background: #fdf6e3;
+    }
+}
+.highlight { background-color: #fdf6e3; color: #586e75 }
+.highlight .c { color: #93a1a1 } /* Comment */
+.highlight .err { color: #586e75 } /* Error */
+.highlight .g { color: #586e75 } /* Generic */
+.highlight .k { color: #859900 } /* Keyword */
+.highlight .l { color: #586e75 } /* Literal */
+.highlight .n { color: #586e75 } /* Name */
+.highlight .o { color: #859900 } /* Operator */
+.highlight .x { color: #cb4b16 } /* Other */
+.highlight .p { color: #586e75 } /* Punctuation */
+.highlight .cm { color: #93a1a1 } /* Comment.Multiline */
+.highlight .cp { color: #859900 } /* Comment.Preproc */
+.highlight .c1 { color: #93a1a1 } /* Comment.Single */
+.highlight .cs { color: #859900 } /* Comment.Special */
+.highlight .gd { color: #2aa198 } /* Generic.Deleted */
+.highlight .ge { color: #586e75; font-style: italic } /* Generic.Emph */
+.highlight .gr { color: #dc322f } /* Generic.Error */
+.highlight .gh { color: #cb4b16 } /* Generic.Heading */
+.highlight .gi { color: #859900 } /* Generic.Inserted */
+.highlight .go { color: #586e75 } /* Generic.Output */
+.highlight .gp { color: #586e75 } /* Generic.Prompt */
+.highlight .gs { color: #586e75; font-weight: bold } /* Generic.Strong */
+.highlight .gu { color: #cb4b16 } /* Generic.Subheading */
+.highlight .gt { color: #586e75 } /* Generic.Traceback */
+.highlight .kc { color: #cb4b16 } /* Keyword.Constant */
+.highlight .kd { color: #268bd2 } /* Keyword.Declaration */
+.highlight .kn { color: #859900 } /* Keyword.Namespace */
+.highlight .kp { color: #859900 } /* Keyword.Pseudo */
+.highlight .kr { color: #268bd2 } /* Keyword.Reserved */
+.highlight .kt { color: #dc322f } /* Keyword.Type */
+.highlight .ld { color: #586e75 } /* Literal.Date */
+.highlight .m { color: #2aa198 } /* Literal.Number */
+.highlight .s { color: #2aa198 } /* Literal.String */
+.highlight .na { color: #586e75 } /* Name.Attribute */
+.highlight .nb { color: #B58900 } /* Name.Builtin */
+.highlight .nc { color: #268bd2 } /* Name.Class */
+.highlight .no { color: #cb4b16 } /* Name.Constant */
+.highlight .nd { color: #268bd2 } /* Name.Decorator */
+.highlight .ni { color: #cb4b16 } /* Name.Entity */
+.highlight .ne { color: #cb4b16 } /* Name.Exception */
+.highlight .nf { color: #268bd2 } /* Name.Function */
+.highlight .nl { color: #586e75 } /* Name.Label */
+.highlight .nn { color: #586e75 } /* Name.Namespace */
+.highlight .nx { color: #586e75 } /* Name.Other */
+.highlight .py { color: #586e75 } /* Name.Property */
+.highlight .nt { color: #268bd2 } /* Name.Tag */
+.highlight .nv { color: #268bd2 } /* Name.Variable */
+.highlight .ow { color: #859900 } /* Operator.Word */
+.highlight .w { color: #586e75 } /* Text.Whitespace */
+.highlight .mf { color: #2aa198 } /* Literal.Number.Float */
+.highlight .mh { color: #2aa198 } /* Literal.Number.Hex */
+.highlight .mi { color: #2aa198 } /* Literal.Number.Integer */
+.highlight .mo { color: #2aa198 } /* Literal.Number.Oct */
+.highlight .sb { color: #93a1a1 } /* Literal.String.Backtick */
+.highlight .sc { color: #2aa198 } /* Literal.String.Char */
+.highlight .sd { color: #586e75 } /* Literal.String.Doc */
+.highlight .s2 { color: #2aa198 } /* Literal.String.Double */
+.highlight .se { color: #cb4b16 } /* Literal.String.Escape */
+.highlight .sh { color: #586e75 } /* Literal.String.Heredoc */
+.highlight .si { color: #2aa198 } /* Literal.String.Interpol */
+.highlight .sx { color: #2aa198 } /* Literal.String.Other */
+.highlight .sr { color: #dc322f } /* Literal.String.Regex */
+.highlight .s1 { color: #2aa198 } /* Literal.String.Single */
+.highlight .ss { color: #2aa198 } /* Literal.String.Symbol */
+.highlight .bp { color: #268bd2 } /* Name.Builtin.Pseudo */
+.highlight .vc { color: #268bd2 } /* Name.Variable.Class */
+.highlight .vg { color: #268bd2 } /* Name.Variable.Global */
+.highlight .vi { color: #268bd2 } /* Name.Variable.Instance */
+.highlight .il { color: #2aa198 } /* Literal.Number.Integer.Long */
diff --git a/_sass/minima/prism.scss b/_sass/minima/prism.scss
deleted file mode 100644
index 06937f22..00000000
--- a/_sass/minima/prism.scss
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,149 +0,0 @@
-/* http://prismjs.com/download.html?themes=prism-solarizedlight&languages=json&plugins=normalize-whitespace */
-/*
- Solarized Color Schemes originally by Ethan Schoonover
- http://ethanschoonover.com/solarized
-
- Ported for PrismJS by Hector Matos
- Website: https://krakendev.io
- Twitter Handle: https://twitter.com/allonsykraken)
-*/
-
-/*
-SOLARIZED HEX
---------- -------
-base03    #002b36
-base02    #073642
-base01    #586e75
-base00    #657b83
-base0     #839496
-base1     #93a1a1
-base2     #eee8d5
-base3     #fdf6e3
-yellow    #b58900
-orange    #cb4b16
-red       #dc322f
-magenta   #d33682
-violet    #6c71c4
-blue      #268bd2
-cyan      #2aa198
-green     #859900
-*/
-
-code[class*="language-"],
-pre[class*="language-"] {
-	color: #657b83; /* base00 */
-	font-family: Consolas, Monaco, 'Andale Mono', 'Ubuntu Mono', monospace;
-	text-align: left;
-	white-space: pre;
-	word-spacing: normal;
-	word-break: normal;
-	word-wrap: normal;
-
-	line-height: 1.5;
-
-	-moz-tab-size: 4;
-	-o-tab-size: 4;
-	tab-size: 4;
-
-	-webkit-hyphens: none;
-	-moz-hyphens: none;
-	-ms-hyphens: none;
-	hyphens: none;
-}
-
-pre[class*="language-"]::-moz-selection, pre[class*="language-"] ::-moz-selection,
-code[class*="language-"]::-moz-selection, code[class*="language-"] ::-moz-selection {
-	background: #073642; /* base02 */
-}
-
-pre[class*="language-"]::selection, pre[class*="language-"] ::selection,
-code[class*="language-"]::selection, code[class*="language-"] ::selection {
-	background: #073642; /* base02 */
-}
-
-/* Code blocks */
-pre[class*="language-"] {
-	padding: 1em;
-	margin: .5em 0;
-	overflow: auto;
-	border-radius: 0.3em;
-}
-
-:not(pre) > code[class*="language-"],
-pre[class*="language-"] {
-	background-color: #fdf6e3; /* base3 */
-}
-
-/* Inline code */
-:not(pre) > code[class*="language-"] {
-	padding: .1em;
-	border-radius: .3em;
-}
-
-.token.comment,
-.token.prolog,
-.token.doctype,
-.token.cdata {
-	color: #93a1a1; /* base1 */
-}
-
-.token.punctuation {
-	color: #586e75; /* base01 */
-}
-
-.namespace {
-	opacity: .7;
-}
-
-.token.property,
-.token.tag,
-.token.boolean,
-.token.number,
-.token.constant,
-.token.symbol,
-.token.deleted {
-	color: #268bd2; /* blue */
-}
-
-.token.selector,
-.token.attr-name,
-.token.string,
-.token.char,
-.token.builtin,
-.token.url,
-.token.inserted {
-	color: #2aa198; /* cyan */
-}
-
-.token.entity {
-	color: #657b83; /* base00 */
-	background: #eee8d5; /* base2 */
-}
-
-.token.atrule,
-.token.attr-value,
-.token.keyword {
-	color: #859900; /* green */
-}
-
-.token.function {
-	color: #b58900; /* yellow */
-}
-
-.token.regex,
-.token.important,
-.token.variable {
-	color: #cb4b16; /* orange */
-}
-
-.token.important,
-.token.bold {
-	font-weight: bold;
-}
-.token.italic {
-	font-style: italic;
-}
-
-.token.entity {
-	cursor: help;
-}
diff --git a/address b/address
deleted file mode 100644
index 67f7a92e..00000000
--- a/address
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,19 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "description": "An Address following the convention of http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard",
-    "type": "object",
-    "properties": {
-        "post-office-box": { "type": "string" },
-        "extended-address": { "type": "string" },
-        "street-address": { "type": "string" },
-        "locality":{ "type": "string" },
-        "region": { "type": "string" },
-        "postal-code": { "type": "string" },
-        "country-name": { "type": "string"}
-    },
-    "required": ["locality", "region", "country-name"],
-    "dependencies": {
-        "post-office-box": ["street-address"],
-        "extended-address": ["street-address"]
-    }
-}
diff --git a/assets/logo-slack.svg b/assets/logo-slack.svg
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..69a4eb6a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/assets/logo-slack.svg
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+<svg enable-background="new 0 0 2447.6 2452.5" viewBox="0 0 2447.6 2452.5" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"><g clip-rule="evenodd" fill-rule="evenodd"><path d="m897.4 0c-135.3.1-244.8 109.9-244.7 245.2-.1 135.3 109.5 245.1 244.8 245.2h244.8v-245.1c.1-135.3-109.5-245.1-244.9-245.3.1 0 .1 0 0 0m0 654h-652.6c-135.3.1-244.9 109.9-244.8 245.2-.2 135.3 109.4 245.1 244.7 245.3h652.7c135.3-.1 244.9-109.9 244.8-245.2.1-135.4-109.5-245.2-244.8-245.3z" fill="#36c5f0"/><path d="m2447.6 899.2c.1-135.3-109.5-245.1-244.8-245.2-135.3.1-244.9 109.9-244.8 245.2v245.3h244.8c135.3-.1 244.9-109.9 244.8-245.3zm-652.7 0v-654c.1-135.2-109.4-245-244.7-245.2-135.3.1-244.9 109.9-244.8 245.2v654c-.2 135.3 109.4 245.1 244.7 245.3 135.3-.1 244.9-109.9 244.8-245.3z" fill="#2eb67d"/><path d="m1550.1 2452.5c135.3-.1 244.9-109.9 244.8-245.2.1-135.3-109.5-245.1-244.8-245.2h-244.8v245.2c-.1 135.2 109.5 245 244.8 245.2zm0-654.1h652.7c135.3-.1 244.9-109.9 244.8-245.2.2-135.3-109.4-245.1-244.7-245.3h-652.7c-135.3.1-244.9 109.9-244.8 245.2-.1 135.4 109.4 245.2 244.7 245.3z" fill="#ecb22e"/><path d="m0 1553.2c-.1 135.3 109.5 245.1 244.8 245.2 135.3-.1 244.9-109.9 244.8-245.2v-245.2h-244.8c-135.3.1-244.9 109.9-244.8 245.2zm652.7 0v654c-.2 135.3 109.4 245.1 244.7 245.3 135.3-.1 244.9-109.9 244.8-245.2v-653.9c.2-135.3-109.4-245.1-244.7-245.3-135.4 0-244.9 109.8-244.8 245.1 0 0 0 .1 0 0" fill="#e01e5a"/></g></svg>
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/assets/logo.svg b/assets/logo.svg
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..3a5936b9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/assets/logo.svg
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
+<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
+<svg
+   xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
+   xmlns:cc="http://creativecommons.org/ns#"
+   xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
+   xmlns:svg="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"
+   xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"
+   id="svg8"
+   version="1.1"
+   viewBox="0 0 70.423268 70.42326"
+   height="100.60467mm"
+   width="100.60467mm">
+  <defs
+     id="defs2" />
+  <metadata
+     id="metadata5">
+    <rdf:RDF>
+      <cc:Work
+         rdf:about="">
+        <dc:format>image/svg+xml</dc:format>
+        <dc:type
+           rdf:resource="http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage" />
+        <dc:title></dc:title>
+      </cc:Work>
+    </rdf:RDF>
+  </metadata>
+  <g
+     transform="translate(-104.22785,-45.507923)"
+     id="layer1">
+    <path
+       id="path4544"
+       d="m 122.99401,114.18985 c -4.32897,-0.9404 -7.58044,-3.47848 -8.71251,-6.80095 -0.78921,-2.31618 -0.67682,-6.07238 0.33363,-11.150598 0.48507,-2.437836 0.88169,-5.347843 0.88139,-6.466688 -9.8e-4,-3.718098 -1.71106,-5.735418 -5.1001,-6.016462 l -1.9549,-0.162116 v -2.392655 -2.392657 l 1.85208,-0.250855 c 2.70243,-0.366031 3.74441,-1.02838 4.57629,-2.908984 0.61121,-1.381726 0.68884,-2.068648 0.50552,-4.472869 -0.11913,-1.562244 -0.53527,-4.348568 -0.92477,-6.191832 -0.98954,-4.682868 -0.94822,-8.485471 0.11707,-10.773163 1.56862,-3.368589 5.43705,-5.854553 9.93248,-6.382903 l 1.93299,-0.227185 v 2.518015 2.518015 h -1.29973 c -1.77186,0 -4.2497,1.262413 -4.8835,2.488054 -0.60797,1.175674 -0.65405,2.864146 -0.15834,5.802223 0.78343,4.643508 1.04707,9.098344 0.67592,11.421636 -0.42464,2.658142 -1.97477,5.796328 -3.6791,7.448236 l -1.18012,1.143813 1.61497,1.982752 c 1.99051,2.443801 2.76458,4.148744 3.24284,7.142561 0.37835,2.368341 0.0844,7.282673 -0.67072,11.213982 -1.05359,5.48514 0.1623,7.65141 4.66209,8.30613 l 1.67569,0.24382 v 2.44782 c 0,2.79211 0.17086,2.69708 -3.43917,1.91286 z"
+       style="fill:#000000;stroke-width:0.35277775" />
+    <path
+       id="path4546"
+       d="m 152.2304,112.24932 v -2.42987 l 2.04969,-0.42336 c 2.26276,-0.46736 4.054,-1.8634 4.45842,-3.47475 0.1274,-0.50758 -0.11267,-3.16398 -0.53347,-5.90311 -1.37183,-8.929552 -0.6114,-13.537042 2.85482,-17.297452 l 1.48237,-1.60818 -1.1108,-1.26512 c -3.97855,-4.53132 -4.66885,-8.552208 -3.15364,-18.369547 0.76342,-4.946305 0.76409,-4.994322 0.087,-6.173611 -0.79713,-1.388278 -3.28385,-2.776033 -4.97438,-2.776033 h -1.15997 v -2.469445 c 0,-2.811057 -0.0583,-2.773846 3.24583,-2.072788 3.9645,0.841179 6.80448,2.853272 8.27787,5.864775 0.84544,1.728026 0.97275,2.400136 0.94911,5.010889 -0.015,1.658349 -0.35758,4.682054 -0.76125,6.719346 -1.49867,7.563594 -1.3651,9.576204 0.7654,11.532814 0.98915,0.90842 1.64012,1.17274 3.37032,1.36849 l 2.14439,0.24261 v 2.42387 2.42388 l -1.6757,7.1e-4 c -2.1517,7e-4 -3.9323,0.90924 -4.83869,2.46889 -0.95194,1.63803 -0.89239,5.20675 0.17364,10.40695 0.90648,4.421902 1.05253,8.458452 0.3882,10.728752 -0.70059,2.39406 -3.81995,5.29609 -6.74745,6.27718 -1.26118,0.42266 -2.96775,0.87096 -3.79236,0.99623 l -1.49931,0.22775 z"
+       style="fill:#000000;stroke-width:0.35277778" />
+    <path
+       id="path4548"
+       d="m 131.74239,108.26592 c -1.02163,-1.2988 -0.87294,-3.53652 0.38087,-5.73185 0.92776,-1.62446 4.80862,-6.948549 7.61066,-10.440949 l 1.13094,-1.40958 -1.80213,-5.22523 c -2.02147,-5.86123 -2.0098,-5.97467 0.65581,-6.37225 l 1.46834,-0.219 1.64076,3.3506 c 0.90242,1.84283 1.76982,3.35061 1.92755,3.35061 0.15774,0 1.77489,-1.75542 3.59368,-3.90092 3.15918,-3.72667 3.35688,-3.89165 4.42591,-3.69334 0.64552,0.11974 1.21858,0.0465 1.35432,-0.17316 0.31818,-0.51481 1.23083,0.24704 1.23083,1.02746 0,0.32009 -0.45438,1.13409 -1.00972,1.80888 -2.26771,2.75549 -7.10417,9.27155 -7.10417,9.5713 0,0.17685 0.97502,2.45302 2.16671,5.05816 l 2.1667,4.736609 -0.65823,0.98459 c -0.36203,0.54152 -0.66236,1.12603 -0.6674,1.29891 -0.005,0.17288 -0.27769,0.48371 -0.60588,0.69073 -0.83174,0.52464 -1.44656,-0.11541 -3.9894,-4.153119 -1.16417,-1.84856 -2.23163,-3.36491 -2.37215,-3.36967 -0.31309,-0.0106 -3.7911,5.131969 -6.47955,9.580639 -2.37093,3.92324 -1.93885,3.4204 -3.26614,3.80106 -0.95533,0.27398 -1.19348,0.19843 -1.79831,-0.57048 z"
+       style="fill:#000000;stroke-width:0.35277775" />
+    <path
+       id="path4550"
+       d="m 131.98567,83.677091 c -2.15148,-3.8472 -6.0183,-9.42829 -7.57842,-10.93815 -0.79252,-0.76698 -1.44094,-1.57494 -1.44094,-1.79546 0,-0.6016 1.61695,-1.21975 3.19058,-1.21975 1.69822,0 3.49597,1.47777 5.0997,4.19203 0.58208,0.98515 1.15641,1.79434 1.27629,1.79819 0.11988,0.004 0.80873,-1.65116 1.53078,-3.67779 1.5464,-4.34039 5.62351,-12.777999 7.22453,-14.951229 1.3726,-1.86316 3.42936,-2.865165 5.90274,-2.875676 3.23375,-0.01374 3.24268,0.130067 0.20474,3.296663 -4.63599,4.832327 -6.76321,8.809632 -11.25155,21.037252 -1.24637,3.39549 -2.39032,6.47895 -2.54212,6.85214 -0.23022,0.56597 -0.49833,0.28096 -1.61633,-1.71822 z"
+       style="fill:#000000;stroke-width:0.35277775" />
+  </g>
+</svg>
diff --git a/assets/main.scss b/assets/main.scss
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..23875e58
--- /dev/null
+++ b/assets/main.scss
@@ -0,0 +1,186 @@
+---
+# Only the main Sass file needs front matter (the dashes are enough)
+---
+@charset "utf-8";
+
+// Import partials from the `minima` theme.
+@import "minima";
+@import "minima/syntax-highlighting";
+@import "tables";
+
+// Import navigation partial for Software page
+@import "intra-navigation";
+
+// _base.scss overrides
+pre,
+code {
+  background-color: unset;
+}
+
+.wrapper {
+  max-width: 760px;
+}
+
+// _layout.scss overrides
+.site-title {
+    line-height: 46px;
+    margin: 10px 0;
+    padding-left: 56px;
+    background: url(../assets/logo.svg) center left no-repeat;
+    background-size: contain;
+}
+
+.site-nav {
+    margin: 10px 0;
+}
+
+.footer-col-1 {
+    box-sizing: border-box;
+    width: 45%;
+}
+
+.footer-col-3 {
+    box-sizing: border-box;
+    width: 55%;
+    text-align: right;
+}
+
+// minima.scss overrides
+$spacing-unit:     10px !default;
+$content-width:    960px !default;
+
+// Carbon ads
+
+#carbonads {
+  max-width: 300px;
+  font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, "Segoe UI", Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;
+  display: flex;
+  position: fixed;
+  right: 10px;
+  top: 90px;
+  font-size: 12px;
+  line-height: 1.45;
+  background-color: #f9f9f9;
+  border: 1px dashed;
+  border-color: #cacaca;
+}
+
+@media (max-width: 1420px) {
+  #carbonads {
+    display: block;
+    position: relative;
+    right: unset;
+    top: unset;
+    margin: auto;
+    margin-bottom: 30px;
+    overflow: hidden;
+    max-width: 728px;
+    font-size: 24px;
+    box-sizing: content-box;
+  }
+}
+
+#carbonads > span {
+  position: relative;
+  display: block;
+  padding: 10px;
+  border-radius: 4px;
+}
+
+#carbonads .carbon-wrap {
+  display: flex;
+}
+
+#carbonads .carbon-img {
+  margin-right: 10px;
+  line-height: 1;
+}
+
+#carbonads .carbon-text {
+  margin-bottom: 12px;
+  color: #637381;
+  text-decoration: none;
+}
+
+#carbonads .carbon-poweredby {
+  position: absolute;
+  bottom: 10px;
+  left: 152px;
+  color: #c5cdd0;
+  text-decoration: none;
+  text-transform: uppercase;
+  letter-spacing: .5px;
+  font-weight: 500;
+  font-size: 10px;
+  line-height: 1;
+}
+
+#carbonads .carbon-poweredby:hover {
+  color: #637381;
+}
+
+@media only screen and (min-width: 320px) and (max-width: 759px) {
+  .carbon-text {
+    font-size: 14px;
+  }
+}
+
+// Minimal buttons https://github.com/vladocar/Simple-Button
+.button {
+  font-size: 1em;
+  display: block;
+  border: 0;
+  margin: 0 6px;
+  padding: 0.7em;
+  cursor: pointer;
+  text-align: center;
+  transition-duration: 0.1s;
+  transition-timing-function: linear;
+}
+.button:hover,
+.button:focus {
+  opacity: 0.8;
+}
+.btcolor {
+  background-color: red;
+  color: #fff;
+}
+.btcolor:hover,
+.btcolor:focus {
+  background: #ff6666;
+  color: #f0f0f0;
+}
+.round {
+  border-radius: 0.6em;
+}
+.pill {
+  border-radius: 1.1em / 50%;
+}
+.border {
+  border: 1px solid #1577ca;
+}
+
+// Other custom CSS
+
+.button-center {
+  display: inline-block;
+}
+.text-center {
+  text-align: center;
+}
+
+.small-svg-logo {
+  height: 1.3em;
+  width: 1.3em;
+}
+
+.wrapper.buttons {
+  margin-bottom: 10px;
+}
+
+.custom-logo-link {
+  /* display: inline-block; */
+  max-height: 40px;
+  padding-bottom: 0.7em;
+  /* width: auto; */
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/assets/openjs_foundation-logo.svg b/assets/openjs_foundation-logo.svg
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..fa063e7c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/assets/openjs_foundation-logo.svg
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
+<!-- Generator: Adobe Illustrator 23.0.2, SVG Export Plug-In . SVG Version: 6.00 Build 0)  -->
+<svg version="1.1" id="ARTWORK" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" x="0px" y="0px"
+	 viewBox="0 0 1000 314.4" style="enable-background:new 0 0 1000 314.4;" xml:space="preserve">
+<style type="text/css">
+	.st0{fill:url(#SVGID_1_);}
+	.st1{fill:#54565A;}
+</style>
+<g>
+	<linearGradient id="SVGID_1_" gradientUnits="userSpaceOnUse" x1="28.7654" y1="49.8307" x2="243.506" y2="264.5713">
+		<stop  offset="0.2145" style="stop-color:#0075C9"/>
+		<stop  offset="0.7067" style="stop-color:#80BC00"/>
+		<stop  offset="1" style="stop-color:#FDE021"/>
+	</linearGradient>
+	<path class="st0" d="M271.4,78.1L137,0.5L136.1,0l-0.9,0.5L1.6,77.7l-0.7,0.4L0,78.6v157.2l0.9,0.5l134.4,77.6l0.9,0.5l0.9-0.5
+		l132.6-76.5l1.8-1l0.9-0.5V78.6L271.4,78.1z M122.7,20.1L89.8,77H24.1L122.7,20.1z M84.4,86.4L69,113.1L22.8,86.4H84.4z
+		 M72.4,125.8l54.3,31.4l-54.3,31.4l-18.1-31.4L72.4,125.8z M64.4,121.2l-15.4,26.7L18.1,94.5L64.4,121.2z M10.7,100.3l32.9,56.9
+		l-32.9,56.9V100.3z M48.9,166.6l15.4,26.7l-46.2,26.7L48.9,166.6z M69,201.3L84.4,228H22.8L69,201.3z M24.1,237.4h65.7l32.9,56.9
+		L24.1,237.4z M131.5,290.8l-30.8-53.4h30.8V290.8z M131.5,228H95.2l-18.1-31.4l54.3-31.4V228z M131.5,149.1l-54.3-31.4l18.1-31.4
+		h36.2V149.1z M131.5,77h-30.8l30.8-53.4V77z M207.9,121.2l46.2-26.7l-30.8,53.4L207.9,121.2z M217.9,157.2l-18.1,31.4l-54.3-31.4
+		l54.3-31.4L217.9,157.2z M203.2,113.1l-15.4-26.7h61.6L203.2,113.1z M248.1,77h-65.7l-32.8-56.9L248.1,77z M140.8,23.6L171.6,77
+		h-30.8V23.6z M140.8,86.4H177l18.1,31.4l-54.3,31.4V86.4z M140.8,165.3l54.3,31.4L177,228h-36.2V165.3z M140.8,237.4h30.8
+		l-30.8,53.4V237.4z M149.6,294.3l32.8-56.9h65.7L149.6,294.3z M187.8,228l15.4-26.7l46.2,26.7H187.8z M207.9,193.2l15.4-26.7
+		l30.8,53.4L207.9,193.2z M261.6,214.1l-32.9-56.9l32.9-56.9V214.1z"/>
+	<polygon class="st1" points="308.4,202.7 372.6,202.7 372.6,208.5 315,208.5 315,257 367.2,257 367.2,263 315,263 315,312.9 
+		308.4,312.9 	"/>
+	<path class="st1" d="M383.8,279.7c0-19,15.2-34.4,34.5-34.4c19.3,0,34.2,15.4,34.2,34.4c0,19-14.9,34.5-34.2,34.5
+		C399,314.2,383.8,298.7,383.8,279.7 M446,279.7c0-16.4-11.2-28.7-27.7-28.7c-16.5,0-28,12.3-28,28.7c0,16.4,11.5,28.9,28,28.9
+		C434.8,308.6,446,296.1,446,279.7"/>
+	<path class="st1" d="M469.9,288.5v-41.7h6.3v40.7c0,13.5,6.3,21.1,19,21.1c14.3,0,24.3-9.6,24.3-24.8v-37h6.3v66.2h-6.3l0.2-14.6
+		c-4.4,9.9-13.5,16-25.1,16C479.8,314.4,469.9,304.7,469.9,288.5"/>
+	<path class="st1" d="M543,246.8h6.3l-0.2,14.8c4.4-10,13.6-16.2,25.3-16.2c14.8,0,24.6,9.9,24.6,26.3v41.3h-6.3v-40.2
+		c0-13.6-6.3-21.6-19.1-21.6c-14.3,0-24.3,9.4-24.3,24.8v37H543V246.8z"/>
+	<path class="st1" d="M616.3,279.7c0-19.5,13.8-34.4,32.8-34.4c13.5,0,23.2,7.3,28,17.2v-66.6h6.3v117.1h-6.3l0.3-16.5
+		c-4.7,10.2-15.6,17.8-28.4,17.8C630.1,314.2,616.3,299.2,616.3,279.7 M677.6,279.7c0-16.4-11-28.7-27.7-28.7
+		c-16.4,0-26.9,12.3-26.9,28.7c0,16.4,10.5,28.9,26.9,28.9C666.6,308.6,677.6,296.1,677.6,279.7"/>
+	<path class="st1" d="M748,271.4c0-14.9-6.8-20.6-17.7-20.6c-10.1,0-16.9,4.2-21.6,11.4l-4.5-3.2c5.5-8.6,14.9-13.6,26.3-13.6
+		c13.6,0,23.8,8.3,23.8,25.5v42.2H748l0.3-10.2c-4.2,6.3-11.5,11.5-22.9,11.5c-15.1,0-25-7-25-20.3c0-13.1,11.5-19.3,24.2-19.3H748
+		V271.4z M725.4,279.9c-10.1,0-18.6,3.9-18.6,13.9c0,10.1,6.6,14.8,19.3,14.8c11,0,21.9-6.5,21.9-16.7v-12H725.4z"/>
+	<path class="st1" d="M782.5,295.4v-43.3h-10.4v-5.4h10.4v-23.2h6.3v23.2h19.1v5.4h-19.1v43.1c0,9.7,3.4,13.3,8.9,13.3
+		c5.8,0,8.1-2.3,10.5-4.9l4.1,3.9c-3.2,3.7-7.1,6.6-14.6,6.6C789.3,314.2,782.5,308.9,782.5,295.4"/>
+	<path class="st1" d="M829.5,218.2c0-3.1,2.6-5.4,5.4-5.4c2.8,0,5.4,2.3,5.4,5.4c0,3.2-2.6,5.3-5.4,5.3
+		C832.1,223.6,829.5,221.5,829.5,218.2 M831.8,246.8h6.3v66.2h-6.3V246.8z"/>
+	<path class="st1" d="M857.1,279.7c0-19,15.2-34.4,34.5-34.4c19.3,0,34.2,15.4,34.2,34.4c0,19-14.9,34.5-34.2,34.5
+		C872.4,314.2,857.1,298.7,857.1,279.7 M919.4,279.7c0-16.4-11.2-28.7-27.7-28.7c-16.5,0-28,12.3-28,28.7c0,16.4,11.5,28.9,28,28.9
+		C908.2,308.6,919.4,296.1,919.4,279.7"/>
+	<path class="st1" d="M943.9,246.8h6.3l-0.2,14.8c4.4-10,13.6-16.2,25.3-16.2c14.8,0,24.6,9.9,24.6,26.3v41.3h-6.3v-40.2
+		c0-13.6-6.3-21.6-19.1-21.6c-14.3,0-24.3,9.4-24.3,24.8v37h-6.3V246.8z"/>
+	<path class="st1" d="M308.4,73.1c0-41.4,31.8-71.3,71.7-71.3c39.6,0,71.5,29.8,71.5,71.3c0,41.4-31.9,71.3-71.5,71.3
+		C340.2,144.3,308.4,114.5,308.4,73.1 M429.4,73.1c0-29.6-20.4-51.9-49.4-51.9c-29,0-49.6,22.3-49.6,51.9
+		c0,29.6,20.6,51.9,49.6,51.9C409,124.9,429.4,102.7,429.4,73.1"/>
+	<path class="st1" d="M473.9,56.8h20.8l-0.6,15.9c5.5-10.6,15.7-17.8,30.4-17.8c22,0,39.8,18.6,39.8,44.5c0,25.9-18,44.9-40.2,44.9
+		c-14.3,0-24.5-6.9-29.4-16.5v58h-20.8V56.8z M543.1,99.4c0-15.5-9.4-26.1-24.3-26.1c-15.1,0-24.9,10.6-24.9,26.1
+		c0,16.1,9.8,26.7,24.9,26.7C533.8,126.2,543.1,115.6,543.1,99.4"/>
+	<path class="st1" d="M635,127c11.2,0,19.4-4.5,24.3-9.2l12,12.7c-8,8-19,13.9-36.1,13.9c-29.4,0-48.4-19-48.4-44.7
+		c0-25.5,20-44.7,45.7-44.7c29.2,0,45.7,21.6,44.3,51.7h-69C610.3,119,619.3,127,635,127 M656.1,92.3c-1.8-11.6-9-20.2-23.3-20.2
+		c-13.3,0-22.5,7.3-24.9,20.2H656.1z"/>
+	<path class="st1" d="M699.7,56.8h20.6l-0.4,15.9c5.3-11.2,16.1-17.8,29-17.8c19,0,32.1,13.5,32.1,36.7v50.8h-20.6V93.3
+		c0-12.3-5.7-19.4-17.8-19.4c-13.5,0-22.3,8.2-22.3,22v46.5h-20.6V56.8z"/>
+	<path class="st1" d="M803.5,120.9l17.6-10.8c4.9,8.8,10.6,14.9,20.8,14.9c11.6,0,19.2-5.5,19.2-21.6V3.7h21.6v100
+		c0,27.6-16.5,40.6-39.8,40.6C822.3,144.3,810.1,133.7,803.5,120.9"/>
+	<path class="st1" d="M904.9,115.6l17.8-9.8c6.5,10.8,14.9,19.4,31.8,19.4c14.1,0,24.1-7.6,24.1-19c0-12-8.2-17.4-23.3-24.1
+		l-9.2-4.1c-20.2-9-32.5-19.2-32.5-40.6c0-20.6,15.9-35.3,39-35.3C971,2,983.5,9,991.8,23.9l-16.9,10.4
+		c-5.3-9.2-11.4-13.5-22.3-13.5c-11,0-18,6.7-18,16.1c0,10.4,5.9,15.1,20,21.2l9,4.1c23.7,10.4,36.3,21.4,36.3,43.7
+		c0,24.3-19,38.4-45.1,38.4C928.5,144.3,912.6,131.3,904.9,115.6"/>
+</g>
+</svg>
diff --git a/calendar b/calendar
deleted file mode 100644
index b1a6f112..00000000
--- a/calendar
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,38 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "description": "A representation of an event",
-    "type": "object",
-    "required": [ "dtstart", "summary" ],
-    "properties": {
-        "dtstart": {
-            "format": "date-time",
-            "type": "string",
-            "description": "Event starting time"
-        },
-        "dtend": {
-            "format": "date-time",
-            "type": "string",
-            "description": "Event ending time"
-        },
-        "summary": { "type": "string" },
-        "location": { "type": "string" },
-        "url": { "type": "string", "format": "uri" },
-        "duration": {
-            "format": "time",
-            "type": "string",
-            "description": "Event duration"
-        },
-        "rdate": {
-            "format": "date-time",
-            "type": "string",
-            "description": "Recurrence date"
-        },
-        "rrule": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "description": "Recurrence rule"
-        },
-        "category": { "type": "string" },
-        "description": { "type": "string" },
-        "geo": { "$ref": "http: //json-schema.org/geo" }
-    }
-}
diff --git a/card b/card
deleted file mode 100644
index acdc3d07..00000000
--- a/card
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,49 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "description": "A representation of a person, company, organization, or place",
-    "type": "object",
-    "required": ["familyName", "givenName"],
-    "properties": {
-        "fn": {
-            "description": "Formatted Name",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "familyName": { "type": "string" },
-        "givenName": { "type": "string" },
-        "additionalName": { "type": "array", "items": { "type": "string" } },
-        "honorificPrefix": { "type": "array", "items": { "type": "string" } },
-        "honorificSuffix": { "type": "array", "items": { "type": "string" } },
-        "nickname": { "type": "string" },
-        "url": { "type": "string", "format": "uri" },
-        "email": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "properties": {
-                "type": { "type": "string" },
-                "value": { "type": "string", "format": "email" }
-            }
-        },
-        "tel": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "properties": {
-                "type": { "type": "string" },
-                "value": { "type": "string", "format": "phone" }
-            }
-        },
-        "adr": { "$ref": "http://json-schema.org/address" },
-        "geo": { "$ref": "http://json-schema.org/geo" },
-        "tz": { "type": "string" },
-        "photo": { "type": "string" },
-        "logo": { "type": "string" },
-        "sound": { "type": "string" },
-        "bday": { "type": "string", "format": "date" },
-        "title": { "type": "string" },
-        "role": { "type": "string" },
-        "org": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "properties": {
-                "organizationName": { "type": "string" },
-                "organizationUnit": { "type": "string" }
-            }
-        }
-    }
-}
diff --git a/css/main.scss b/css/main.scss
deleted file mode 100644
index c91fac8d..00000000
--- a/css/main.scss
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,39 +0,0 @@
----
-# Only the main Sass file needs front matter (the dashes are enough)
----
-@charset "utf-8";
-
-// Our variables
-$base-font-family: "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;
-$base-font-size:   16px;
-$base-font-weight: 400;
-$small-font-size:  $base-font-size * 0.875;
-$base-line-height: 1.5;
-
-$spacing-unit:     30px;
-
-$text-color:       #111;
-$background-color: #fdfdfd;
-$brand-color:      #2a7ae2;
-
-$grey-color:       #828282;
-$grey-color-light: lighten($grey-color, 40%);
-$grey-color-dark:  darken($grey-color, 25%);
-
-// Width of the content area
-$content-width:    800px;
-
-$on-palm:          600px;
-$on-laptop:        800px;
-
-// Minima also includes a mixin for defining media queries.
-// Use media queries like this:
-// @include media-query($on-palm) {
-//     .wrapper {
-//         padding-right: $spacing-unit / 2;
-//         padding-left: $spacing-unit / 2;
-//     }
-// }
-
-// Import partials from the `minima` theme.
-@import "minima";
diff --git a/docker-compose.yml b/docker-compose.yml
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..9b51565a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docker-compose.yml
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+version: "3.9"
+
+services:
+  web:
+    image: docker.io/jekyll/jekyll
+    volumes:
+      - .:/srv/jekyll:Z
+      - ./vendor/bundle:/usr/local/bundle:Z
+    ports:
+      - "4000:4000"
+    command: jekyll serve --incremental --watch
diff --git a/documentation.md b/documentation.md
deleted file mode 100644
index 354b0c25..00000000
--- a/documentation.md
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,41 +0,0 @@
----
-layout: page
----
-
-Specification
--------------
-
-The latest Internet-Drafts at the IETF are the draft-wright-json-schema\*-01 documents, which correspond to the draft-06 meta-schemas. These were published on 2017-04-15. (Due to a change in authorship the I-D numbering was reset with the previous draft). The specification is split into three parts, Core, Validation, and Hyper-Schema:
-
-|--------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|
-| [JSON Schema Core](latest/json-schema-core.html)             | defines the basic foundation of JSON Schema     |
-| [JSON Schema Validation](latest/json-schema-validation.html) | defines the validation keywords of JSON Schema  |
-| [JSON Hyper-Schema](latest/json-schema-hypermedia.html)      | defines the hyper-media keywords of JSON Schema |
-
-They are also available on the IETF main site: [core (draft-wright-json-schema-01)](http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-01), [validation (draft-wright-json-schema-validation-01)](http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-validation-01) and [hyper-schema (draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-01)](http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-01).
-
-For previous versions of the specification, please see the [Specification Links](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/wiki/Specification-Links) page on our github wiki.
-
-Meta-schemas
-------------
-
-The meta-schemas are the schemas which define the JSON Schema and Hyper-Schema formats.
-
-The latest meta-schema is draft-06.
-
-|--------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------|
-| [Core/Validation Meta-Schema](http://json-schema.org/schema) | Used for schemas written for pure validation.              |
-| [Hyper Meta-Schema](http://json-schema.org/hyper-schema)     | Used for schemas written for validation and hyper-linking. |
-
-Standard schemas
-----------------
-
-These sample schemas describe simple data structures which can be expressed as JSON:
-
-|-----------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
-| [Geographic Coordinate](http://json-schema.org/geo) | a location as longitude and latitude                                            |
-| [Card](http://json-schema.org/card)                 | a microformat-style representation of a person, company, organization, or place |
-| [Calendar](http://json-schema.org/calendar)         | a microformat-style representation of an event                                  |
-| [Address](http://json-schema.org/address)           | a microformat-style representation of a street address                          |
-
-
diff --git a/draft-00/hyper-schema b/draft-00/hyper-schema
deleted file mode 100644
index de80b918..00000000
--- a/draft-00/hyper-schema
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-	"$schema" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-00/hyper-schema#",
-	"id" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-00/hyper-schema#",
-
-	"properties" : {
-		"links" : {
-			"type" : "array",
-			"items" : {"$ref" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-00/links#"},
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"fragmentResolution" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : "dot-delimited"
-		},
-		
-		"root" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : false
-		},
-		
-		"readonly" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : false
-		},
-		
-		"pathStart" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"format" : "uri"
-		},
-		
-		"mediaType" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"format" : "media-type"
-		},
-		
-		"alternate" : {
-			"type" : "array",
-			"items" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-			"optional" : true
-		}
-	},
-	
-	"links" : [
-		{
-			"href" : "{$ref}",
-			"rel" : "full"
-		},
-		
-		{
-			"href" : "{$schema}",
-			"rel" : "describedby"
-		},
-		
-		{
-			"href" : "{id}",
-			"rel" : "self"
-		}
-	],
-	
-	"fragmentResolution" : "dot-delimited",
-	"extends" : {"$ref" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-00/schema#"}
-}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-00/hyper-schema b/draft-00/hyper-schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..cb015a14
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-00/hyper-schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-00/hyper-schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-00/json-ref b/draft-00/json-ref
deleted file mode 100644
index 3a872a71..00000000
--- a/draft-00/json-ref
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,26 +0,0 @@
-{
-	"$schema" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-00/hyper-schema#",
-	"id" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-00/json-ref#",
-	
-	"items" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-	"additionalProperties" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-	
-	"links" : [
-		{
-			"href" : "{$ref}",
-			"rel" : "full"
-		},
-		
-		{
-			"href" : "{$schema}",
-			"rel" : "describedby"
-		},
-		
-		{
-			"href" : "{id}",
-			"rel" : "self"
-		}
-	],
-	
-	"fragmentResolution" : "dot-delimited"
-}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-00/json-ref b/draft-00/json-ref
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..d85e4aaf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-00/json-ref
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-00/json-ref.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-00/links b/draft-00/links
deleted file mode 100644
index 8a5e7807..00000000
--- a/draft-00/links
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,33 +0,0 @@
-{
-	"$schema" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-00/hyper-schema#",
-	"id" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-00/links#",
-	"type" : "object",
-	
-	"properties" : {
-		"href" : {
-			"type" : "string"
-		},
-		
-		"rel" : {
-			"type" : "string"
-		},
-		
-		"method" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"default" : "GET",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"enctype" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"requires" : "method",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"properties" : {
-			"type" : "object",
-			"additionalProperties" : {"$ref" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-00/hyper-schema#"},
-			"optional" : true
-		}
-	}
-}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-00/links b/draft-00/links
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..c33ea783
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-00/links
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-00/links.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-00/schema b/draft-00/schema
deleted file mode 100644
index 9aa2fbc5..00000000
--- a/draft-00/schema
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,155 +0,0 @@
-{
-	"$schema" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-00/hyper-schema#",
-	"id" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-00/schema#",
-	"type" : "object",
-	
-	"properties" : {
-		"type" : {
-			"type" : ["string", "array"],
-			"items" : {
-				"type" : ["string", {"$ref" : "#"}]
-			},
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : "any"
-		},
-		
-		"properties" : {
-			"type" : "object",
-			"additionalProperties" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : {}
-		},
-		
-		"items" : {
-			"type" : [{"$ref" : "#"}, "array"],
-			"items" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : {}
-		},
-		
-		"optional" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : false
-		},
-		
-		"additionalProperties" : {
-			"type" : [{"$ref" : "#"}, "boolean"],
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : {}
-		},
-		
-		"requires" : {
-			"type" : ["string", {"$ref" : "#"}],
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"minimum" : {
-			"type" : "number",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"maximum" : {
-			"type" : "number",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"minimumCanEqual" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"requires" : "minimum",
-			"default" : true
-		},
-		
-		"maximumCanEqual" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"requires" : "maximum",
-			"default" : true
-		},
-		
-		"minItems" : {
-			"type" : "integer",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"minimum" : 0,
-			"default" : 0
-		},
-		
-		"maxItems" : {
-			"type" : "integer",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"minimum" : 0
-		},
-		
-		"pattern" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"format" : "regex"
-		},
-		
-		"minLength" : {
-			"type" : "integer",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"minimum" : 0,
-			"default" : 0
-		},
-		
-		"maxLength" : {
-			"type" : "integer",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"enum" : {
-			"type" : "array",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"minItems" : 1
-		},
-		
-		"title" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"description" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"format" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"contentEncoding" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"default" : {
-			"type" : "any",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"maxDecimal" : {
-			"type" : "integer",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"minimum" : 0
-		},
-		
-		"disallow" : {
-			"type" : ["string", "array"],
-			"items" : {"type" : "string"},
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"extends" : {
-			"type" : [{"$ref" : "#"}, "array"],
-			"items" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : {}
-		}
-	},
-	
-	"optional" : true,
-	"default" : {}
-}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-00/schema b/draft-00/schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..318d7b2f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-00/schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-00/schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-zyp-json-schema-01.html b/draft-01/draft-zyp-json-schema-01.html
similarity index 99%
rename from draft-zyp-json-schema-01.html
rename to draft-01/draft-zyp-json-schema-01.html
index 7ce12a86..ea922af5 100644
--- a/draft-zyp-json-schema-01.html
+++ b/draft-01/draft-zyp-json-schema-01.html
@@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
+---
+redirect_from: "/draft-zyp-json-schema-01.html"
+permalink: "/draft-01/draft-zyp-json-schema-01.html"
+---
 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
 <html lang="en"><head><title>A JSON Media Type for Describing the Structure and Meaning of JSON Documents</title>
 <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
@@ -138,6 +142,10 @@
                 color: #CCC; background-color: #CCC;
         }
 --></style>
+
+  {% if jekyll.environment == 'production' and site.google_analytics %}
+  {% include google-analytics.html %}
+  {% endif %}
 </head>
 <body>
 <table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc">&nbsp;TOC&nbsp;</a></td></tr></table>
diff --git a/draft-01/hyper-schema b/draft-01/hyper-schema
deleted file mode 100644
index 3f6c6cc2..00000000
--- a/draft-01/hyper-schema
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-	"$schema" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-01/hyper-schema#",
-	"id" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-01/hyper-schema#",
-
-	"properties" : {
-		"links" : {
-			"type" : "array",
-			"items" : {"$ref" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-01/links#"},
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"fragmentResolution" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : "dot-delimited"
-		},
-		
-		"root" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : false
-		},
-		
-		"readonly" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : false
-		},
-		
-		"pathStart" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"format" : "uri"
-		},
-		
-		"mediaType" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"format" : "media-type"
-		},
-		
-		"alternate" : {
-			"type" : "array",
-			"items" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-			"optional" : true
-		}
-	},
-	
-	"links" : [
-		{
-			"href" : "{$ref}",
-			"rel" : "full"
-		},
-		
-		{
-			"href" : "{$schema}",
-			"rel" : "describedby"
-		},
-		
-		{
-			"href" : "{id}",
-			"rel" : "self"
-		}
-	],
-	
-	"fragmentResolution" : "dot-delimited",
-	"extends" : {"$ref" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-01/schema#"}
-}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-01/hyper-schema b/draft-01/hyper-schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..056dff1c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-01/hyper-schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-01/hyper-schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-01/json-ref b/draft-01/json-ref
deleted file mode 100644
index 4d26174e..00000000
--- a/draft-01/json-ref
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,26 +0,0 @@
-{
-	"$schema" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-01/hyper-schema#",
-	"id" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-01/json-ref#",
-	
-	"items" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-	"additionalProperties" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-	
-	"links" : [
-		{
-			"href" : "{$ref}",
-			"rel" : "full"
-		},
-		
-		{
-			"href" : "{$schema}",
-			"rel" : "describedby"
-		},
-		
-		{
-			"href" : "{id}",
-			"rel" : "self"
-		}
-	],
-	
-	"fragmentResolution" : "dot-delimited"
-}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-01/json-ref b/draft-01/json-ref
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..8785a460
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-01/json-ref
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-01/json-ref.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-01/links b/draft-01/links
deleted file mode 100644
index 52430a5d..00000000
--- a/draft-01/links
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,33 +0,0 @@
-{
-	"$schema" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-01/hyper-schema#",
-	"id" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-01/links#",
-	"type" : "object",
-	
-	"properties" : {
-		"href" : {
-			"type" : "string"
-		},
-		
-		"rel" : {
-			"type" : "string"
-		},
-		
-		"method" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"default" : "GET",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"enctype" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"requires" : "method",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"properties" : {
-			"type" : "object",
-			"additionalProperties" : {"$ref" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-01/hyper-schema#"},
-			"optional" : true
-		}
-	}
-}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-01/links b/draft-01/links
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..cc15eef2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-01/links
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-01/links.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-01/schema b/draft-01/schema
deleted file mode 100644
index 7a208e68..00000000
--- a/draft-01/schema
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,155 +0,0 @@
-{
-	"$schema" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-01/hyper-schema#",
-	"id" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-01/schema#",
-	"type" : "object",
-	
-	"properties" : {
-		"type" : {
-			"type" : ["string", "array"],
-			"items" : {
-				"type" : ["string", {"$ref" : "#"}]
-			},
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : "any"
-		},
-		
-		"properties" : {
-			"type" : "object",
-			"additionalProperties" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : {}
-		},
-		
-		"items" : {
-			"type" : [{"$ref" : "#"}, "array"],
-			"items" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : {}
-		},
-		
-		"optional" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : false
-		},
-		
-		"additionalProperties" : {
-			"type" : [{"$ref" : "#"}, "boolean"],
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : {}
-		},
-		
-		"requires" : {
-			"type" : ["string", {"$ref" : "#"}],
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"minimum" : {
-			"type" : "number",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"maximum" : {
-			"type" : "number",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"minimumCanEqual" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"requires" : "minimum",
-			"default" : true
-		},
-		
-		"maximumCanEqual" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"requires" : "maximum",
-			"default" : true
-		},
-		
-		"minItems" : {
-			"type" : "integer",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"minimum" : 0,
-			"default" : 0
-		},
-		
-		"maxItems" : {
-			"type" : "integer",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"minimum" : 0
-		},
-		
-		"pattern" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"format" : "regex"
-		},
-		
-		"minLength" : {
-			"type" : "integer",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"minimum" : 0,
-			"default" : 0
-		},
-		
-		"maxLength" : {
-			"type" : "integer",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"enum" : {
-			"type" : "array",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"minItems" : 1
-		},
-		
-		"title" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"description" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"format" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"contentEncoding" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"default" : {
-			"type" : "any",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"maxDecimal" : {
-			"type" : "integer",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"minimum" : 0
-		},
-		
-		"disallow" : {
-			"type" : ["string", "array"],
-			"items" : {"type" : "string"},
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"extends" : {
-			"type" : [{"$ref" : "#"}, "array"],
-			"items" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : {}
-		}
-	},
-	
-	"optional" : true,
-	"default" : {}
-}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-01/schema b/draft-01/schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..01ea5c3d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-01/schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-01/schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-02/hyper-schema b/draft-02/hyper-schema
deleted file mode 100644
index 4ec1b756..00000000
--- a/draft-02/hyper-schema
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-	"$schema" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-02/hyper-schema#",
-	"id" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-02/hyper-schema#",
-
-	"properties" : {
-		"links" : {
-			"type" : "array",
-			"items" : {"$ref" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-02/links#"},
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"fragmentResolution" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : "slash-delimited"
-		},
-		
-		"root" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : false
-		},
-		
-		"readonly" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : false
-		},
-		
-		"pathStart" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"format" : "uri"
-		},
-		
-		"mediaType" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"format" : "media-type"
-		},
-		
-		"alternate" : {
-			"type" : "array",
-			"items" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-			"optional" : true
-		}
-	},
-	
-	"links" : [
-		{
-			"href" : "{$ref}",
-			"rel" : "full"
-		},
-		
-		{
-			"href" : "{$schema}",
-			"rel" : "describedby"
-		},
-		
-		{
-			"href" : "{id}",
-			"rel" : "self"
-		}
-	],
-	
-	"fragmentResolution" : "slash-delimited",
-	"extends" : {"$ref" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-02/schema#"}
-}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-02/hyper-schema b/draft-02/hyper-schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..bbf3fe69
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-02/hyper-schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-02/hyper-schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-02/json-ref b/draft-02/json-ref
deleted file mode 100644
index 6526c394..00000000
--- a/draft-02/json-ref
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,26 +0,0 @@
-{
-	"$schema" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-02/hyper-schema#",
-	"id" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-02/json-ref#",
-	
-	"items" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-	"additionalProperties" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-	
-	"links" : [
-		{
-			"href" : "{$ref}",
-			"rel" : "full"
-		},
-		
-		{
-			"href" : "{$schema}",
-			"rel" : "describedby"
-		},
-		
-		{
-			"href" : "{id}",
-			"rel" : "self"
-		}
-	],
-	
-	"fragmentResolution" : "dot-delimited"
-}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-02/json-ref b/draft-02/json-ref
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..95d1908d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-02/json-ref
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-02/json-ref.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-02/links b/draft-02/links
deleted file mode 100644
index 1b176178..00000000
--- a/draft-02/links
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,35 +0,0 @@
-{
-	"$schema" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-02/hyper-schema#",
-	"id" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-02/links#",
-	"type" : "object",
-	
-	"properties" : {
-		"href" : {
-			"type" : "string"
-		},
-		
-		"rel" : {
-			"type" : "string"
-		},
-		
-		"targetSchema" : {"$ref" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-02/hyper-schema#"},
-		
-		"method" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"default" : "GET",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"enctype" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"requires" : "method",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"properties" : {
-			"type" : "object",
-			"additionalProperties" : {"$ref" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-02/hyper-schema#"},
-			"optional" : true
-		}
-	}
-}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-02/links b/draft-02/links
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..368f78a3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-02/links
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-02/links.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-02/schema b/draft-02/schema
deleted file mode 100644
index 61b8de15..00000000
--- a/draft-02/schema
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,166 +0,0 @@
-{
-	"$schema" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-02/hyper-schema#",
-	"id" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-02/schema#",
-	"type" : "object",
-	
-	"properties" : {
-		"type" : {
-			"type" : ["string", "array"],
-			"items" : {
-				"type" : ["string", {"$ref" : "#"}]
-			},
-			"optional" : true,
-			"uniqueItems" : true,
-			"default" : "any"
-		},
-		
-		"properties" : {
-			"type" : "object",
-			"additionalProperties" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : {}
-		},
-		
-		"items" : {
-			"type" : [{"$ref" : "#"}, "array"],
-			"items" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : {}
-		},
-		
-		"optional" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : false
-		},
-		
-		"additionalProperties" : {
-			"type" : [{"$ref" : "#"}, "boolean"],
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : {}
-		},
-		
-		"requires" : {
-			"type" : ["string", {"$ref" : "#"}],
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"minimum" : {
-			"type" : "number",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"maximum" : {
-			"type" : "number",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"minimumCanEqual" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"requires" : "minimum",
-			"default" : true
-		},
-		
-		"maximumCanEqual" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"requires" : "maximum",
-			"default" : true
-		},
-		
-		"minItems" : {
-			"type" : "integer",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"minimum" : 0,
-			"default" : 0
-		},
-		
-		"maxItems" : {
-			"type" : "integer",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"minimum" : 0
-		},
-		
-		"uniqueItems" : {
-			"type" : "boolean",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : false
-		},
-		
-		"pattern" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"format" : "regex"
-		},
-		
-		"minLength" : {
-			"type" : "integer",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"minimum" : 0,
-			"default" : 0
-		},
-		
-		"maxLength" : {
-			"type" : "integer",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"enum" : {
-			"type" : "array",
-			"optional" : true,
-			"minItems" : 1,
-			"uniqueItems" : true
-		},
-		
-		"title" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"description" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"format" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"contentEncoding" : {
-			"type" : "string",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"default" : {
-			"type" : "any",
-			"optional" : true
-		},
-		
-		"divisibleBy" : {
-			"type" : "number",
-			"minimum" : 0,
-			"minimumCanEqual" : false,
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : 1
-		},
-		
-		"disallow" : {
-			"type" : ["string", "array"],
-			"items" : {"type" : "string"},
-			"optional" : true,
-			"uniqueItems" : true
-		},
-		
-		"extends" : {
-			"type" : [{"$ref" : "#"}, "array"],
-			"items" : {"$ref" : "#"},
-			"optional" : true,
-			"default" : {}
-		}
-	},
-	
-	"optional" : true,
-	"default" : {}
-}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-02/schema b/draft-02/schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..f4d7bce9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-02/schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-02/schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-03/hyper-schema b/draft-03/hyper-schema
deleted file mode 100644
index 0446f1f5..00000000
--- a/draft-03/hyper-schema
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,45 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/hyper-schema#",
-    "id": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/hyper-schema#",
-    "extends": { "$ref": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/schema#" },
-    "properties": {
-        "links": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "items": { "$ref": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/links#" }
-        },
-        "fragmentResolution": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "default": "slash-delimited"
-        },
-        "readonly": {
-            "type": "boolean",
-            "default": false
-        },
-        "contentEncoding": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "pathStart": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "uri"
-        },
-        "mediaType": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "media-type"
-        }
-    },
-    "links": [
-        {
-            "href": "{id}",
-            "rel": "self"
-        },
-        {
-            "href": "{$ref}",
-            "rel": "full"
-        },
-        {
-            "href": "{$schema}",
-            "rel": "describedby"
-        }
-    ],
-    "fragmentResolution": "slash-delimited"
-}
diff --git a/draft-03/hyper-schema b/draft-03/hyper-schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..68db4d27
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-03/hyper-schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-03/hyper-schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-03/json-ref b/draft-03/json-ref
deleted file mode 100644
index bbafa591..00000000
--- a/draft-03/json-ref
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,21 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/hyper-schema#",
-    "id": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/json-ref#",
-    "additionalItems": { "$ref": "#" },
-    "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" },
-    "links": [
-        {
-            "href": "{id}",
-            "rel": "self"
-        },
-        {
-            "href": "{$ref}",
-            "rel": "full"
-        },
-        {
-            "href": "{$schema}",
-            "rel": "describedby"
-        }
-    ],
-    "fragmentResolution": "slash-delimited"
-}
diff --git a/draft-03/json-ref b/draft-03/json-ref
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..36cfcb11
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-03/json-ref
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-03/json-ref.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-03/links b/draft-03/links
deleted file mode 100644
index 96a9a088..00000000
--- a/draft-03/links
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,31 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/hyper-schema#",
-    "id": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/links#",
-    "type": "object",
-    
-    "properties": {
-        "href": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "required": true
-        },
-        "rel": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "required": true
-        },
-        "targetSchema": { "$ref": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/hyper-schema#" },
-        "method": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "default": "GET"
-        },
-        "enctype": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "schema": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/hyper-schema#" }
-        }
-    },
-    "dependencies": {
-        "enctype": "method"
-    }
-}
diff --git a/draft-03/links b/draft-03/links
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..7266730e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-03/links
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-03/links.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-03/schema b/draft-03/schema
deleted file mode 100644
index 7a1a2d38..00000000
--- a/draft-03/schema
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,174 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/schema#",
-    "id": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/schema#",
-    "type": "object",
-    
-    "properties": {
-        "type": {
-            "type": [ "string", "array" ],
-            "items": {
-                "type": [ "string", { "$ref": "#" } ]
-            },
-            "uniqueItems": true,
-            "default": "any"
-        },
-        
-        "properties": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" },
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        
-        "patternProperties": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" },
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        
-        "additionalProperties": {
-            "type": [ { "$ref": "#" }, "boolean" ],
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        
-        "items": {
-            "type": [ { "$ref": "#" }, "array" ],
-            "items": { "$ref": "#" },
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        
-        "additionalItems": {
-            "type": [ { "$ref": "#" }, "boolean" ],
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        
-        "required": {
-            "type": "boolean",
-            "default": false
-        },
-        
-        "dependencies": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": {
-                "type": [ "string", "array", { "$ref": "#" } ],
-                "items": {
-                    "type": "string"
-                }
-            },
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        
-        "minimum": {
-            "type": "number"
-        },
-        
-        "maximum": {
-            "type": "number"
-        },
-        
-        "exclusiveMinimum": {
-            "type": "boolean",
-            "default": false
-        },
-        
-        "exclusiveMaximum": {
-            "type": "boolean",
-            "default": false
-        },
-        
-        "minItems": {
-            "type": "integer",
-            "minimum": 0,
-            "default": 0
-        },
-        
-        "maxItems": {
-            "type": "integer",
-            "minimum": 0
-        },
-        
-        "uniqueItems": {
-            "type": "boolean",
-            "default": false
-        },
-        
-        "pattern": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "regex"
-        },
-        
-        "minLength": {
-            "type": "integer",
-            "minimum": 0,
-            "default": 0
-        },
-        
-        "maxLength": {
-            "type": "integer"
-        },
-        
-        "enum": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "minItems": 1,
-            "uniqueItems": true
-        },
-        
-        "default": {
-            "type": "any"
-        },
-        
-        "title": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        
-        "description": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        
-        "format": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        
-        "divisibleBy": {
-            "type": "number",
-            "minimum": 0,
-            "exclusiveMinimum": true,
-            "default": 1
-        },
-        
-        "disallow": {
-            "type": [ "string", "array" ],
-            "items": {
-                "type": [ "string", { "$ref": "#" } ]
-            },
-            "uniqueItems": true
-        },
-        
-        "extends": {
-            "type": [ { "$ref": "#" }, "array" ],
-            "items": { "$ref": "#" },
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        
-        "id": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "uri"
-        },
-        
-        "$ref": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "uri"
-        },
-        
-        "$schema": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "uri"
-        }
-    },
-    
-    "dependencies": {
-        "exclusiveMinimum": "minimum",
-        "exclusiveMaximum": "maximum"
-    },
-    
-    "default": {}
-}
diff --git a/draft-03/schema b/draft-03/schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..a4f58213
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-03/schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-03/schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-04/hyper-schema b/draft-04/hyper-schema
deleted file mode 100644
index c2cb9d1e..00000000
--- a/draft-04/hyper-schema
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,158 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/hyper-schema#",
-    "id": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/hyper-schema#",
-    "title": "JSON Hyper-Schema",
-    "allOf": [
-        {
-            "$ref": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#"
-        }
-    ],
-    "properties": {
-        "additionalItems": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                {
-                    "type": "boolean"
-                },
-                {
-                    "$ref": "#"
-                }
-            ]
-        },
-        "additionalProperties": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                {
-                    "type": "boolean"
-                },
-                {
-                    "$ref": "#"
-                }
-            ]
-        },
-        "dependencies": {
-            "additionalProperties": {
-                "anyOf": [
-                    {
-                        "$ref": "#"
-                    },
-                    {
-                        "type": "array"
-                    }
-                ]
-            }
-        },
-        "items": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                {
-                    "$ref": "#"
-                },
-                {
-                    "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray"
-                }
-            ]
-        },
-        "definitions": {
-            "additionalProperties": {
-                "$ref": "#"
-            }
-        },
-        "patternProperties": {
-            "additionalProperties": {
-                "$ref": "#"
-            }
-        },
-        "properties": {
-            "additionalProperties": {
-                "$ref": "#"
-            }
-        },
-        "allOf": {
-            "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray"
-        },
-        "anyOf": {
-            "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray"
-        },
-        "oneOf": {
-            "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray"
-        },
-        "not": {
-            "$ref": "#"
-        },
-
-        "links": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "items": {
-                "$ref": "#/definitions/linkDescription"
-            }
-        },
-        "fragmentResolution": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "media": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "properties": {
-                "type": {
-                    "description": "A media type, as described in RFC 2046",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "binaryEncoding": {
-                    "description": "A content encoding scheme, as described in RFC 2045",
-                    "type": "string"
-                }
-            }
-        },
-        "pathStart": {
-            "description": "Instances' URIs must start with this value for this schema to apply to them",
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "uri"
-        }
-    },
-    "definitions": {
-        "schemaArray": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "items": {
-                "$ref": "#"
-            }
-        },
-        "linkDescription": {
-            "title": "Link Description Object",
-            "type": "object",
-            "required": [ "href", "rel" ],
-            "properties": {
-                "href": {
-                    "description": "a URI template, as defined by RFC 6570, with the addition of the $, ( and ) characters for pre-processing",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "rel": {
-                    "description": "relation to the target resource of the link",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "title": {
-                    "description": "a title for the link",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "targetSchema": {
-                    "description": "JSON Schema describing the link target",
-                    "$ref": "#"
-                },
-                "mediaType": {
-                    "description": "media type (as defined by RFC 2046) describing the link target",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "method": {
-                    "description": "method for requesting the target of the link (e.g. for HTTP this might be \"GET\" or \"DELETE\")",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "encType": {
-                    "description": "The media type in which to submit data along with the request",
-                    "type": "string",
-                    "default": "application/json"
-                },
-                "schema": {
-                    "description": "Schema describing the data to submit along with the request",
-                    "$ref": "#"
-                }
-            }
-        }
-    }
-}
-
diff --git a/draft-04/hyper-schema b/draft-04/hyper-schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..82344733
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-04/hyper-schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-04/hyper-schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-04/json-schema-core.html b/draft-04/json-schema-core.html
index 96c12669..32f11f3e 100644
--- a/draft-04/json-schema-core.html
+++ b/draft-04/json-schema-core.html
@@ -1,3 +1,6 @@
+---
+---
+
 <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
   "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
 
@@ -426,6 +429,10 @@
   <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Schema defines the media type &quot;application/schema+json&quot;, a JSON based format for defining the structure of JSON data. JSON Schema provides a contract for what JSON data is required for a given application and how to interact with it. JSON Schema is intended to define validation, documentation, hyperlink navigation, and interaction control of JSON data.  " />
   <meta name="description" content="JSON Schema defines the media type &quot;application/schema+json&quot;, a JSON based format for defining the structure of JSON data. JSON Schema provides a contract for what JSON data is required for a given application and how to interact with it. JSON Schema is intended to define validation, documentation, hyperlink navigation, and interaction control of JSON data.  " />
 
+  {% if jekyll.environment == 'production' and site.google_analytics %}
+  {% include google-analytics.html %}
+  {% endif %}
+
 </head>
 
 <body>
diff --git a/draft-04/json-schema-hypermedia.html b/draft-04/json-schema-hypermedia.html
index b2e395e1..2fb4ac1c 100644
--- a/draft-04/json-schema-hypermedia.html
+++ b/draft-04/json-schema-hypermedia.html
@@ -1,3 +1,6 @@
+---
+---
+
 <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
   "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
 
@@ -421,6 +424,9 @@
   <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Schema is a JSON based format for defining the structure of JSON data.  This document specifies hyperlink- and hypermedia-related keywords of JSON Schema.  " />
   <meta name="description" content="JSON Schema is a JSON based format for defining the structure of JSON data.  This document specifies hyperlink- and hypermedia-related keywords of JSON Schema.  " />
 
+  {% if jekyll.environment == 'production' and site.google_analytics %}
+  {% include google-analytics.html %}
+  {% endif %}
 </head>
 
 <body>
@@ -763,6 +769,7 @@ <h1 id="rfc.section.5.1.1.1.4"><a href="#rfc.section.5.1.1.1.4">5.1.1.1.4.</a> E
 <p>For example, here are some possible values for "href", followed by the results after pre-processing:</p>
 <pre>
 
+{% raw %}
 Input                    Output
 -----------------------------------------
 "no change"              "no change"
@@ -777,7 +784,7 @@ <h1 id="rfc.section.5.1.1.1.4"><a href="#rfc.section.5.1.1.1.4">5.1.1.1.4.</a> E
 "{()}"                   "{%65mpty}
 "{+$*}"                   "{+%73elf*}
 "{+($)*}"                 "{+%24*}
-
+{% endraw %}
                                     </pre>
 <p>Note that in the final example, because the "+" was outside the brackets, it remained unescaped, whereas in the fourth example the "+" was escaped.  </p>
 <h1 id="rfc.section.5.1.1.2"><a href="#rfc.section.5.1.1.2">5.1.1.2.</a> Values for substitution</h1>
diff --git a/draft-04/json-schema-validation.html b/draft-04/json-schema-validation.html
index 2f26dc07..1b488849 100644
--- a/draft-04/json-schema-validation.html
+++ b/draft-04/json-schema-validation.html
@@ -1,3 +1,6 @@
+---
+---
+
 <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
   "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
 
@@ -458,6 +461,10 @@
   <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Schema (application/schema+json) has several purposes, one of which is instance validation. The validation process may be interactive or non interactive. For instance, applications may use JSON Schema to build a user interface enabling interactive content generation in addition to user input checking, or validate data retrieved from various sources. This specification describes schema keywords dedicated to validation purposes.  " />
   <meta name="description" content="JSON Schema (application/schema+json) has several purposes, one of which is instance validation. The validation process may be interactive or non interactive. For instance, applications may use JSON Schema to build a user interface enabling interactive content generation in addition to user input checking, or validate data retrieved from various sources. This specification describes schema keywords dedicated to validation purposes.  " />
 
+  {% if jekyll.environment == 'production' and site.google_analytics %}
+  {% include google-analytics.html %}
+  {% endif %}
+
 </head>
 
 <body>
diff --git a/draft-04/links b/draft-04/links
deleted file mode 100644
index da815919..00000000
--- a/draft-04/links
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,42 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/hyper-schema#",
-    "id": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/links#",
-    "title": "Link Description Object",
-    "type": "object",
-    "required": [ "href", "rel" ],
-    "properties": {
-        "href": {
-            "description": "a URI template, as defined by RFC 6570, with the addition of the $, ( and ) characters for pre-processing",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "rel": {
-            "description": "relation to the target resource of the link",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "title": {
-            "description": "a title for the link",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "targetSchema": {
-            "description": "JSON Schema describing the link target",
-            "$ref": "hyper-schema#"
-        },
-        "mediaType": {
-            "description": "media type (as defined by RFC 2046) describing the link target",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "method": {
-            "description": "method for requesting the target of the link (e.g. for HTTP this might be \"GET\" or \"DELETE\")",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "encType": {
-            "description": "The media type in which to submit data along with the request",
-            "type": "string",
-            "default": "application/json"
-        },
-        "schema": {
-            "description": "Schema describing the data to submit along with the request",
-            "$ref": "hyper-schema#"
-        }
-    }
-}
diff --git a/draft-04/links b/draft-04/links
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..65234db3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-04/links
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-04/links.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-04/schema b/draft-04/schema
deleted file mode 100644
index 85eb502a..00000000
--- a/draft-04/schema
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,150 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "id": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "description": "Core schema meta-schema",
-    "definitions": {
-        "schemaArray": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "minItems": 1,
-            "items": { "$ref": "#" }
-        },
-        "positiveInteger": {
-            "type": "integer",
-            "minimum": 0
-        },
-        "positiveIntegerDefault0": {
-            "allOf": [ { "$ref": "#/definitions/positiveInteger" }, { "default": 0 } ]
-        },
-        "simpleTypes": {
-            "enum": [ "array", "boolean", "integer", "null", "number", "object", "string" ]
-        },
-        "stringArray": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "items": { "type": "string" },
-            "minItems": 1,
-            "uniqueItems": true
-        }
-    },
-    "type": "object",
-    "properties": {
-        "id": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "uri"
-        },
-        "$schema": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "uri"
-        },
-        "title": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "description": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "default": {},
-        "multipleOf": {
-            "type": "number",
-            "minimum": 0,
-            "exclusiveMinimum": true
-        },
-        "maximum": {
-            "type": "number"
-        },
-        "exclusiveMaximum": {
-            "type": "boolean",
-            "default": false
-        },
-        "minimum": {
-            "type": "number"
-        },
-        "exclusiveMinimum": {
-            "type": "boolean",
-            "default": false
-        },
-        "maxLength": { "$ref": "#/definitions/positiveInteger" },
-        "minLength": { "$ref": "#/definitions/positiveIntegerDefault0" },
-        "pattern": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "regex"
-        },
-        "additionalItems": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                { "type": "boolean" },
-                { "$ref": "#" }
-            ],
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "items": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                { "$ref": "#" },
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" }
-            ],
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "maxItems": { "$ref": "#/definitions/positiveInteger" },
-        "minItems": { "$ref": "#/definitions/positiveIntegerDefault0" },
-        "uniqueItems": {
-            "type": "boolean",
-            "default": false
-        },
-        "maxProperties": { "$ref": "#/definitions/positiveInteger" },
-        "minProperties": { "$ref": "#/definitions/positiveIntegerDefault0" },
-        "required": { "$ref": "#/definitions/stringArray" },
-        "additionalProperties": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                { "type": "boolean" },
-                { "$ref": "#" }
-            ],
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "definitions": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" },
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "properties": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" },
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "patternProperties": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" },
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "dependencies": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": {
-                "anyOf": [
-                    { "$ref": "#" },
-                    { "$ref": "#/definitions/stringArray" }
-                ]
-            }
-        },
-        "enum": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "minItems": 1,
-            "uniqueItems": true
-        },
-        "type": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/simpleTypes" },
-                {
-                    "type": "array",
-                    "items": { "$ref": "#/definitions/simpleTypes" },
-                    "minItems": 1,
-                    "uniqueItems": true
-                }
-            ]
-        },
-        "allOf": { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" },
-        "anyOf": { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" },
-        "oneOf": { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" },
-        "not": { "$ref": "#" }
-    },
-    "dependencies": {
-        "exclusiveMaximum": [ "maximum" ],
-        "exclusiveMinimum": [ "minimum" ]
-    },
-    "default": {}
-}
diff --git a/draft-04/schema b/draft-04/schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..4edebda6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-04/schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-04/schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-05/README.md b/draft-05/README.md
index 7a34cb9d..82507210 100644
--- a/draft-05/README.md
+++ b/draft-05/README.md
@@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: default
+---
+
 ## Explanation for lack of draft-05 meta-schemas
 
 "Draft-05" in the sequential meta-schema numbering would have
diff --git a/draft-06/README.md b/draft-06/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..b40f679c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-06/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+---
+layout: default
+---
+
+# Draft-06 Release Notes
+
+- [JSON Schema Release Notes](json-schema-release-notes.md)
+- [JSON Hyper-Schema Release Notes](json-hyper-schema-release-notes.md)
diff --git a/draft-06/hyper-schema b/draft-06/hyper-schema
deleted file mode 100644
index 84249f01..00000000
--- a/draft-06/hyper-schema
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,131 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-06/hyper-schema#",
-    "$id": "http://json-schema.org/draft-06/hyper-schema#",
-    "title": "JSON Hyper-Schema",
-    "definitions": {
-        "schemaArray": {
-            "allOf": [
-                { "$ref": "http://json-schema.org/draft-06/schema#/definitions/schemaArray" },
-                {
-                    "items": { "$ref": "#" }
-                }
-            ]
-        },
-        "linkDescription": {
-            "title": "Link Description Object",
-            "type": "object",
-            "required": [ "href" ],
-            "properties": {
-                "href": {
-                    "description": "a URI template, as defined by RFC 6570",
-                    "type": "string",
-                    "format": "uri-template"
-                },
-                "hrefSchema": {
-                    "description": "a schema for validating user input to the URI template, where the input is in the form of a JSON object with property names matching variable names in \"href\"",
-                    "allOf": [ {"$ref": "#"} ]
-                },
-                "rel": {
-                    "description": "relation to the target resource of the link",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "title": {
-                    "description": "a title for the link",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "targetSchema": {
-                    "description": "JSON Schema describing the link target",
-                    "allOf": [ { "$ref": "#" } ]
-                },
-                "mediaType": {
-                    "description": "media type (as defined by RFC 2046) describing the link target",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "submissionEncType": {
-                    "description": "The media type in which to submit data along with the request",
-                    "type": "string",
-                    "default": "application/json"
-                },
-                "submissionSchema": {
-                    "description": "Schema describing the data to submit along with the request",
-                    "allOf": [ { "$ref": "#" } ]
-                }
-            }
-        }
-    },
-    "allOf": [ { "$ref": "http://json-schema.org/draft-06/schema#" } ],
-    "properties": {
-        "additionalItems": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                { "type": "boolean" },
-                { "$ref": "#" }
-            ]
-        },
-        "additionalProperties": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                { "type": "boolean" },
-                { "$ref": "#" }
-            ]
-        },
-        "dependencies": {
-            "additionalProperties": {
-                "anyOf": [
-                    { "$ref": "#" },
-                    { "type": "array" }
-                ]
-            }
-        },
-        "items": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                { "$ref": "#" },
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" }
-            ]
-        },
-        "definitions": {
-            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" }
-        },
-        "patternProperties": {
-            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" }
-        },
-        "properties": {
-            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" }
-        },
-        "allOf": { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" },
-        "anyOf": { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" },
-        "oneOf": { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" },
-        "not": { "$ref": "#" },
-
-        "base": {
-            "description": "URI Template resolved as for the 'href' keyword in the Link Description Object.  The resulting URI Reference is resolved against the current URI base and sets the new URI base for URI references within the instance.",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "links": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "items": { "$ref": "#/definitions/linkDescription" }
-        },
-        "media": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "properties": {
-                "type": {
-                    "description": "A media type, as described in RFC 2046",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "binaryEncoding": {
-                    "description": "A content encoding scheme, as described in RFC 2045",
-                    "type": "string"
-                }
-            }
-        },
-        "readOnly": {
-            "description": "If true, indicates that the value of this property is controlled by the server.",
-            "type": "boolean",
-            "default": "false"
-        }
-    },
-    "links": [
-        {
-            "rel": "self",
-            "href": "{+%24id}"
-        }
-    ]
-}
diff --git a/draft-06/hyper-schema b/draft-06/hyper-schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..a7dce84d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-06/hyper-schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-06/hyper-schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-06/json-hyper-schema-release-notes.md b/draft-06/json-hyper-schema-release-notes.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..5712f6c0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-06/json-hyper-schema-release-notes.md
@@ -0,0 +1,100 @@
+---
+title: JSON Hyper-Schema Draft-06 Release Notes
+layout: page
+redirect_from: "/draft-06/json-hyper-schema-migration-faq.html"
+permalink: /draft-06/json-hyper-schema-release-notes.html
+---
+
+Release notes for migrating from draft-luff-json-hyper-schema-00 (draft-04) to draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-01 (draft-06).
+
+<span style="color: red; font-size: 200%">**NOTE**: draft-07 has been released</span>
+
+_The [migration notes for draft-07](../draft-07/json-hyper-schema-release-notes.html) give a much more straightforward overview of migrating from draft-04 to draft-07 by skipping the complicated intermediate states of draft-05 and draft-06.  This page has been retained for historical interest, but it is not recommened for those who just want to get going with the latest draft._
+
+_**For implementors:** We recommend just implementing draft-07, and not draft-06 or earlier._
+
+* TOC
+{:toc}
+
+### Q: What are the incompatible changes between draft-04 and draft-06?
+
+Between drafts 04 and 06 we undertook a major re-examining of Hyper-Schema, which has never been as widely adopted as JSON Schema Validation.
+
+While we knew that there were still major gaps in draft-06, we felt that it was a good set of changes for collecting feedback.  With draft-07 published, that draft or later should be used, and draft-06 becomes an historical curiosity.
+
+#### Changes from draft-04 to draft-05
+
+keyword | change | consequence
+---- | ---- | ----
+`"base"` | replaces looking up the nearest "self" link to determine the base URI for `"href"` | if you were relying on "self" links to change the base, set `"base"` explicitly
+`"rel"` | "full" relation removed | use ["item"](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues/295)
+`"rel"` | "instances" and "create" relations removed | use ["collection"](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues/295)
+`"rel"` | "root" relation removed | use a fragment in your `"href"` URI Template
+`"fragmentResolution"` | *removed* | media type determines how fragments are interpreted
+`"pathStart"` | *removed* | *[no replacement]*
+`"method"` | [changed back to HTML form semantics](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-03#section-6.1.1.4.1) of "get" and "post" rather than all HTTP methods | *[changed again in draft-06 due to feedback that this was confusing]*
+
+#### Changes from draft-05 to draft-06
+
+keyword | change | consequence
+---- | ---- | ----
+`"method"` | *removed* | for HTTP method proposals, see issues [#73](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues/73) and [#296](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues/296) (use either `"method"` or `"allow"` as an extension keyword if needed); indication of how to use `"schema"` and `"encType"` no longer necessary
+`"schema"` | *removed* | use `"hrefSchema"`, `"submissionSchema"`,  or `"targetSchema"` |
+`"encType"` | *removed* | use `"submissionEncType"` for request bodies; no longer needed for URI query strings
+`"hrefSchema"` | *added* | replaces `"method": "get", "schema": {...}`, with additional functionality |
+`"submissionSchema"` | *added* | replaces `"method": "post", "schema": {...}`
+`"submissionEncType"` | *added* | replaces `"method": "post", "encType": "..."`
+`"href"` | preprocessing removed | *to be replaced and expanded in future drafts*
+
+#### Proper use of `"targetSchema"`
+
+While `"targetSchema"` did not change its meaning in either recent draft, it has been widely misinterpreted.  So it may feel like a change to use it as specified.
+
+Due to draft-04 emphasizing individual HTTP methods as `"method"` values, many users interpreted `"targetSchema"` as a hint of the response to the method in `"method"`.  This was never correct; all drafts define this keyword as describing the representation of the target resource, which appears as a response to HTTP GET, but may or may not appear in other responses.
+
+Draft-06 clarifies this usage and provides guidance on its use with different HTTP methods.  This includes using `"targetSchema"` as a request description for PUT and PATCH.  With draft-04, many users used `"schema"` to describe PUT and PATCH requests which is not needed.
+
+However, the [`"targetHints"` proposal](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues/296) has been accepted into draft-07.  Among other things, it enables hinting at "Accept-Patch", which is needed to properly use `"targetSchema"` with HTTP PATCH.  There will be examples and detailed guidance in draft-07.
+
+### Q: Why were several major changes made to Hyper-Schema just before draft-06's publication?
+
+A: During final review, it became apparent that there was no consensus on how to use the spec as written.  The late changes were necessary to publish a spec with unambiguous meaning, so that we could get feedback on its contents rather than differing interpretations.  Originally we attempted to simply clarify what was there, but then we realized there was no agreement on what was there in the first place.
+
+### Q: Why doesn't the spec mention or behave like HTML anymore?
+
+A: We came to a consensus that the existing analogies caused more harm than good, for two reasons:
+
+1. The change between draft-03 and draft-04 to let `"method"` indicate any HTTP method instead of HTML's `<form method="...">` "get" and "post" values broke the original analogy to HTML, and trying to change it back was not well-received
+2. Only being able to use `"schema"` and `"encType"` for either the URI query string (but no other part of the URI) or the request body, but not having any way to work with both at once, was overly restrictive for API design
+
+#### Splitting `"schema"`
+
+Instead of having `"schema"` perform two different things depending on `"method"`, we split it into two keywords, one for each use.  This allows using both simultaneously when needed, which is a use case not present in HTML forms.
+
+`"hrefSchema"` replaces the `"method": "get"` use, but leverages URI Template variables so that client data-driven dynamic  URIs are no longer limited to the query string.  `"encType"` is no longer needed with this approach.
+
+`"submissionSchema"` directly replaces the `"method": "post"` use, with `"submissionEncType"` replacing `"encType"`.
+
+#### Removing `"method"`
+
+Draft-05 tried to restore the draft-03 behavior of `"method"`, but feedback told us that users found the change very confusing.  With `"schema"` split, the draft-05 behavior of `"method"` was no longer needed.
+
+We could have switched by to draft-04's `"method"` behavior, but in addition to producing more confusion from all of the back and forth, the draft-04 approach to `"method"` was not consistent with the rest of the LDO design anyway.  Most notably, it caused problems with the usage of `"targetSchema"` as described above.
+
+### Q: So how do I indicate which HTTP methods are supported on a link?
+
+A: Ideally, this is implicitly conveyed by your link relation type, which is the primary indicator of semantics across machine-oriented hypermedia in general.  [RFC 5988](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988) provides guidance on creating custom (a.k.a. "extension") link relations.
+
+Several URI schemes and namespaces, such as the [UUID namespace in the `urn:` scheme](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4122), or the [`tag:` scheme](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4151), are particularly suitable for creating unique identifiers.
+
+And of course, there are ways to detect this at runtime such as HTTP's `"Allow"` response header, or attempting a method and handling a `405 Method Not Allowed` error accordingly.
+
+### Q: No, really. How do I _explicitly_ indicate which HTTP methods are supported on a link?
+
+A: The [`"targetHints"` proposal](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues/296) is part of draft-07, so using it as an extension to draft-06 is an option, but we recommend simply using draft-07 at this point.
+
+### Q: If `"targetSchema"` is not the response, how do I describe responses?
+
+A: You should have hyper-schemas for your various success and error responses, but connecting them to links is more of a documentation question than a usage question: each response will indicate its own schema, so you don't need to know it in advance at runtime.
+
+There has never been a Hyper-Schema keyword to explicitly associate responses with operations such as HTTP methods.  The use cases for this seem to be about generating API documentation, so this is most likely a candidate for a [JSON Schema API Documentation vocabulary](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-vocabularies/issues/1).
diff --git a/latest/json-schema-core.html b/draft-06/json-schema-core.html
similarity index 100%
rename from latest/json-schema-core.html
rename to draft-06/json-schema-core.html
diff --git a/latest/json-schema-hypermedia.html b/draft-06/json-schema-hypermedia.html
similarity index 100%
rename from latest/json-schema-hypermedia.html
rename to draft-06/json-schema-hypermedia.html
diff --git a/draft-06/json-schema-release-notes.md b/draft-06/json-schema-release-notes.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..6716725b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-06/json-schema-release-notes.md
@@ -0,0 +1,131 @@
+---
+title: JSON Schema Draft-06 Release Notes
+layout: page
+redirect_from: "/draft-06/json-schema-migration-faq.html"
+permalink: /draft-06/json-schema-release-notes.html
+---
+
+Release notes for migrating from zyp-04 and fge-00 (draft-04) to wright-01 (draft-06).
+
+<span style="color: red; font-size: 200%">**NOTE**: draft-07 has been released</span>
+
+_Note that draft-07 core and validation are backwards-compatible with draft-06.
+For more information, see that draft's [migration notes](../draft-07/json-schema-release-notes.html)._
+
+* TOC
+{:toc}
+
+### Q: What are the changes between draft-04 and draft-06?
+
+#### Backwards-incompatible changes
+
+keyword | change | consequence
+---- | ---- | ----
+`"id"` | replaced by `"$id"` | no longer easily confused with instance properties named `"id"`
+`"$id"` | replaces `"id"` | behavior is identical, `$` prefix matches the other two core keywords
+`"$ref"` | only allowed where a schema is expected | it is now possible to describe instance properties named `"$ref"`
+`"exclusiveMinimum"` and `"exclusiveMaximum"` | changed from a boolean to a number to be consistent with the principle of keyword independence | wherever one of these would be true before, change the value to the corresponding `"minimum"` or `"maximum"` value and remove the `"minimum"`/`"maximum"` keyword
+`"type"` | definition of `"integer"` | in draft-04, `"integer"` is listed as a primitive type and defined as "a JSON number without a fraction or exponent part"; in draft-06, `"integer"` is not considered a primitive type and is only defined in the section for keyword `"type"` as "any number with a zero fractional part"; `1.0` is thus not a valid `"integer"` type in draft-04 and earlier, but is a valid `"integer"` type in draft-06 and later; note that both drafts say that integers SHOULD be encoded in JSON without fractional parts  
+
+#### Additions and backwards-compatible changes
+
+keyword | change | consequence
+---- | ---- | ----
+booleans as schemas | allowable anywhere, not just `"additionalProperties"` and `"additionalItems"` | `true` is equivalent to `{}`, `false` is equivalent to `{"not": {}}`, but the intent is more clear and implementations can optimize these cases more easily
+`"propertyNames"` | added | takes a schema which validates the *names* of all properties rather than their values
+`"contains"` | added | array keyword that passes validation if its schema validates at least one array item
+`"const"` | added | more readible form of a one-element `"enum"`
+`"required"` | allows an empty array | an empty array indicates that no properties are required
+`"dependencies"` | allows an empty array for property dependencies | an empty array indicates that there are no dependencies for the given property
+`"format": "uri-reference"` | added | allows relative URI references per RFC 3986; see the section below about `"uri"` as a format
+`"format": "uri-template"` | added | indicates an RFC 6570 conforming URI Template value, as is used in JSON Hyper-Schema for `"href"`
+`"format": "json-pointer"` | added | indicates a JSON Pointer value such as `/foo/bar`; do _not_ use this for JSON Pointer URI fragments such as `#/foo/bar`: the proper format for those is `"uri-reference"`
+`"examples"` | added | array of examples with no validation effect; the value of `"default"` is usable as an example without repeating it under this keyword
+
+#### Formats: `"uri"` vs `"uri-reference"`
+
+While not technically a change, the behavior of the `"uri"` format was not clearly explained and often implemented and used incorrectly (including in the draft-04 meta-schema).
+
+`"uri"` should only be used when an absolute URI (starting with a scheme) is required.
+
+When a relative path, fragment, or any other style of URI Reference (per RFC 3986) is allowable, use `"uri-reference"`.
+
+Implementations offering a translation from draft-04 to draft-06 may want to offer an option to convert `"uri"` formats to `"uri-reference"`, although any such option should be disabled by default for strict conformance.
+
+### Q: What happened to draft-05?
+
+The draft-05 core and validation specifications were intended to be more clear and readable rewrites of draft-04, to give us a strong base for draft-06 changes.  Implementors should **not** implement or advertise support for "draft-05".
+
+Implementations that supported "draft-05" by implementing proposals from right after the publication of draft-04 should either remove that support or give it a different name to avoid confusion.
+
+### Q: What happened to all the discussions around re-using schemas with `"additionalProperties"`?
+
+There are several competing proposals for making the re-use of schemas that set `"additionalProperties"` to something other than `true`.  Most people specifically care about the case where it is `false`, but the same behavior occurs with any non-`true` value.
+
+[All of the proposals in this area](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22re-use+%2F+addlProps%22) will be the focus of [draft-08](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/milestone/6).  While we made progress in eliminating some options during draft-07, the remaining divisions are deep enough to warrant making it the primary focus of a draft ([draft-07](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/milestone/5)'s primary focus is Hyper-Schema).
+
+The difficulty is that if you attempt to do this:
+
+```json
+{
+    "type": "object",
+    "allOf": [
+        { "$ref": "#/definitions/foo" },
+        { "$ref": "#/definitions/bar" }
+    ],
+    "definitions": {
+        "foo": {
+            "properties": {
+                "foo": { "type": "string" }
+            },
+            "additionalProperties": false
+        },
+        "bar": {
+            "properties": {
+                "bar": { "type": "number" }
+            },
+            "additionalProperties": false
+        }
+    }
+}
+```
+
+Validation will always fail for any non-empty object instance.  `"additionalProperties"` only knows about immediately adjacent `"properties"` and `"patternProperties"`, in order to ensure that each subschema means the same thing whether it is being used with another subschema or on its own.
+
+So in this example, if the instance has a "bar" property, it will fail the first subschema because "bar" is not "foo".  If it has a "foo" property, it will fail the second subschema because "foo" is not "bar".  And any other property will fail both schemas.
+
+A workaround is available with the new `"propertyNames"` keyword:
+
+```json
+{
+    "type": "object",
+    "allOf": [
+        { "$ref": "#/definitions/foo" },
+        { "$ref": "#/definitions/bar" }
+    ],
+    "propertyNames": {
+        "anyOf": [
+            { "$ref": "#/definitions/fooNames" },
+            { "$ref": "#/definitions/barNames" }
+        ]
+    },
+    "definitions": {
+        "foo": {
+            "properties": {
+                "foo": { "type": "string" }
+            }
+        },
+        "fooNames": { "enum": ["foo"] },
+        "bar": {
+            "properties": {
+                "bar": { "type": "number" }
+            }
+        },
+        "barNames": { "enum": ["bar"] }
+    }
+}
+```
+
+This will allow an object with either "foo" or "bar" or both, but will fail validation if any other property is present.  The `"allOf"` ensures that "foo" and "bar" will each be validated correctly if present, while the `"anyOf"` allows for properties with names in either allowed set, but forbids properties that are not listed in at least one set.
+
+It does require duplicating the names, and the awkward use of both an `"allOf"` and `"anyOf"`, but it is less repetition than other options, and can be re-used fairly robustly even if the "foo" and "bar" schemas are in separate files managed by a different person or organization.
diff --git a/latest/json-schema-validation.html b/draft-06/json-schema-validation.html
similarity index 100%
rename from latest/json-schema-validation.html
rename to draft-06/json-schema-validation.html
diff --git a/draft-06/links b/draft-06/links
deleted file mode 100644
index 7c2292c3..00000000
--- a/draft-06/links
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,43 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-06/hyper-schema#",
-    "$id": "http://json-schema.org/draft-06/links#",
-    "title": "Link Description Object",
-    "type": "object",
-    "required": [ "href" ],
-    "properties": {
-        "href": {
-            "description": "a URI template, as defined by RFC 6570",
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "uri-template"
-        },
-        "hrefSchema": {
-            "description": "a schema for validating user input to the URI template, where the input is in the form of a JSON object with property names matching variable names in \"href\"",
-            "allOf": [ {"$ref": "#"} ]
-        },
-        "rel": {
-            "description": "relation to the target resource of the link",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "title": {
-            "description": "a title for the link",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "targetSchema": {
-            "description": "JSON Schema describing the link target",
-            "allOf": [ { "$ref": "hyper-schema#" } ]
-        },
-        "mediaType": {
-            "description": "media type (as defined by RFC 2046) describing the link target",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "submissionEncType": {
-            "description": "The media type in which to submit data along with the request",
-            "type": "string",
-            "default": "application/json"
-        },
-        "submissionSchema": {
-            "description": "Schema describing the data to submit along with the request",
-            "allOf": [ { "$ref": "hyper-schema#" } ]
-        }
-    }
-}
diff --git a/draft-06/links b/draft-06/links
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..e5b9b959
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-06/links
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-06/links.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-06/schema b/draft-06/schema
deleted file mode 100644
index 621cc510..00000000
--- a/draft-06/schema
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,150 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-06/schema#",
-    "$id": "http://json-schema.org/draft-06/schema#",
-    "title": "Core schema meta-schema",
-    "definitions": {
-        "schemaArray": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "minItems": 1,
-            "items": { "$ref": "#" }
-        },
-        "nonNegativeInteger": {
-            "type": "integer",
-            "minimum": 0
-        },
-        "nonNegativeIntegerDefault0": {
-            "allOf": [
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/nonNegativeInteger" },
-                { "default": 0 }
-            ]
-        },
-        "simpleTypes": {
-            "enum": [
-                "array",
-                "boolean",
-                "integer",
-                "null",
-                "number",
-                "object",
-                "string"
-            ]
-        },
-        "stringArray": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "items": { "type": "string" },
-            "uniqueItems": true,
-            "default": []
-        }
-    },
-    "type": ["object", "boolean"],
-    "properties": {
-        "$id": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "uri-reference"
-        },
-        "$schema": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "uri"
-        },
-        "$ref": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "uri-reference"
-        },
-        "title": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "description": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "default": {},
-        "multipleOf": {
-            "type": "number",
-            "exclusiveMinimum": 0
-        },
-        "maximum": {
-            "type": "number"
-        },
-        "exclusiveMaximum": {
-            "type": "number"
-        },
-        "minimum": {
-            "type": "number"
-        },
-        "exclusiveMinimum": {
-            "type": "number"
-        },
-        "maxLength": { "$ref": "#/definitions/nonNegativeInteger" },
-        "minLength": { "$ref": "#/definitions/nonNegativeIntegerDefault0" },
-        "pattern": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "regex"
-        },
-        "additionalItems": { "$ref": "#" },
-        "items": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                { "$ref": "#" },
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" }
-            ],
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "maxItems": { "$ref": "#/definitions/nonNegativeInteger" },
-        "minItems": { "$ref": "#/definitions/nonNegativeIntegerDefault0" },
-        "uniqueItems": {
-            "type": "boolean",
-            "default": false
-        },
-        "contains": { "$ref": "#" },
-        "maxProperties": { "$ref": "#/definitions/nonNegativeInteger" },
-        "minProperties": { "$ref": "#/definitions/nonNegativeIntegerDefault0" },
-        "required": { "$ref": "#/definitions/stringArray" },
-        "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" },
-        "definitions": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" },
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "properties": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" },
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "patternProperties": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" },
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "dependencies": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": {
-                "anyOf": [
-                    { "$ref": "#" },
-                    { "$ref": "#/definitions/stringArray" }
-                ]
-            }
-        },
-        "propertyNames": { "$ref": "#" },
-        "const": {},
-        "enum": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "minItems": 1,
-            "uniqueItems": true
-        },
-        "type": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/simpleTypes" },
-                {
-                    "type": "array",
-                    "items": { "$ref": "#/definitions/simpleTypes" },
-                    "minItems": 1,
-                    "uniqueItems": true
-                }
-            ]
-        },
-        "format": { "type": "string" },
-        "allOf": { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" },
-        "anyOf": { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" },
-        "oneOf": { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" },
-        "not": { "$ref": "#" }
-    },
-    "default": {}
-}
diff --git a/draft-06/schema b/draft-06/schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..79d1c766
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-06/schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-06/schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-07/README.md b/draft-07/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..bea80df7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-07/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+layout: default
+---
+
+# Draft-07 Release Notes
+
+- [JSON Schema Release Notes](json-schema-release-notes.html)
+- [JSON Hyper-Schema Release Notes](json-hyper-schema-release-notes.html)
+
+Note that the draft-handrews-\*-00 versions of JSON Hyper-Schema and Relative JSON Pointer had confusing bugs, and have been replaced by draft-handrews-\*-01 versions.  The -00 versions may be found in the [obsolete](obsolete) directory.
diff --git a/draft-07/hyper-schema b/draft-07/hyper-schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..27b5ade1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-07/hyper-schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-07/hyper-schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-07/hyper-schema-output b/draft-07/hyper-schema-output
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..b00936bb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-07/hyper-schema-output
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-07/hyper-schema-output.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-07/json-hyper-schema-release-notes.md b/draft-07/json-hyper-schema-release-notes.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..8484ca38
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-07/json-hyper-schema-release-notes.md
@@ -0,0 +1,127 @@
+---
+title: JSON Hyper-Schema Draft-07 Release Notes
+layout: page
+---
+
+JSON Hyper-Schema [draft-07](json-schema-hypermedia.html) completes the
+reworking of Hyper-Schema that was begun in draft-06.
+
+Hyper-Schema is now solely focused on adding hyperlinks to JSON documents,
+so keywords used for other purposes (`readOnly` and `media`) have been
+[moved to the Validation specification](json-schema-release-notes.html).
+
+The [new draft](json-schema-hypermedia.html) has been completely rewritten
+for clarity and accessibility, so it is best to simply approach it as a new
+proposal.  We hope to add tutorial material at some point, but that is
+outside of the scope of release notes.
+
+However, if you wish to migrate from an earlier draft, this page is a guide
+to the key _changes_.  The additions, which are much more numerous,
+should be learned directly from the new specification until we can provide
+tutorials.
+
+_Note that draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-00 has been replaced
+by draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-01 in order to fix confusing
+bugs.  The newer -01 draft is **still considered to be draft-07**.
+It now references the draft-07 meta-schema with the correct URI, among
+other typo fixes.  There are no funcitonal changes between -00 and -01._
+
+* TOC
+{:toc}
+
+
+### Migrating from draft-06
+
+No draft-06 features were changed, although two keywords were renamed
+for clarity and consistency:
+
+* `mediaType` -> `targetMediaType`
+* `submissionEncType` -> `submissionMediaType`
+
+Additionally, `hrefSchema` was somewhat confusing, so a great deal
+more effort has gone into explaining how it works, and how it fits
+into the overall link resolution process.
+
+### Migrating from draft-05
+
+See the [draft-06 release notes](../draft-06/json-hyper-schema-migration-faq.html)
+for information related to draft-05.
+
+### Migrating from draft-04
+
+In the ideal draft-07 world, links and
+[operations](https://json-schema.org/draft-07/json-schema-hypermedia.html#rfc.section.3.1)
+are not the same concept.  Using terminology borrowed from
+[OpenAPI's Operation Object](https://github.com/OAI/OpenAPI-Specification/blob/master/versions/3.0.0.md#operationObject), HTTP methods are operations, and each
+link (as described by a single LDO) can support multiple operations.
+
+Therefore, unlike draft-04, draft-07 hyper-schemas
+[do not have separate links for each operation](json-schema-hypermedia.html#rfc.section.8.1).  This makes the migration guidelines below approximate at best.
+
+For a more detailed explanation of how draft-04's `method` and `targetSchema`
+were typically used to create single-operation links, and how that poses
+a challenge for migrating to multi-operation links, see the
+[draft-06 release notes](../draft-06/json-hyper-schema-migration-faq.html).
+Those release notes also explain what happened to the link relations defined
+in draft-04 and subsequently removed, and the changes in how the instance
+base URI is determined.
+
+Beyond those changes, a minimal migration would be something along the
+following lines, although the
+[intentional lack of explicit response descriptions](json-schema-hypermedia.html#rfc.appendix.A.2)
+(except when the response happens to be a representation of the target resource)
+means that some uses of draft-04 do not have direct analogues in draft-07.
+
+Any keyword not mentioned in a list below is unchanged for that link operation.
+
+#### GET
+
+* `"method": "GET"` -> `"targetHints": {"allow": ["GET"]}`
+* `mediaType` -> `targetMediaType`
+* `schema` -> `hrefSchema` with parameters added to `href`
+* `encType` -> drop if `application/x-www-form-urlencoded`, contact the mailing list otherwise
+
+#### PUT
+
+If you have a PUT link where `schema`/`encType` differ from
+`targetSchema`/`mediaType`, where `targetSchema`/`mediaType`
+describe a non-representation response, then those fields do
+not have a direct replacement.
+
+* `"method": "PUT"` -> `"targetHints": {"allow": ["PUT"]}`
+* `schema` -> `targetSchema`
+* `encType` -> `targetMediaType`
+
+#### DELETE
+
+DELETE does not take a request payload, so `schema` and `encType`
+should be unused.  If `targetSchema` and `mediaType` were being
+used for a response other than the just-deleted resource's representation,
+then they do not have a direct replacement.
+
+* `"method": "DELETE"` -> `"targetHints": {"allow": ["DELETE"]}`
+* `mediaType` -> `targetMediaType` (if describing the representation)
+
+#### POST
+
+In most cases, the response of a POST is **not** a representation of the
+target resource, but rather some sort of result or status of whatever
+the POST attempted to do.  Therefore `targetSchema` and `mediaType`
+should almost certainly be dropped.  Other than that:
+
+* `"method": "POST"` -> `"targetHints": {"allow": ["POST"]}`
+* `schema` -> `submissionSchema`
+* `encType` -> `submissionMediaType`
+
+#### PATCH
+
+It was never entirely clear how to model a proper PATCH (that uses
+a patch media type rather than `application/json` in the request) in Hyper-Schema.
+One option was to treat it identically to PUT except with the patch media type
+in `encType`.  Assuming that approach (and the same `taregetSchema`/`mediaType`
+caveats as for PUT):
+
+* `"method": "PATCH"` -> `"targetHints": {"allow": ["PATCH"]}`
+* `schema` -> `targetSchema`
+* `"encType": "..."` -> `"targetHints": {"accept-patch": "..."}`
+
diff --git a/draft-07/json-schema-core.html b/draft-07/json-schema-core.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..23e22842
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-07/json-schema-core.html
@@ -0,0 +1,1145 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
+  "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
+<head profile="http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/">
+  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" />
+
+  <title>JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents</title>
+
+  <style type="text/css" title="Xml2Rfc (sans serif)">
+  /*<![CDATA[*/
+	  a {
+	  text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+      /* info code from SantaKlauss at http://www.madaboutstyle.com/tooltip2.html */
+      a.info {
+          /* This is the key. */
+          position: relative;
+          z-index: 24;
+          text-decoration: none;
+      }
+      a.info:hover {
+          z-index: 25;
+          color: #FFF; background-color: #900;
+      }
+      a.info span { display: none; }
+      a.info:hover span.info {
+          /* The span will display just on :hover state. */
+          display: block;
+          position: absolute;
+          font-size: smaller;
+          top: 2em; left: -5em; width: 15em;
+          padding: 2px; border: 1px solid #333;
+          color: #900; background-color: #EEE;
+          text-align: left;
+      }
+	  a.smpl {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  a:hover {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  a:active {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  address {
+	  margin-top: 1em;
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  body {
+	  color: black;
+	  font-family: verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  max-width: 55em;
+	  
+	  }
+	  cite {
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  dd {
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  dl {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.empty {
+	  list-style-type: none;
+	  }
+	  ul.empty li {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  dl p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  dt {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  h1 {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h1.np {
+	  page-break-before: always;
+	  }
+	  h1 a {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  }
+	  h2 {
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 15pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h2 a, h3 a, h4 a, h5 a, h6 a {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  img {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  }
+	  li {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  p {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  pre {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  background-color: lightyellow;
+	  padding: .25em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text2 {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f0f0f0;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.inline {
+	  background-color: white;
+	  padding: 0em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.drawing {
+	  border-style: solid;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  padding: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table.tt {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt td {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full td {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt th {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full th {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers th {
+	  border-style: none none inset none;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.left {
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.right {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.center {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  caption {
+	  caption-side: bottom;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+	  border-spacing: 1px;
+	  width: 95%;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.top {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  td.topnowrap {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap; 
+	  }
+	  table.header td {
+	  background-color: gray;
+	  width: 50%;
+	  }
+	  table.header a {
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.reference {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap;
+	  padding-right: 1em;
+	  }
+	  thead {
+	  display:table-header-group;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc, ul.toc ul {
+	  list-style: none;
+	  margin-left: 1.5em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  padding-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li {
+	  line-height: 150%;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li li {
+	  line-height: normal;
+	  font-weight: normal;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  li.excluded {
+	  font-size: 0pt;
+	  }
+	  ul p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	
+	  .comment {
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	  .center {
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .error {
+	  color: red;
+	  font-style: italic;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .figure {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  }
+	  .filename {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .fn {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .hidden {
+	  display: none;
+	  }
+	  .left {
+	  text-align: left;
+	  }
+	  .right {
+	  text-align: right;
+	  }
+	  .title {
+	  color: #990000;
+	  font-size: 18pt;
+	  line-height: 18pt;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  margin-top: 36pt;
+	  }
+	  .vcardline {
+	  display: block;
+	  }
+	  .warning {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	
+	
+	  @media print {
+	  .noprint {
+		display: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  a {
+		color: black;
+		text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+		width: 90%;
+	  }
+	
+	  td.header {
+		width: 50%;
+		color: black;
+		background-color: white;
+		vertical-align: top;
+		font-size: 12pt;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.toc a::after {
+		content: leader('.') target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.ind li li a {
+		content: target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  .print2col {
+		column-count: 2;
+		-moz-column-count: 2;
+		column-fill: auto;
+	  }
+	  }
+	
+	  @page {
+	  @top-left {
+		   content: "Internet-Draft"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-right {
+		   content: "December 2010"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-center {
+		   content: "Abbreviated Title";
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-left {
+		   content: "Doe"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-center {
+		   content: "Expires June 2011"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-right {
+		   content: "[Page " counter(page) "]"; 
+	  } 
+	  }
+	
+	  @page:first { 
+		@top-left {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-right {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-center {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+	  }
+  /*]]>*/
+  </style>
+
+  <link href="#rfc.toc" rel="Contents"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.1" rel="Chapter" title="1 Introduction"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.2" rel="Chapter" title="2 Conventions and Terminology"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3" rel="Chapter" title="3 Overview"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="3.1 Validation"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="3.2 Annotation"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.3" rel="Chapter" title="3.3 Hypermedia and Linking"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4" rel="Chapter" title="4 Definitions"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.1" rel="Chapter" title="4.1 JSON Document"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.2" rel="Chapter" title="4.2 Instance"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="4.2.1 Instance Data Model"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="4.2.2 Instance Media Types"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.2.3" rel="Chapter" title="4.2.3 Instance Equality"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3" rel="Chapter" title="4.3 JSON Schema Documents"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="4.3.1 JSON Schema Values and Keywords"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="4.3.2 JSON Schema Vocabularies"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3.3" rel="Chapter" title="4.3.3 Root Schema and Subschemas"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.5" rel="Chapter" title="5 Fragment Identifiers"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6" rel="Chapter" title="6 General Considerations"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.1 Range of JSON Values"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.2 Programming Language Independence"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.3 Mathematical Integers"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.4 Extending JSON Schema"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7" rel="Chapter" title="7 The &quot;$schema&quot; Keyword"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8" rel="Chapter" title="8 Base URI and Dereferencing"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1" rel="Chapter" title="8.1 Initial Base URI"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2" rel="Chapter" title="8.2 The &quot;$id&quot; Keyword"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="8.2.1 Identifying the root schema"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="8.2.2 Changing the base URI within a schema file"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2.3" rel="Chapter" title="8.2.3 Location-independent identifiers"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2.4" rel="Chapter" title="8.2.4 Schema identification examples"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.3" rel="Chapter" title="8.3 Schema References With &quot;$ref&quot;"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="8.3.1 Loading a referenced schema"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="8.3.2 Dereferencing"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9" rel="Chapter" title="9 Comments With &quot;$comment&quot;"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10" rel="Chapter" title="10 Usage for Hypermedia"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.1" rel="Chapter" title="10.1 Linking to a Schema"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.2" rel="Chapter" title="10.2 Identifying a Schema via a Media Type Parameter"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.3" rel="Chapter" title="10.3 Usage Over HTTP"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.11" rel="Chapter" title="11 Security Considerations"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.12" rel="Chapter" title="12 IANA Considerations"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.1" rel="Chapter" title="12.1 application/schema+json"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.2" rel="Chapter" title="12.2 application/schema-instance+json"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references" rel="Chapter" title="13 References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references.1" rel="Chapter" title="13.1 Normative References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references.2" rel="Chapter" title="13.2 Informative References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A" rel="Chapter" title="A Acknowledgments"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.B" rel="Chapter" title="B ChangeLog"/>
+<link href="#rfc.authors" rel="Chapter"/>
+
+
+  <meta name="generator" content="xml2rfc version 2.5.1 - http://tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc" />
+  <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" />
+
+  <meta name="dct.creator" content="Wright, A., Ed. and H. Andrews, Ed." />
+  <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-handrews-json-schema-01" />
+  <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2018-3-19" />
+  <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Schema defines the media type &quot;application/schema+json&quot;, a JSON-based format for describing the structure of JSON data.  JSON Schema asserts what a JSON document must look like, ways to extract information from it, and how to interact with it.  The &quot;application/schema-instance+json&quot; media type provides additional feature-rich integration with &quot;application/schema+json&quot; beyond what can be offered for &quot;application/json&quot; documents.  " />
+  <meta name="description" content="JSON Schema defines the media type &quot;application/schema+json&quot;, a JSON-based format for describing the structure of JSON data.  JSON Schema asserts what a JSON document must look like, ways to extract information from it, and how to interact with it.  The &quot;application/schema-instance+json&quot; media type provides additional feature-rich integration with &quot;application/schema+json&quot; beyond what can be offered for &quot;application/json&quot; documents.  " />
+
+</head>
+
+<body>
+
+  <table class="header">
+    <tbody>
+    
+    	<tr>
+  <td class="left">Internet Engineering Task Force</td>
+  <td class="right">A. Wright, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
+  <td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Intended status: Informational</td>
+  <td class="right">H. Andrews, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Expires: September 20, 2018</td>
+  <td class="right">Cloudflare, Inc.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left"></td>
+  <td class="right">March 19, 2018</td>
+</tr>
+
+    	
+    </tbody>
+  </table>
+
+  <p class="title">JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents<br />
+  <span class="filename">draft-handrews-json-schema-01</span></p>
+  
+  <h1 id="rfc.abstract">
+  <a href="#rfc.abstract">Abstract</a>
+</h1>
+<p>JSON Schema defines the media type "application/schema+json", a JSON-based format for describing the structure of JSON data.  JSON Schema asserts what a JSON document must look like, ways to extract information from it, and how to interact with it.  The "application/schema-instance+json" media type provides additional feature-rich integration with "application/schema+json" beyond what can be offered for "application/json" documents.  </p>
+<h1>
+  <a>Note to Readers</a>
+</h1>
+<p>The issues list for this draft can be found at <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues">https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>For additional information, see <span>&lt;</span><a href="http://json-schema.org/">http://json-schema.org/</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>To provide feedback, use this issue tracker, the communication methods listed on the homepage, or email the document editors.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.status">
+  <a href="#rfc.status">Status of This Memo</a>
+</h1>
+<p>This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.</p>
+<p>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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.</p>
+<p>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."</p>
+<p>This Internet-Draft will expire on September 20, 2018.</p>
+<h1 id="rfc.copyrightnotice">
+  <a href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a>
+</h1>
+<p>Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors.  All rights reserved.</p>
+<p>This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://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.</p>
+
+  
+  <hr class="noprint" />
+  <h1 class="np" id="rfc.toc"><a href="#rfc.toc">Table of Contents</a></h1>
+  <ul class="toc">
+
+  	<li>1.   <a href="#rfc.section.1">Introduction</a></li>
+<li>2.   <a href="#rfc.section.2">Conventions and Terminology</a></li>
+<li>3.   <a href="#rfc.section.3">Overview</a></li>
+<ul><li>3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.1">Validation</a></li>
+<li>3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.2">Annotation</a></li>
+<li>3.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.3">Hypermedia and Linking</a></li>
+</ul><li>4.   <a href="#rfc.section.4">Definitions</a></li>
+<ul><li>4.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.1">JSON Document</a></li>
+<li>4.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.2">Instance</a></li>
+<ul><li>4.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.2.1">Instance Data Model</a></li>
+<li>4.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.2.2">Instance Media Types</a></li>
+<li>4.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.2.3">Instance Equality</a></li>
+</ul><li>4.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3">JSON Schema Documents</a></li>
+<ul><li>4.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3.1">JSON Schema Values and Keywords</a></li>
+<li>4.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3.2">JSON Schema Vocabularies</a></li>
+<li>4.3.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3.3">Root Schema and Subschemas</a></li>
+</ul></ul><li>5.   <a href="#rfc.section.5">Fragment Identifiers</a></li>
+<li>6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6">General Considerations</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1">Range of JSON Values</a></li>
+<li>6.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2">Programming Language Independence</a></li>
+<li>6.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3">Mathematical Integers</a></li>
+<li>6.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4">Extending JSON Schema</a></li>
+</ul><li>7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7">The "$schema" Keyword</a></li>
+<li>8.   <a href="#rfc.section.8">Base URI and Dereferencing</a></li>
+<ul><li>8.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1">Initial Base URI</a></li>
+<li>8.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2">The "$id" Keyword</a></li>
+<ul><li>8.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2.1">Identifying the root schema</a></li>
+<li>8.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2.2">Changing the base URI within a schema file</a></li>
+<li>8.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2.3">Location-independent identifiers</a></li>
+<li>8.2.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2.4">Schema identification examples</a></li>
+</ul><li>8.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.3">Schema References With "$ref"</a></li>
+<ul><li>8.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.3.1">Loading a referenced schema</a></li>
+<li>8.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.3.2">Dereferencing</a></li>
+</ul></ul><li>9.   <a href="#rfc.section.9">Comments With "$comment"</a></li>
+<li>10.   <a href="#rfc.section.10">Usage for Hypermedia</a></li>
+<ul><li>10.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.1">Linking to a Schema</a></li>
+<li>10.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.2">Identifying a Schema via a Media Type Parameter</a></li>
+<li>10.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.3">Usage Over HTTP</a></li>
+</ul><li>11.   <a href="#rfc.section.11">Security Considerations</a></li>
+<li>12.   <a href="#rfc.section.12">IANA Considerations</a></li>
+<ul><li>12.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.1">application/schema+json</a></li>
+<li>12.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.2">application/schema-instance+json</a></li>
+</ul><li>13.   <a href="#rfc.references">References</a></li>
+<ul><li>13.1.   <a href="#rfc.references.1">Normative References</a></li>
+<li>13.2.   <a href="#rfc.references.2">Informative References</a></li>
+</ul><li>Appendix A.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Acknowledgments</a></li>
+<li>Appendix B.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.B">ChangeLog</a></li>
+<li><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a></li>
+
+
+  </ul>
+
+  <h1 id="rfc.section.1"><a href="#rfc.section.1">1.</a> Introduction</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.1">JSON Schema is a JSON media type for defining the structure of JSON data. JSON Schema is intended to define validation, documentation, hyperlink navigation, and interaction control of JSON data.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.2">This specification defines JSON Schema core terminology and mechanisms, including pointing to another JSON Schema by reference, dereferencing a JSON Schema reference, and specifying the vocabulary being used.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.3">Other specifications define the vocabularies that perform assertions about validation, linking, annotation, navigation, and interaction.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.2"><a href="#rfc.section.2">2.</a> Conventions and Terminology</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.1">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 <a href="#RFC2119">RFC 2119</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC2119]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.2">The terms "JSON", "JSON text", "JSON value", "member", "element", "object", "array", "number", "string", "boolean", "true", "false", and "null" in this document are to be interpreted as defined in <a href="#RFC7159">RFC 7159</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7159]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3"><a href="#rfc.section.3">3.</a> Overview</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.1">This document proposes a new media type "application/schema+json" to identify a JSON Schema for describing JSON data.  It also proposes a further optional media type, "application/schema-instance+json", to provide additional integration features.  JSON Schemas are themselves JSON documents.  This, and related specifications, define keywords allowing authors to describe JSON data in several ways.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.1"><a href="#rfc.section.3.1">3.1.</a> Validation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.1">JSON Schema describes the structure of a JSON document (for instance, required properties and length limitations).  Applications can use this information to validate instances (check that constraints are met), or inform interfaces to collect user input such that the constraints are satisfied.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.2">Validation behaviour and keywords are specified in <a href="#json-schema-validation">a separate document</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema-validation]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.2"><a href="#rfc.section.3.2">3.2.</a> Annotation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.1">JSON Schema can annotate an instance with information, whenever the instance validates against the schema object containing the annotation, and all of its parent schema objects.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.2">Detailed annotation behavior, along with a small set of basic annotation keywords are defined in <a href="#json-schema-validation">the validation specification</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema-validation]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.3"><a href="#rfc.section.3.3">3.3.</a> Hypermedia and Linking</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.3.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema describes the hypertext structure of a JSON document.  This includes link relations from the instance to other resources, interpretation of instances as multimedia data, and submission data required to use an API.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.3.p.2">Hyper-schema behaviour and keywords are specified in <a href="#json-hyper-schema">a separate document</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-hyper-schema]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4"><a href="#rfc.section.4">4.</a> Definitions</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.1"><a href="#rfc.section.4.1">4.1.</a> JSON Document</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.1">A JSON document is an information resource (series of octets) described by the application/json media type.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.2">In JSON Schema, the terms "JSON document", "JSON text", and "JSON value" are interchangeable because of the data model it defines.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.3">JSON Schema is only defined over JSON documents. However, any document or memory structure that can be parsed into or processed according to the JSON Schema data model can be interpreted against a JSON Schema, including media types like <a href="#RFC7049">CBOR</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7049]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.2"><a href="#rfc.section.4.2">4.2.</a> Instance</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.p.1">A JSON document to which a schema is applied is known as an "instance".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.2.1"><a href="#rfc.section.4.2.1">4.2.1.</a> Instance Data Model</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.1.p.1">JSON Schema interprets documents according to a data model. A JSON value interpreted according to this data model is called an "instance".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.1.p.2">An instance has one of six primitive types, and a range of possible values depending on the type: </p>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>null:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A JSON "null" production</dd>
+  <dt>boolean:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A "true" or "false" value, from the JSON "true" or "false" productions</dd>
+  <dt>object:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">An unordered set of properties mapping a string to an instance, from the JSON "object" production</dd>
+  <dt>array:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">An ordered list of instances, from the JSON "array" production</dd>
+  <dt>number:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">An arbitrary-precision, base-10 decimal number value, from the JSON "number" production</dd>
+  <dt>string:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A string of Unicode code points, from the JSON "string" production</dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.1.p.3">Whitespace and formatting concerns, including different lexical representations of numbers that are equal within the data model, are thus outside the scope of JSON Schema.  JSON Schema <a href="#vocabulary">vocabularies</a> <cite title="NONE">[vocabulary]</cite> that wish to work with such differences in lexical representations SHOULD define keywords to precisely interpret formatted strings within the data model rather than relying on having the original JSON representation Unicode characters available.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.1.p.4">Since an object cannot have two properties with the same key, behavior for a JSON document that tries to define two properties (the "member" production) with the same key (the "string" production) in a single object is undefined.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.1.p.5">Note that JSON Schema vocabularies are free to define their own extended type system.  This should not be confused with the core data model types defined here.  As an example, "integer" is a reasonable type for a vocabulary to define as a value for a keyword, but the data model makes no distinction between integers and other numbers.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.2.2"><a href="#rfc.section.4.2.2">4.2.2.</a> Instance Media Types</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.2.p.1">JSON Schema is designed to fully work with "application/json" documents, as well as media types using the "+json" structured syntax suffix.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.2.p.2">Some functionality that is useful for working with schemas is defined by each media type, namely media type parameters and URI fragment identifier syntax and semantics.  These features are useful in content negotiation and in calculating URIs for specific locations within an instance, respectively.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.2.p.3">This specification defines the "application/schema-instance+json" media type in order to allow instance authors to take full advantage of parameters and fragment identifiers for these purposes.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.2.3"><a href="#rfc.section.4.2.3">4.2.3.</a> Instance Equality</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.3.p.1">Two JSON instances are said to be equal if and only if they are of the same type and have the same value according to the data model. Specifically, this means: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+  <li>both are null; or</li>
+  <li>both are true; or</li>
+  <li>both are false; or</li>
+  <li>both are strings, and are the same codepoint-for-codepoint; or</li>
+  <li>both are numbers, and have the same mathematical value; or</li>
+  <li>both are arrays, and have an equal value item-for-item; or</li>
+  <li>both are objects, and each property in one has exactly one property with a key equal to the other's, and that other property has an equal value.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.3.p.2">Implied in this definition is that arrays must be the same length, objects must have the same number of members, properties in objects are unordered, there is no way to define multiple properties with the same key, and mere formatting differences (indentation, placement of commas, trailing zeros) are insignificant.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3"><a href="#rfc.section.4.3">4.3.</a> JSON Schema Documents</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.p.1">A JSON Schema document, or simply a schema, is a JSON document used to describe an instance.  A schema is itself interpreted as an instance, but SHOULD always be given the media type "application/schema+json" rather than "application/schema-instance+json".  The "application/schema+json" media type is defined to offer a superset of the media type parameter and fragment identifier syntax and semantics provided by "application/schema-instance+json".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3.1"><a href="#rfc.section.4.3.1">4.3.1.</a> JSON Schema Values and Keywords</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.1">A JSON Schema MUST be an object or a boolean.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.2">Object properties that are applied to the instance are called keywords, or schema keywords.  Broadly speaking, keywords fall into one or both of two categories: </p>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>assertions:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">produce a boolean result when applied to an instance </dd>
+  <dt>annotations:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">attach information to an instance for application use </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.3">Keywords may fall into either or both categories.  Extension keywords, meaning those defined outside of this document and its companions, are free to define other behaviors as well.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.4">The boolean schema values "true" and "false" are trivial assertions that always return themselves regardless of the instance value.  As an example, in terms of the validation vocabulary, boolean schemas are equivalent to the following behaviors: </p>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>true:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">Always passes validation, as if the empty schema {} </dd>
+  <dt>false:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">Always fails validation, as if the schema { "not":{} } </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.5">A JSON Schema MAY contain properties which are not schema keywords.  Unknown keywords SHOULD be ignored.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.6">An empty schema is a JSON Schema with no properties, or only unknown properties.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3.2"><a href="#rfc.section.4.3.2">4.3.2.</a> <a href="#vocabulary" id="vocabulary">JSON Schema Vocabularies</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.2.p.1">A JSON Schema vocabulary is a set of keywords defined for a particular purpose.  The vocabulary specifies the meaning of its keywords as assertions, annotations, and/or any vocabulary-defined keyword category.  The two companion standards to this document each define a vocabulary: One for instance validation, and one for hypermedia annotations.  Vocabularies are the primary mechanism for extensibility within the JSON Schema media type.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.2.p.2">Vocabularies may be defined by any entity.  Vocabulary authors SHOULD take care to avoid keyword name collisions if the vocabulary is intended for broad use, and potentially combined with other vocabularies.  JSON Schema does not provide any formal namespacing system, but also does not constrain keyword names, allowing for any number of namespacing approaches.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.2.p.3">Vocabularies may build on each other, such as by defining the behavior of their keywords with respect to the behavior of keywords from another vocabulary, or by using a keyword from another vocabulary with a restricted or expanded set of acceptable values.  Not all such vocabulary re-use will result in a new vocabulary that is compatible with the vocabulary on which it is built.  Vocabulary authors SHOULD clearly document what level of compatibility, if any, is expected.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.2.p.4">A schema that itself describes a schema is called a meta-schema.  Meta-schemas are used to validate JSON Schemas and specify which vocabulary it is using.  <a id="CREF1" class="info">[CREF1]<span class="info">Currently, only a single meta-schema may be specified per schema, meaning that in order to use multiple vocabularies, a meta-schema must be written that encompasses all of them.  The hyper-schema meta-schema is an example of this, as it encompasses the validation vocabulary as well as the hypermedia vocabulary.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3.3"><a href="#rfc.section.4.3.3">4.3.3.</a> Root Schema and Subschemas</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.3.p.1">The root schema is the schema that comprises the entire JSON document in question.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.3.p.2">Some keywords take schemas themselves, allowing JSON Schemas to be nested: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "title": "root",
+    "items": {
+        "title": "array item"
+    }
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.3.p.3">In this example document, the schema titled "array item" is a subschema, and the schema titled "root" is the root schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.3.p.4">As with the root schema, a subschema is either an object or a boolean.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5"><a href="#rfc.section.5">5.</a> <a href="#fragments" id="fragments">Fragment Identifiers</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.1">In accordance with section 3.1 of <a href="#RFC6839">[RFC6839]</a>, the syntax and semantics of fragment identifiers specified for any +json media type SHOULD be as specified for "application/json".  (At publication of this document, there is no fragment identification syntax defined for "application/json".) </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.2">Additionally, the "application/schema+json" media type supports two fragment identifier structures: plain names and JSON Pointers.  The "application/schema-instance+json" media type supports one fragment identifier structure: JSON Pointers.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.3">The use of JSON Pointers as URI fragment identifiers is described in <a href="#RFC6901">RFC 6901</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite>.  For "application/schema+json", which supports two fragment identifier syntaxes, fragment identifiers matching the JSON Pointer syntax, including the empty string, MUST be interpreted as JSON Pointer fragment identifiers.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.4">Per the W3C's <a href="#W3C.WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025">best practices for fragment identifiers</a> <cite title="NONE">[W3C.WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025]</cite>, plain name fragment identifiers in "application/schema+json" are reserved for referencing locally named schemas.  All fragment identifiers that do not match the JSON Pointer syntax MUST be interpreted as plain name fragment identifiers.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.5">Defining and referencing a plain name fragment identifier within an "application/schema+json" document are specified in the <a href="#id-keyword">"$id" keyword</a> <cite title="NONE">[id-keyword]</cite> section.  </p>
+<p/>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6"><a href="#rfc.section.6">6.</a> General Considerations</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.1">6.1.</a> Range of JSON Values</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.p.1">An instance may be any valid JSON value as defined by <a href="#RFC7159">JSON</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7159]</cite>.  JSON Schema imposes no restrictions on type: JSON Schema can describe any JSON value, including, for example, null.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2">6.2.</a> <a href="#language" id="language">Programming Language Independence</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.p.1">JSON Schema is programming language agnostic, and supports the full range of values described in the data model.  Be aware, however, that some languages and JSON parsers may not be able to represent in memory the full range of values describable by JSON.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.3">6.3.</a> <a href="#integers" id="integers">Mathematical Integers</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.p.1">Some programming languages and parsers use different internal representations for floating point numbers than they do for integers.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.p.2">For consistency, integer JSON numbers SHOULD NOT be encoded with a fractional part.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4"><a href="#rfc.section.6.4">6.4.</a> Extending JSON Schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.1">Implementations MAY define additional keywords to JSON Schema. Save for explicit agreement, schema authors SHALL NOT expect these additional keywords to be supported by peer implementations. Implementations SHOULD ignore keywords they do not support.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.2">Authors of extensions to JSON Schema are encouraged to write their own meta-schemas, which extend the existing meta-schemas using "allOf".  This extended meta-schema SHOULD be referenced using the "$schema" keyword, to allow tools to follow the correct behaviour.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.3">Note that the recursive nature of meta-schemas requires re-defining recursive keywords in the extended meta-schema, as can be seen in the JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7"><a href="#rfc.section.7">7.</a> The "$schema" Keyword</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.1">The "$schema" keyword is both used as a JSON Schema version identifier and the location of a resource which is itself a JSON Schema, which describes any schema written for this particular version.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.2">The value of this keyword MUST be a <a href="#RFC3986">URI</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC3986]</cite> (containing a scheme) and this URI MUST be normalized.  The current schema MUST be valid against the meta-schema identified by this URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.3">If this URI identifies a retrievable resource, that resource SHOULD be of media type "application/schema+json".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.4">The "$schema" keyword SHOULD be used in a root schema.  It MUST NOT appear in subschemas.  </p>
+<p><a id="CREF2" class="info">[CREF2]<span class="info">Using multiple "$schema" keywords in the same document would imply that the vocabulary and therefore behavior can change within a document.  This would necessitate resolving a number of implementation concerns that have not yet been clearly defined.  So, while the pattern of using "$schema" only in root schemas is likely to remain the best practice for schema authoring, implementation behavior is subject to be revised or liberalized in future drafts.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.6">Values for this property are defined in other documents and by other parties.  JSON Schema implementations SHOULD implement support for current and previous published drafts of JSON Schema vocabularies as deemed reasonable.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8"><a href="#rfc.section.8">8.</a> Base URI and Dereferencing</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.1">To differentiate between schemas in a vast ecosystem, schemas are identified by <a href="#RFC3986">URI</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC3986]</cite>, and can embed references to other schemas by specifying their URI.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1"><a href="#rfc.section.8.1">8.1.</a> Initial Base URI</h1>
+<p><a href="#RFC3986">RFC3986 Section 5.1</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC3986]</cite> defines how to determine the default base URI of a document.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.2">Informatively, the initial base URI of a schema is the URI at which it was found, or a suitable substitute URI if none is known.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2"><a href="#rfc.section.8.2">8.2.</a> <a href="#id-keyword" id="id-keyword">The "$id" Keyword</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.1">The "$id" keyword defines a URI for the schema, and the base URI that other URI references within the schema are resolved against.  A subschema's "$id" is resolved against the base URI of its parent schema.  If no parent sets an explicit base with "$id", the base URI is that of the entire document, as determined per <a href="#RFC3986">RFC 3986 section 5</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC3986]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.2">If present, the value for this keyword MUST be a string, and MUST represent a valid <a href="#RFC3986">URI-reference</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC3986]</cite>.  This value SHOULD be normalized, and SHOULD NOT be an empty fragment &lt;#&gt; or an empty string &lt;&gt;.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.1"><a href="#rfc.section.8.2.1">8.2.1.</a> Identifying the root schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.1.p.1">The root schema of a JSON Schema document SHOULD contain an "$id" keyword with an <a href="#RFC3986">absolute-URI</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC3986]</cite> (containing a scheme, but no fragment), or this absolute URI but with an empty fragment.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.2"><a href="#rfc.section.8.2.2">8.2.2.</a> Changing the base URI within a schema file</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.1">When an "$id" sets the base URI, the object containing that "$id" and all of its subschemas can be identified by using a JSON Pointer fragment starting from that location.  This is true even of subschemas that further change the base URI.  Therefore, a single subschema may be accessible by multiple URIs, each consisting of base URI declared in the subschema or a parent, along with a JSON Pointer fragment identifying the path from the schema object that declares the base to the subschema being identified.  Examples of this are shown in section <a href="#idExamples">8.2.4</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.3"><a href="#rfc.section.8.2.3">8.2.3.</a> Location-independent identifiers</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.p.1">Using JSON Pointer fragments requires knowledge of the structure of the schema.  When writing schema documents with the intention to provide re-usable schemas, it may be preferable to use a plain name fragment that is not tied to any particular structural location.  This allows a subschema to be relocated without requiring JSON Pointer references to be updated.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.p.2">To specify such a subschema identifier, the "$id" keyword is set to a URI reference with a plain name fragment (not a JSON Pointer fragment).  This value MUST begin with the number sign that specifies a fragment ("#"), then a letter ([A-Za-z]), followed by any number of letters, digits ([0-9]), hyphens ("-"), underscores ("_"), colons (":"), or periods (".").  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.p.3">The effect of using a fragment in "$id" that isn't blank or doesn't follow the plain name syntax is undefined.  <a id="CREF3" class="info">[CREF3]<span class="info">How should an "$id" URI reference containing a fragment with other components be interpreted?  There are two cases:  when the other components match the current base URI and when they change the base URI.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.4"><a href="#rfc.section.8.2.4">8.2.4.</a> <a href="#idExamples" id="idExamples">Schema identification examples</a></h1>
+<p>Consider the following schema, which shows "$id" being used to identify the root schema, change the base URI for subschemas, and assign plain name fragments to subschemas: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "$id": "http://example.com/root.json",
+    "definitions": {
+        "A": { "$id": "#foo" },
+        "B": {
+            "$id": "other.json",
+            "definitions": {
+                "X": { "$id": "#bar" },
+                "Y": { "$id": "t/inner.json" }
+            }
+        },
+        "C": {
+            "$id": "urn:uuid:ee564b8a-7a87-4125-8c96-e9f123d6766f"
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.p.1">The schemas at the following URI-encoded <a href="#RFC6901">JSON Pointers</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite> (relative to the root schema) have the following base URIs, and are identifiable by any listed URI in accordance with Section <a href="#fragments">5</a> above: </p>
+<p/>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt># (document root)</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <dl>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">http://example.com/root.json</dd>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">http://example.com/root.json#</dd>
+    </dl>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>#/definitions/A</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <dl>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">http://example.com/root.json#foo</dd>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">http://example.com/root.json#/definitions/A</dd>
+    </dl>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>#/definitions/B</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <dl>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">http://example.com/other.json</dd>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">http://example.com/other.json#</dd>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">http://example.com/root.json#/definitions/B</dd>
+    </dl>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>#/definitions/B/definitions/X</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <dl>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">http://example.com/other.json#bar</dd>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">http://example.com/other.json#/definitions/X</dd>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">http://example.com/root.json#/definitions/B/definitions/X</dd>
+    </dl>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>#/definitions/B/definitions/Y</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <dl>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">http://example.com/t/inner.json</dd>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">http://example.com/t/inner.json#</dd>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">http://example.com/other.json#/definitions/Y</dd>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">http://example.com/root.json#/definitions/B/definitions/Y</dd>
+    </dl>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>#/definitions/C</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <dl>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">urn:uuid:ee564b8a-7a87-4125-8c96-e9f123d6766f</dd>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">urn:uuid:ee564b8a-7a87-4125-8c96-e9f123d6766f#</dd>
+      <dt></dt>
+      <dd style="margin-left: 8">http://example.com/root.json#/definitions/C</dd>
+    </dl>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.3"><a href="#rfc.section.8.3">8.3.</a> Schema References With "$ref"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.1">The "$ref" keyword is used to reference a schema, and provides the ability to validate recursive structures through self-reference.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.2">An object schema with a "$ref" property MUST be interpreted as a "$ref" reference.  The value of the "$ref" property MUST be a URI Reference.  Resolved against the current URI base, it identifies the URI of a schema to use.  All other properties in a "$ref" object MUST be ignored.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.3">The URI is not a network locator, only an identifier. A schema need not be downloadable from the address if it is a network-addressable URL, and implementations SHOULD NOT assume they should perform a network operation when they encounter a network-addressable URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.4">A schema MUST NOT be run into an infinite loop against a schema. For example, if two schemas "#alice" and "#bob" both have an "allOf" property that refers to the other, a naive validator might get stuck in an infinite recursive loop trying to validate the instance.  Schemas SHOULD NOT make use of infinite recursive nesting like this; the behavior is undefined.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.3.1"><a href="#rfc.section.8.3.1">8.3.1.</a> Loading a referenced schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.1.p.1">The use of URIs to identify remote schemas does not necessarily mean anything is downloaded, but instead JSON Schema implementations SHOULD understand ahead of time which schemas they will be using, and the URIs that identify them.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.1.p.2">When schemas are downloaded, for example by a generic user-agent that doesn't know until runtime which schemas to download, see <a href="#hypermedia">Usage for Hypermedia</a> <cite title="NONE">[hypermedia]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.1.p.3">Implementations SHOULD be able to associate arbitrary URIs with an arbitrary schema and/or automatically associate a schema's "$id"-given URI, depending on the trust that the validator has in the schema.  Such URIs and schemas can be supplied to an implementation prior to processing instances, or may be noted within a schema document as it is processed, producing associations as shown in section <a href="#idExamples">8.2.4</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.1.p.4">A schema MAY (and likely will) have multiple URIs, but there is no way for a URI to identify more than one schema. When multiple schemas try to identify as the same URI, validators SHOULD raise an error condition.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.3.2"><a href="#rfc.section.8.3.2">8.3.2.</a> Dereferencing</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.2.p.1">Schemas can be identified by any URI that has been given to them, including a JSON Pointer or their URI given directly by "$id".  In all cases, dereferencing a "$ref" reference involves first resolving its value as a URI reference against the current base URI per <a href="#RFC3986">RFC 3986</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC3986]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.2.p.2">If the resulting URI identifies a schema within the current document, or within another schema document that has been made available to the implementation, then that schema SHOULD be used automatically.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.2.p.3">For example, consider this schema: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "$id": "http://example.net/root.json",
+    "items": {
+        "type": "array",
+        "items": { "$ref": "#item" }
+    },
+    "definitions": {
+        "single": {
+            "$id": "#item",
+            "type": "object",
+            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "other.json" }
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.2.p.4">When an implementation encounters the &lt;#/definitions/single&gt; schema, it resolves the "$id" URI reference against the current base URI to form &lt;http://example.net/root.json#item&gt;.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.2.p.5">When an implementation then looks inside the &lt;#/items&gt; schema, it encounters the &lt;#item&gt; reference, and resolves this to &lt;http://example.net/root.json#item&gt;, which it has seen defined in this same document and can therefore use automatically.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.2.p.6">When an implementation encounters the reference to "other.json", it resolves this to &lt;http://example.net/other.json&gt;, which is not defined in this document.  If a schema with that identifier has otherwise been supplied to the implementation, it can also be used automatically.  <a id="CREF4" class="info">[CREF4]<span class="info">What should implementations do when the referenced schema is not known? Are there circumstances in which automatic network dereferencing is allowed?  A same origin policy?  A user-configurable option?  In the case of an evolving API described by Hyper-Schema, it is expected that new schemas will be added to the system dynamically, so placing an absolute requirement of pre-loading schema documents is not feasible.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9"><a href="#rfc.section.9">9.</a> Comments With "$comment"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.1">This keyword is reserved for comments from schema authors to readers or maintainers of the schema.  The value of this keyword MUST be a string. Implementations MUST NOT present this string to end users.  Tools for editing schemas SHOULD support displaying and editing this keyword.  The value of this keyword MAY be used in debug or error output which is intended for developers making use of schemas.  Schema vocabularies SHOULD allow "$comment" within any object containing vocabulary keywords.  Implementations MAY assume "$comment" is allowed unless the vocabulary specifically forbids it.  Vocabularies MUST NOT specify any effect of "$comment" beyond what is described in this specification.  Tools that translate other media types or programming languages to and from application/schema+json MAY choose to convert that media type or programming language's native comments to or from "$comment" values.  The behavior of such translation when both native comments and "$comment" properties are present is implementation-dependent.  Implementations SHOULD treat "$comment" identically to an unknown extension keyword.  They MAY strip "$comment" values at any point during processing.  In particular, this allows for shortening schemas when the size of deployed schemas is a concern.  Implementations MUST NOT take any other action based on the presence, absence, or contents of "$comment" properties.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10"><a href="#rfc.section.10">10.</a> <a href="#hypermedia" id="hypermedia">Usage for Hypermedia</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.1">JSON has been adopted widely by HTTP servers for automated APIs and robots. This section describes how to enhance processing of JSON documents in a more RESTful manner when used with protocols that support media types and <a href="#RFC8288">Web linking</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC8288]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.1"><a href="#rfc.section.10.1">10.1.</a> Linking to a Schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.1">It is RECOMMENDED that instances described by a schema provide a link to a downloadable JSON Schema using the link relation "describedby", as defined by <a href="#W3C.REC-ldp-20150226">Linked Data Protocol 1.0, section 8.1</a> <cite title="NONE">[W3C.REC-ldp-20150226]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.2">In HTTP, such links can be attached to any response using the <a href="#RFC8288">Link header</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC8288]</cite>. An example of such a header would be: </p>
+<pre>
+
+Link: &lt;http://example.com/my-hyper-schema#&gt;; rel="describedby"
+
+                    </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2"><a href="#rfc.section.10.2">10.2.</a> <a href="#parameter" id="parameter">Identifying a Schema via a Media Type Parameter</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.p.1">Media types MAY allow for a "schema" media type parameter, which gives HTTP servers the ability to perform Content-Type Negotiation based on schema.  The media-type parameter MUST be a whitespace-separated list of URIs (i.e. relative references are invalid).  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.p.2">When using the media type application/schema-instance+json, the "schema" parameter MUST be supplied.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.p.3">The schema URI is opaque and SHOULD NOT automatically be dereferenced.  If the implementation does not understand the semantics of the provided schema, the implementation can instead follow the "describedby" links, if any, which may provide information on how to handle the schema.  Since "schema" doesn't necessarily point to a network location, the "describedby" relation is used for linking to a downloadable schema.  However, for simplicity, schema authors should make these URIs point to the same resource when possible.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.p.4">In HTTP, the media-type parameter would be sent inside the Content-Type header: </p>
+<pre>
+
+Content-Type: application/json;
+          schema="http://example.com/my-hyper-schema#"
+
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.p.5">Multiple schemas are whitespace separated: </p>
+<pre>
+
+Content-Type: application/json;
+          schema="http://example.com/alice http://example.com/bob"
+
+                    </pre>
+<p><a id="CREF5" class="info">[CREF5]<span class="info">This paragraph assumes that we can register a "schema" link relation.  Should we instead specify something like "tag:json-schema.org,2017:schema" for now? </span></a> HTTP can also send the "schema" in a Link, though this may impact media-type semantics and Content-Type negotiation if this replaces the media-type parameter entirely: </p>
+<pre>
+
+Link: &lt;/alice&gt;;rel="schema", &lt;/bob&gt;;rel="schema"
+
+                    </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3"><a href="#rfc.section.10.3">10.3.</a> Usage Over HTTP</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.1">When used for hypermedia systems over a network, <a href="#RFC7231">HTTP</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7231]</cite> is frequently the protocol of choice for distributing schemas. Misbehaving clients can pose problems for server maintainers if they pull a schema over the network more frequently than necessary, when it's instead possible to cache a schema for a long period of time.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.2">HTTP servers SHOULD set long-lived caching headers on JSON Schemas.  HTTP clients SHOULD observe caching headers and not re-request documents within their freshness period.  Distributed systems SHOULD make use of a shared cache and/or caching proxy.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+User-Agent: product-name/5.4.1 so-cool-json-schema/1.0.2 curl/7.43.0
+
+                        </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.3">Clients SHOULD set or prepend a User-Agent header specific to the JSON Schema implementation or software product. Since symbols are listed in decreasing order of significance, the JSON Schema library name/version should precede the more generic HTTP library name (if any). For example: </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.4">Clients SHOULD be able to make requests with a "From" header so that server operators can contact the owner of a potentially misbehaving script.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.11"><a href="#rfc.section.11">11.</a> <a href="#security" id="security">Security Considerations</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.1">Both schemas and instances are JSON values. As such, all security considerations defined in <a href="#RFC7159">RFC 7159</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7159]</cite> apply.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.2">Instances and schemas are both frequently written by untrusted third parties, to be deployed on public Internet servers.  Validators should take care that the parsing and validating against schemas doesn't consume excessive system resources.  Validators MUST NOT fall into an infinite loop.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.3">Servers MUST ensure that malicious parties can't change the functionality of existing schemas by uploading a schema with an pre-existing or very similar "$id".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.4">Individual JSON Schema vocabularies are liable to also have their own security considerations. Consult the respective specifications for more information.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.5">Schema authors should take care with "$comment" contents, as a malicious implementation can display them to end-users in violation of a spec, or fail to strip them if such behavior is expected.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.6">A malicious schema author could place executable code or other dangerous material within a "$comment".  Implementations MUST NOT parse or otherwise take action based on "$comment" contents.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12"><a href="#rfc.section.12">12.</a> IANA Considerations</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.1"><a href="#rfc.section.12.1">12.1.</a> application/schema+json</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.1.p.1">The proposed MIME media type for JSON Schema is defined as follows: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+  <li>Type name: application</li>
+  <li>Subtype name: schema+json</li>
+  <li>Required parameters: N/A</li>
+  <li>Encoding considerations: Encoding considerations are identical to those specified for the "application/json" media type.  See <a href="#RFC7159">JSON</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7159]</cite>.  </li>
+  <li>Security considerations: See Section <a href="#security">11</a> above.  </li>
+  <li>Interoperability considerations: See Sections <a href="#language">6.2</a> and <a href="#integers">6.3</a> above.  </li>
+  <li>Fragment identifier considerations: See Section <a href="#fragments">5</a> </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.2"><a href="#rfc.section.12.2">12.2.</a> application/schema-instance+json</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.2.p.1">The proposed MIME media type for JSON Schema Instances that require a JSON Schema-specific media type is defined as follows: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+  <li>Type name: application</li>
+  <li>Subtype name: schema-instance+json</li>
+  <li>Required parameters: <dl><dt>schema:</dt><dd style="margin-left: 8">A non-empty list of space-separated URIs, each identifying a JSON Schema resource.  The instance SHOULD successfully validate against at least one of these schemas.  Non-validating schemas MAY be included for purposes such as allowing clients to make use of older versions of a schema as long as the runtime instance validates against that older version.  </dd></dl><p> </p></li>
+  <li>Encoding considerations: Encoding considerations are identical to those specified for the "application/json" media type.  See <a href="#RFC7159">JSON</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7159]</cite>.  </li>
+  <li>Security considerations: See Section <a href="#security">11</a> above.  </li>
+  <li>Interoperability considerations: See Sections <a href="#language">6.2</a> and <a href="#integers">6.3</a> above.  </li>
+  <li>Fragment identifier considerations: See Section <a href="#fragments">5</a> </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.references"><a href="#rfc.references">13.</a> References</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.1"><a href="#rfc.references.1">13.1.</a> Normative References</h1>
+<table>
+  <tbody>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Bradner, S.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</a>", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC3986">[RFC3986]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Berners-Lee, T.</a>, <a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>L. Masinter</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986">Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax</a>", STD 66, RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC6839">[RFC6839]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Hansen, T.</a> and <a>A. Melnikov</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6839">Additional Media Type Structured Syntax Suffixes</a>", RFC 6839, DOI 10.17487/RFC6839, January 2013.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC6901">[RFC6901]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Bryan, P.</a>, <a>Zyp, K.</a> and <a>M. Nottingham</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6901">JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Pointer</a>", RFC 6901, DOI 10.17487/RFC6901, April 2013.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC7159">[RFC7159]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Bray, T.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7159">The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format</a>", RFC 7159, DOI 10.17487/RFC7159, March 2014.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="W3C.REC-ldp-20150226">[W3C.REC-ldp-20150226]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Speicher, S.</a>, <a>Arwe, J.</a> and <a>A. Malhotra</a>, "<a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/REC-ldp-20150226">Linked Data Platform 1.0</a>", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation REC-ldp-20150226, February 2015.</td>
+    </tr>
+  </tbody>
+</table>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.2"><a href="#rfc.references.2">13.2.</a> Informative References</h1>
+<table>
+  <tbody>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC7049">[RFC7049]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Bormann, C.</a> and <a>P. Hoffman</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7049">Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)</a>", RFC 7049, DOI 10.17487/RFC7049, October 2013.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC7231">[RFC7231]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>J. Reschke</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231">Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content</a>", RFC 7231, DOI 10.17487/RFC7231, June 2014.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC8288">[RFC8288]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Nottingham, M.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8288">Web Linking</a>", RFC 8288, DOI 10.17487/RFC8288, October 2017.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="W3C.WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025">[W3C.WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Tennison, J.</a>, "<a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025">Best Practices for Fragment Identifiers and Media Type Definitions</a>", World Wide Web Consortium LastCall WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025, October 2012.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="json-schema-validation">[json-schema-validation]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Wright, A.</a>, <a title="Cloudflare, Inc.">Andrews, H.</a> and <a>G. Luff</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01">JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01, November 2017.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="json-hyper-schema">[json-hyper-schema]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a title="Cloudflare, Inc.">Andrews, H.</a> and <a>A. Wright</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-01">JSON Hyper-Schema: A Vocabulary for Hypermedia Annotation of JSON</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-01, November 2017.</td>
+    </tr>
+  </tbody>
+</table>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A"><a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Appendix A.</a> Acknowledgments</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.1">Thanks to Gary Court, Francis Galiegue, Kris Zyp, and Geraint Luff for their work on the initial drafts of JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.2">Thanks to Jason Desrosiers, Daniel Perrett, Erik Wilde, Ben Hutton, Evgeny Poberezkin, Brad Bowman, Gowry Sankar, Donald Pipowitch, and Dave Finlay for their submissions and patches to the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.B"><a href="#rfc.appendix.B">Appendix B.</a> ChangeLog</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF6" class="info">[CREF6]<span class="info">This section to be removed before leaving Internet-Draft status.</span></a> </p>
+<p/>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-01</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>This draft is purely a clarification with no functional changes</li>
+      <li>Emphasized annotations as a primary usage of JSON Schema</li>
+      <li>Clarified $id by use cases</li>
+      <li>Exhaustive schema identification examples</li>
+      <li>Replaced "external referencing" with how and when an implementation might know of a schema from another doucment</li>
+      <li>Replaced "internal referencing" with how an implementation should recognized schema identifiers during parsing</li>
+      <li>Dereferencing the former "internal" or "external" references is always the same process</li>
+      <li>Minor formatting improvements</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-00</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Make the concept of a schema keyword vocabulary more clear</li>
+      <li>Note that the concept of "integer" is from a vocabulary, not the data model</li>
+      <li>Classify keywords as assertions or annotations and describe their general behavior</li>
+      <li>Explain the boolean schemas in terms of generalized assertions</li>
+      <li>Reserve "$comment" for non-user-visible notes about the schema</li>
+      <li>Wording improvements around "$id" and fragments</li>
+      <li>Note the challenges of extending meta-schemas with recursive references</li>
+      <li>Add "application/schema-instance+json" media type</li>
+      <li>Recommend a "schema" link relation / parameter instead of "profile"</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-wright-json-schema-01</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Updated intro</li>
+      <li>Allowed for any schema to be a boolean</li>
+      <li>"$schema" SHOULD NOT appear in subschemas, although that may change</li>
+      <li>Changed "id" to "$id"; all core keywords prefixed with "$"</li>
+      <li>Clarify and formalize fragments for application/schema+json</li>
+      <li>Note applicability to formats such as CBOR that can be represented in the JSON data model</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-wright-json-schema-00</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Updated references to JSON</li>
+      <li>Updated references to HTTP</li>
+      <li>Updated references to JSON Pointer</li>
+      <li>Behavior for "id" is now specified in terms of RFC3986</li>
+      <li>Aligned vocabulary usage for URIs with RFC3986</li>
+      <li>Removed reference to draft-pbryan-zyp-json-ref-03</li>
+      <li>Limited use of "$ref" to wherever a schema is expected</li>
+      <li>Added definition of the "JSON Schema data model"</li>
+      <li>Added additional security considerations</li>
+      <li>Defined use of subschema identifiers for "id"</li>
+      <li>Rewrote section on usage with HTTP</li>
+      <li>Rewrote section on usage with rel="describedBy" and rel="profile"</li>
+      <li>Fixed numerous invalid examples</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-zyp-json-schema-04</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Salvaged from draft v3.</li>
+      <li>Split validation keywords into separate document.</li>
+      <li>Split hypermedia keywords into separate document.</li>
+      <li>Initial post-split draft.</li>
+      <li>Mandate the use of JSON Reference, JSON Pointer.</li>
+      <li>Define the role of "id". Define URI resolution scope.</li>
+      <li>Add interoperability considerations.</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-zyp-json-schema-00</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Initial draft.</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.authors">
+  <a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a>
+</h1>
+<div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Austin Wright</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Wright</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:aaa@bzfx.net">aaa@bzfx.net</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Henry Andrews</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Andrews</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline">Cloudflare, Inc.</span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality">San Francisco</span>,  
+		<span class="region">CA</span> 
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline">USA</span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:henry@cloudflare.com">henry@cloudflare.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/draft-07/json-schema-hypermedia.html b/draft-07/json-schema-hypermedia.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..76470132
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-07/json-schema-hypermedia.html
@@ -0,0 +1,1829 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
+  "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
+<head profile="http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/">
+  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" />
+
+  <title>JSON Hyper-Schema: A Vocabulary for Hypermedia Annotation of JSON </title>
+
+  <style type="text/css" title="Xml2Rfc (sans serif)">
+  /*<![CDATA[*/
+	  a {
+	  text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+      /* info code from SantaKlauss at http://www.madaboutstyle.com/tooltip2.html */
+      a.info {
+          /* This is the key. */
+          position: relative;
+          z-index: 24;
+          text-decoration: none;
+      }
+      a.info:hover {
+          z-index: 25;
+          color: #FFF; background-color: #900;
+      }
+      a.info span { display: none; }
+      a.info:hover span.info {
+          /* The span will display just on :hover state. */
+          display: block;
+          position: absolute;
+          font-size: smaller;
+          top: 2em; left: -5em; width: 15em;
+          padding: 2px; border: 1px solid #333;
+          color: #900; background-color: #EEE;
+          text-align: left;
+      }
+	  a.smpl {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  a:hover {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  a:active {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  address {
+	  margin-top: 1em;
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  body {
+	  color: black;
+	  font-family: verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  max-width: 55em;
+	  
+	  }
+	  cite {
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  dd {
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  dl {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.empty {
+	  list-style-type: none;
+	  }
+	  ul.empty li {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  dl p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  dt {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  h1 {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h1.np {
+	  page-break-before: always;
+	  }
+	  h1 a {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  }
+	  h2 {
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 15pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h2 a, h3 a, h4 a, h5 a, h6 a {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  img {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  }
+	  li {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  p {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  pre {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  background-color: lightyellow;
+	  padding: .25em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text2 {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f0f0f0;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.inline {
+	  background-color: white;
+	  padding: 0em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.drawing {
+	  border-style: solid;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  padding: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table.tt {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt td {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full td {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt th {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full th {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers th {
+	  border-style: none none inset none;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.left {
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.right {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.center {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  caption {
+	  caption-side: bottom;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+	  border-spacing: 1px;
+	  width: 95%;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.top {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  td.topnowrap {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap; 
+	  }
+	  table.header td {
+	  background-color: gray;
+	  width: 50%;
+	  }
+	  table.header a {
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.reference {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap;
+	  padding-right: 1em;
+	  }
+	  thead {
+	  display:table-header-group;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc, ul.toc ul {
+	  list-style: none;
+	  margin-left: 1.5em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  padding-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li {
+	  line-height: 150%;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li li {
+	  line-height: normal;
+	  font-weight: normal;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  li.excluded {
+	  font-size: 0pt;
+	  }
+	  ul p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	
+	  .comment {
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	  .center {
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .error {
+	  color: red;
+	  font-style: italic;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .figure {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  }
+	  .filename {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .fn {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .hidden {
+	  display: none;
+	  }
+	  .left {
+	  text-align: left;
+	  }
+	  .right {
+	  text-align: right;
+	  }
+	  .title {
+	  color: #990000;
+	  font-size: 18pt;
+	  line-height: 18pt;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  margin-top: 36pt;
+	  }
+	  .vcardline {
+	  display: block;
+	  }
+	  .warning {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	
+	
+	  @media print {
+	  .noprint {
+		display: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  a {
+		color: black;
+		text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+		width: 90%;
+	  }
+	
+	  td.header {
+		width: 50%;
+		color: black;
+		background-color: white;
+		vertical-align: top;
+		font-size: 12pt;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.toc a::after {
+		content: leader('.') target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.ind li li a {
+		content: target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  .print2col {
+		column-count: 2;
+		-moz-column-count: 2;
+		column-fill: auto;
+	  }
+	  }
+	
+	  @page {
+	  @top-left {
+		   content: "Internet-Draft"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-right {
+		   content: "December 2010"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-center {
+		   content: "Abbreviated Title";
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-left {
+		   content: "Doe"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-center {
+		   content: "Expires June 2011"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-right {
+		   content: "[Page " counter(page) "]"; 
+	  } 
+	  }
+	
+	  @page:first { 
+		@top-left {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-right {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-center {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+	  }
+  /*]]>*/
+  </style>
+
+  <link href="#rfc.toc" rel="Contents"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.1" rel="Chapter" title="1 Introduction"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.2" rel="Chapter" title="2 Notational Conventions"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3" rel="Chapter" title="3 Overview"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="3.1 Terminology"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="3.2 Functionality"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4" rel="Chapter" title="4 Meta-Schemas and Output Schema"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.5" rel="Chapter" title="5 Schema Keywords"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="5.1 base"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.5.2" rel="Chapter" title="5.2 links"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6" rel="Chapter" title="6 Link Description Object"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.1 Link Context"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.1.1 anchor"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.1.2 anchorPointer"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.2 Link Relation Type"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.1 rel"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.2 &quot;self&quot; Links"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.3 &quot;collection&quot; and &quot;item&quot; Links"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.4 Using Extension Relation Types"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.3 Link Target"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.3.1 href"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.4 Adjusting URI Template Resolution"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.1 templatePointers"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.2 templateRequired"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.5 Link Target Attributes"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.1 title"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.2 description"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.3 targetMediaType"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.4 targetSchema"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.5 targetHints"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6" rel="Chapter" title="6.6 Link Input"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.6.1 hrefSchema"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.6.2 headerSchema"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.6.3 Manipulating the Target Resource Representation"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.6.4 Submitting Data for Processing"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7" rel="Chapter" title="7 Implementation Requirements"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.1 Link Discovery and Look-Up"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.2 URI Templating"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.2.1 Populating Template Data From the Instance"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.2.2 Accepting Input for Template Data"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.2.3 Encoding Data as Strings"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.3 Providing Access to LDO Keywords"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.4" rel="Chapter" title="7.4 Requests"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.5" rel="Chapter" title="7.5 Responses"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.6" rel="Chapter" title="7.6 Streaming Parsers"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8" rel="Chapter" title="8 JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1" rel="Chapter" title="8.1 One Link Per Target and Relation Type"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2" rel="Chapter" title="8.2 &quot;targetSchema&quot; and HTTP"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.3" rel="Chapter" title="8.3 HTTP POST and the &quot;submission*&quot; keywords"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.4" rel="Chapter" title="8.4 Optimizing HTTP Discoverability With &quot;targetHints&quot;"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.5" rel="Chapter" title="8.5 Advertising HTTP Features With &quot;headerSchema&quot;"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.6" rel="Chapter" title="8.6 Creating Resources Through Collections"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.7" rel="Chapter" title="8.7 Content Negotiation and Schema Evolution"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9" rel="Chapter" title="9 Examples"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.1" rel="Chapter" title="9.1 Entry Point Links, No Templates"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.2" rel="Chapter" title="9.2 Individually Identified Resources"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.3" rel="Chapter" title="9.3 Submitting a Payload and Accepting URI Input"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.4" rel="Chapter" title="9.4 &quot;anchor&quot;, &quot;base&quot; and URI Template Resolution"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.5" rel="Chapter" title="9.5 Collections"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="9.5.1 Pagination"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.5.2" rel="Chapter" title="9.5.2 Creating the First Item"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10" rel="Chapter" title="10 Security Considerations"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.1" rel="Chapter" title="10.1 Target Attributes"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.2" rel="Chapter" title="10.2 &quot;self&quot; Links"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.11" rel="Chapter" title="11 Acknowledgments"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references" rel="Chapter" title="12 References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references.1" rel="Chapter" title="12.1 Normative References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references.2" rel="Chapter" title="12.2 Informative References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A" rel="Chapter" title="A Using JSON Hyper-Schema in APIs"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A.1" rel="Chapter" title="A.1 Resource Evolution With Hyper-Schema"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A.2" rel="Chapter" title="A.2 Responses and Errors"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A.3" rel="Chapter" title="A.3 Static Analysis of an API's Hyper-Schemas"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.B" rel="Chapter" title="B ChangeLog"/>
+<link href="#rfc.authors" rel="Chapter"/>
+
+
+  <meta name="generator" content="xml2rfc version 2.5.2 - http://tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc" />
+  <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" />
+
+  <meta name="dct.creator" content="Andrews, H., Ed. and A. Wright, Ed." />
+  <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-01" />
+  <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2018-1-19" />
+  <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Schema is a JSON-based format for describing JSON data using various vocabularies.  This document specifies a vocabulary for annotating JSON documents with hyperlinks.  These hyperlinks include attributes describing how to manipulate and interact with remote resources through hypermedia environments such as HTTP, as well as determining whether the link is usable based on the instance value.  The hyperlink serialization format described in this document is also usable independent of JSON Schema.  " />
+  <meta name="description" content="JSON Schema is a JSON-based format for describing JSON data using various vocabularies.  This document specifies a vocabulary for annotating JSON documents with hyperlinks.  These hyperlinks include attributes describing how to manipulate and interact with remote resources through hypermedia environments such as HTTP, as well as determining whether the link is usable based on the instance value.  The hyperlink serialization format described in this document is also usable independent of JSON Schema.  " />
+
+</head>
+
+<body>
+
+  <table class="header">
+    <tbody>
+    
+    	<tr>
+  <td class="left">Internet Engineering Task Force</td>
+  <td class="right">H. Andrews, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
+  <td class="right">Cloudflare, Inc.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Intended status: Informational</td>
+  <td class="right">A. Wright, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Expires: July 23, 2018</td>
+  <td class="right">January 19, 2018</td>
+</tr>
+
+    	
+    </tbody>
+  </table>
+
+  <p class="title">JSON Hyper-Schema: A Vocabulary for Hypermedia Annotation of JSON <br />
+  <span class="filename">draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-01</span></p>
+  
+  <h1 id="rfc.abstract">
+  <a href="#rfc.abstract">Abstract</a>
+</h1>
+<p>JSON Schema is a JSON-based format for describing JSON data using various vocabularies.  This document specifies a vocabulary for annotating JSON documents with hyperlinks.  These hyperlinks include attributes describing how to manipulate and interact with remote resources through hypermedia environments such as HTTP, as well as determining whether the link is usable based on the instance value.  The hyperlink serialization format described in this document is also usable independent of JSON Schema.  </p>
+<h1>
+  <a>Note to Readers</a>
+</h1>
+<p>The issues list for this draft can be found at <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues">https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>For additional information, see <span>&lt;</span><a href="http://json-schema.org/">http://json-schema.org/</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>To provide feedback, use this issue tracker, the communication methods listed on the homepage, or email the document editors.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.status">
+  <a href="#rfc.status">Status of This Memo</a>
+</h1>
+<p>This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.</p>
+<p>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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.</p>
+<p>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."</p>
+<p>This Internet-Draft will expire on July 23, 2018.</p>
+<h1 id="rfc.copyrightnotice">
+  <a href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a>
+</h1>
+<p>Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors.  All rights reserved.</p>
+<p>This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://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.</p>
+
+  
+  <hr class="noprint" />
+  <h1 class="np" id="rfc.toc"><a href="#rfc.toc">Table of Contents</a></h1>
+  <ul class="toc">
+
+  	<li>1.   <a href="#rfc.section.1">Introduction</a></li>
+<li>2.   <a href="#rfc.section.2">Notational Conventions</a></li>
+<li>3.   <a href="#rfc.section.3">Overview</a></li>
+<ul><li>3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.1">Terminology</a></li>
+<li>3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.2">Functionality</a></li>
+</ul><li>4.   <a href="#rfc.section.4">Meta-Schemas and Output Schema</a></li>
+<li>5.   <a href="#rfc.section.5">Schema Keywords</a></li>
+<ul><li>5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.5.1">base</a></li>
+<li>5.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.5.2">links</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6">Link Description Object</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1">Link Context</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.1.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1.1">anchor</a></li>
+<li>6.1.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1.2">anchorPointer</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2">Link Relation Type</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.1">rel</a></li>
+<li>6.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.2">"self" Links</a></li>
+<li>6.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.3">"collection" and "item" Links</a></li>
+<li>6.2.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.4">Using Extension Relation Types</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3">Link Target</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3.1">href</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4">Adjusting URI Template Resolution</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.4.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.1">templatePointers</a></li>
+<li>6.4.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.2">templateRequired</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5">Link Target Attributes</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.1">title</a></li>
+<li>6.5.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.2">description</a></li>
+<li>6.5.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.3">targetMediaType</a></li>
+<li>6.5.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.4">targetSchema</a></li>
+<li>6.5.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.5">targetHints</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6">Link Input</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.6.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6.1">hrefSchema</a></li>
+<li>6.6.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6.2">headerSchema</a></li>
+<li>6.6.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6.3">Manipulating the Target Resource Representation</a></li>
+<li>6.6.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6.4">Submitting Data for Processing</a></li>
+</ul></ul><li>7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7">Implementation Requirements</a></li>
+<ul><li>7.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.1">Link Discovery and Look-Up</a></li>
+<li>7.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2">URI Templating</a></li>
+<ul><li>7.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2.1">Populating Template Data From the Instance</a></li>
+<li>7.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2.2">Accepting Input for Template Data</a></li>
+<li>7.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2.3">Encoding Data as Strings</a></li>
+</ul><li>7.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3">Providing Access to LDO Keywords</a></li>
+<li>7.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.4">Requests</a></li>
+<li>7.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.5">Responses</a></li>
+<li>7.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.6">Streaming Parsers</a></li>
+</ul><li>8.   <a href="#rfc.section.8">JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP</a></li>
+<ul><li>8.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1">One Link Per Target and Relation Type</a></li>
+<li>8.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2">"targetSchema" and HTTP</a></li>
+<li>8.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.3">HTTP POST and the "submission*" keywords</a></li>
+<li>8.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.4">Optimizing HTTP Discoverability With "targetHints"</a></li>
+<li>8.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.5">Advertising HTTP Features With "headerSchema"</a></li>
+<li>8.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.6">Creating Resources Through Collections</a></li>
+<li>8.7.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.7">Content Negotiation and Schema Evolution</a></li>
+</ul><li>9.   <a href="#rfc.section.9">Examples</a></li>
+<ul><li>9.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.1">Entry Point Links, No Templates</a></li>
+<li>9.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.2">Individually Identified Resources</a></li>
+<li>9.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.3">Submitting a Payload and Accepting URI Input</a></li>
+<li>9.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.4">"anchor", "base" and URI Template Resolution</a></li>
+<li>9.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.5">Collections</a></li>
+<ul><li>9.5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.5.1">Pagination</a></li>
+<li>9.5.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.5.2">Creating the First Item</a></li>
+</ul></ul><li>10.   <a href="#rfc.section.10">Security Considerations</a></li>
+<ul><li>10.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.1">Target Attributes</a></li>
+<li>10.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.2">"self" Links</a></li>
+</ul><li>11.   <a href="#rfc.section.11">Acknowledgments</a></li>
+<li>12.   <a href="#rfc.references">References</a></li>
+<ul><li>12.1.   <a href="#rfc.references.1">Normative References</a></li>
+<li>12.2.   <a href="#rfc.references.2">Informative References</a></li>
+</ul><li>Appendix A.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Using JSON Hyper-Schema in APIs</a></li>
+<ul><li>A.1.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A.1">Resource Evolution With Hyper-Schema</a></li>
+<li>A.2.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A.2">Responses and Errors</a></li>
+<li>A.3.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A.3">Static Analysis of an API's Hyper-Schemas</a></li>
+</ul><li>Appendix B.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.B">ChangeLog</a></li>
+<li><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a></li>
+
+
+  </ul>
+
+  <h1 id="rfc.section.1"><a href="#rfc.section.1">1.</a> Introduction</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema is a JSON Schema vocabulary for annotating JSON documents with hyperlinks and instructions for processing and manipulating remote JSON resources through hypermedia environments such as HTTP.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.2">The term JSON Hyper-Schema is used to refer to a JSON Schema that uses these keywords.  The term "hyper-schema" on its own refers to a JSON Hyper-Schema within the scope of this specification.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.3">The primary mechanism introduced for specifying links is the Link Description Object (LDO), which is a serialization of the abstract link model defined in <a href="#RFC8288">RFC 8288, section 2</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC8288]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.4">This specification will use the concepts, syntax, and terminology defined by the <a href="#json-schema">JSON Schema core</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema]</cite> and <a href="#json-schema-validation">JSON Schema validation</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema-validation]</cite> specifications.  It is advised that readers have a copy of these specifications.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.2"><a href="#rfc.section.2">2.</a> Notational Conventions</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.1">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 <a href="#RFC2119">RFC 2119</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC2119]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3"><a href="#rfc.section.3">3.</a> Overview</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema makes it possible to build hypermedia systems from JSON documents by describing how to construct hyperlinks from instance data.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.2">The combination of a JSON instance document and a valid application/schema+json hyper-schema for that instance behaves as a single hypermedia representation.  By allowing this separation, hyper-schema-based systems can gracefully support applications that expect plain JSON, while providing full hypermedia capabilities for hyper-schema-aware applications and user agents.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.3">User agents can detect the presence of hyper-schema by looking for the application/schema+json media type and a "$schema" value that indicates the presence of the hyper-schema vocabulary.  A user agent can then use an implementation of JSON Hyper-Schema to provide an interface to the combination of the schema and instance documents as a single logical representation of a resource, just as with any single-document hypermedia representation format.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.4">Hyper-schemas allow representations to take up fewer bytes on the wire, and distribute the burden of link construction from the server to each client.  A user agent need not construct a link unless a client application requests that link.  JSON Hyper-Schema can also be used on the server side to generate other link serializations or representation formats at runtime, or pre-emptively follow links to facilitate server push usage.  </p>
+<p>Here is an example hyper-schema that adds a single link, with the IANA-registered link relation type "self", that is built from an instance with one known object field named "id": </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "type": "object",
+    "properties": {
+        "id": {
+            "type": "number",
+            "readOnly": true
+        }
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "thing/{id}"
+        }
+    ]
+}
+                </pre>
+<p>If the instance is {"id": 1234}, and its base URI according to <a href="#RFC3986">RFC 3986 section 5.1</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC3986]</cite>, is "https://api.example.com/", then "https://api.example.com/thing/1234" is the resulting link's target URI.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.1"><a href="#rfc.section.3.1">3.1.</a> Terminology</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.1">The terms "schema", "instance", and "meta-schema" are to be interpreted as defined in the <a href="#json-schema">JSON Schema core specification</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.2">The terms "applicable" and "attached" are to be interpreted as defined in <a href="#json-schema-validation">Section 3 of the JSON Schema validation specification</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema-validation]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.3">The terms "link", "link context" (or "context"), "link target" (or "target"), and "target attributes" are to be interpreted as defined in <a href="#RFC8288">Section 2 of RFC 8288</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC8288]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.4">The term "user agent" is to be interpreted as defined in <a href="#RFC7230">Section 2.1 of RFC 7230</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7230]</cite>, generalized to apply to any protocol that may be used in a hypermedia system rather than specifically being an HTTP client.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.5">This specification defines the following terms: </p>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>JSON Hyper-Schema</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A JSON Schema using the keywords defined by this specification.  </dd>
+  <dt>hyper-schema</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">Within this document, the term "hyper-schema" always refers to a JSON Hyper-Schema </dd>
+  <dt>link validity</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A valid link for an instance is one that is applicable to that instance and does not fail any requirement imposed by the keywords in the Link Description Object.  </dd>
+  <dt>generic user agent</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A user agent which can be used to interact with any resource, from any server, from among the standardized link relations, media types, URI schemes, and protocols that it supports; though it may be extendible to specially handle particular profiles of media types.  </dd>
+  <dt>client application</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">An application which uses a hypermedia system for a specific purpose.  Such an application may also be its own user agent, or it may be built on top of a generic user agent.  A client application is programmed with knowledge of link relations, media types, URI schemes, protocols, and data structures that are specific to the application's domain.  </dd>
+  <dt>client input</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">Data provided through a user agent, and most often also through a client application.  Such data may be requested from a user interactively, or provided before interaction in forms such as command-line arguments, configuration files, or hardcoded values in source code.  </dd>
+  <dt>operation</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A specific use of a hyperlink, such as making a network request (for a URI with a scheme such as "http://" that indicates a protocol) or otherwise taking action based on a link (reading data from a "data:" URI, or constructing an email message based on a "mailto:" link).  For protocols such as HTTP that support multiple methods, each method is considered to be a separate operation on the same link.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.2"><a href="#rfc.section.3.2">3.2.</a> Functionality</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.1">A JSON Hyper-Schema implementation is able to take a hyper-schema, an instance, and in some cases client input, and produce a set of fully resolved valid links.  As defined by <a href="#RFC8288">RFC 8288, section 2</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC8288]</cite>, a link consists of a context, a typed relation, a target, and optionally additional target attributes.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.2">The relation type and target attributes are taken directly from each link's Link Description Object.  The context and target identifiers are constructed from some combination of URI Templates, instance data, and (in the case of the target identifier) client input.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.3">The target is always fully identified by a URI.  Due to the lack of a URI fragment identifier syntax for application/json and many other media types that can be used with JSON Hyper-Schema, the context may be only partially identified by a URI.  In such cases, the remaining identification will be provided as a JSON Pointer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.4">A few IANA-registered link relation types are given specific semantics in a JSON Hyper-Schema document.  A "self" link is used to interact with the resource that the instance document represents, while "collection" and "item" links identify resources for which collection-specific semantics can be assumed.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4"><a href="#rfc.section.4">4.</a> Meta-Schemas and Output Schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.1">The current URI for the JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema is <span>&lt;</span><a href="http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema#">http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema#</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.2">The <a href="#ldo">link description format</a> <cite title="NONE">[ldo]</cite> can be used without JSON Schema, and use of this format can be declared by referencing the normative link description schema as the schema for the data structure that uses the links.  The URI of the normative link description schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="http://json-schema.org/draft-07/links#">http://json-schema.org/draft-07/links#</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.3">JSON Hyper-Schema implementations are free to provide output in any format.  However, a specific format is defined for use in the conformance test suite, which is also used to illustrate points in the <a href="#implementation">"Implementation Requirements"</a> <cite title="NONE">[implementation]</cite>, and to show the output generated by <a href="#examples">examples</a> <cite title="NONE">[examples]</cite>.  It is RECOMMENDED that implementations be capable of producing output in this format to facilitated testing.  The URI of the JSON Schema describing the recommended output format is <span>&lt;</span><a href="http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema-output#">http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema-output#</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5"><a href="#rfc.section.5">5.</a> Schema Keywords</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.1">Hyper-schema keywords from all schemas that are applicable to a position in an instance, as defined by <a href="#json-schema-validation">Section 3 of JSON Schema validation</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema-validation]</cite>, can be used with that instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.2">When multiple subschemas are applicable to a given sub-instance, all "link" arrays MUST be combined, in any order, into a single set.  Each object in the resulting set MUST retain its own list of applicable "base" values, in resolution order, from the same schema and any parent schemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.3">As with all JSON Schema keywords, all keywords described in this section are optional.  The minimal valid JSON Hyper-schema is the blank object.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5.1"><a href="#rfc.section.5.1">5.1.</a> <a href="#base" id="base">base</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.1">If present, this keyword MUST be first <a href="#uriTemplating">resolved as a URI Template</a> <cite title="NONE">[uriTemplating]</cite>, and then MUST be resolved as a URI Reference against the current URI base of the instance.  The result MUST be set as the new URI base for the instance while processing the sub-schema containing "base" and all sub-schemas within it.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.2">The process for resolving the "base" template can be different when being resolved for use with "anchor" than when being resolved for use with "href", which is explained in detail in the URI Templating section.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5.2"><a href="#rfc.section.5.2">5.2.</a> links</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.2.p.1">The "links" property of schemas is used to associate Link Description Objects with instances.  The value of this property MUST be an array, and the items in the array must be Link Description Objects, as defined below.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6"><a href="#rfc.section.6">6.</a> <a href="#ldo" id="ldo">Link Description Object</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.1">A Link Description Object (LDO) is a serialization of the abstract link model defined in <a href="#RFC8288">RFC 8288, section 2</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC8288]</cite>.  As described in that document, a link consists of a context, a relation type, a target, and optionally target attributes.  JSON Hyper-Schema's LDO provides all of these, along with additional features using JSON Schema to describe input for use with the links in various ways.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.2">Due to the use of URI Templates to identify link contexts and targets, as well as optional further use of client input when identifying targets, an LDO is a link template that may resolve to multiple links when used with a JSON instance document.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.3">A specific use of an LDO, typically involving a request and response across a protocol, is referred to as an operation.  For many protocols, multiple operations are possible on any given link.  The protocol is indicated by the target's URI scheme.  Note that not all URI schemes indicate a protocol that can be used for communications, and even resources with URI schemes that do indicate such protocols need not be available over that protocol.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.4">A Link Description Object MUST be an object, and the <a href="#href">"href"</a> <cite title="NONE">[href]</cite> and <a href="#rel">"rel"</a> <cite title="NONE">[rel]</cite> properties MUST be present.  Each keyword is covered briefly in this section, with additional usage explanation and comprehensive examples given later in the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.1">6.1.</a> <a href="#context" id="context">Link Context</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.p.1">In JSON Hyper-Schema, the link's context resource is, by default, the sub-instance to which it is attached (as defined by <a href="#json-schema-validation">Section 3 of the JSON Schema validation specification</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema-validation]</cite>).  This is often not the entire instance document.  This default context can be changed using the keywords in this section.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.p.2">Depending on the media type of the instance, it may or may not be possible to assign a URI to the exact default context resource.  In particular, application/json does not define a URI fragment resolution syntax, so properties or array elements within a plain JSON document cannot be fully identified by a URI.  When it is not possible to produce a complete URI, the position of the context SHOULD be conveyed by the URI of the instance document, together with a separate plain-string JSON Pointer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.p.3">Implementations MUST be able to construct the link context's URI, and (if necessary for full identification), a JSON Pointer in string representation form as per <a href="#RFC6901">RFC 6901, section 5</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite> in place of a URI fragment.  The process for constructing a URI based on a URI template is given in the <a href="#uriTemplating">URI Templating</a> <cite title="NONE">[uriTemplating]</cite> section.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.1.1">6.1.1.</a> <a href="#anchor" id="anchor">anchor</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.1.p.1">This property sets the context URI of the link.  The value of the property is a <a href="#RFC6570">URI Template</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6570]</cite>, and the resulting <a href="#RFC3986">URI-reference</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC3986]</cite> MUST be resolved against the base URI of the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.1.p.2">The URI is computed from the provided URI template using the same process described for the <a href="#href">"href"</a> <cite title="NONE">[href]</cite> property, with the exception that <a href="#hrefSchema">"hrefSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[hrefSchema]</cite> MUST NOT be applied.  Unlike target URIs, context URIs do not accept user input.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.1.2">6.1.2.</a> <a href="#anchorPointer" id="anchorPointer">anchorPointer</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.1">This property changes the point within the instance that is considered to be the context resource of the link.  The value of the property MUST be a valid JSON Pointer in JSON String representation form, or a valid <a href="#relative-json-pointer">Relative JSON Pointer</a> <cite title="NONE">[relative-json-pointer]</cite> which is evaluated relative to the default context.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.2">While an alternate context with a known URI is best set with the <a href="#anchor">"anchor"</a> <cite title="NONE">[anchor]</cite> keyword, the lack of a fragment identifier syntax for application/json means that it is usually not possible to change the context within a JSON instance using a URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.3">Even in "+json" media types that define JSON Pointer as a fragment identifier syntax, if the default context is nested within an array, it is not possible to obtain the index of the default context's position in that array in order to construct a pointer to another property in that same nested JSON object.  This will be demonstrated in the examples.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.4">The result of processing this keyword SHOULD be a URI fragment if the media type of the instance allows for such a fragment.  Otherwise it MUST be a string-encoded JSON Pointer.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2">6.2.</a> <a href="#relationType" id="relationType">Link Relation Type</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.p.1">The link's relation type identifies its semantics.  It is the primary means of conveying how an application can interact with a resource.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.p.2">Relationship definitions are not normally media type dependent, and users are encouraged to utilize the most suitable existing accepted relation definitions.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2.1">6.2.1.</a> <a href="#rel" id="rel">rel</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.1.p.1">The value of this property MUST be a string, and MUST be a single Link Relation Type as defined in RFC 8288, Section 2.1.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.1.p.2">This property is required.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2.2">6.2.2.</a> <a href="#self" id="self">"self" Links</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.2.p.1">A "self" link, as originally defined by <a href="#RFC4287">Section 4.2.7.2 of RFC 4287</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC4287]</cite>, indicates that the target URI identifies a resource equivalent to the link context.  In JSON Hyper-Schema, a "self" link MUST be resolvable from the instance, and therefore "hrefSchema" MUST NOT be present.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.2.p.2">Hyper-schema authors SHOULD use "templateRequired" to ensure that the "self" link has all instance data that is needed for use.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.2.p.3">A hyper-schema implementation MUST recognize that a link with relation type "self" that has the entire current instance document as its context describes how a user agent can interact with the resource represented by that instance document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2.3">6.2.3.</a> <a href="#collectionAndItem" id="collectionAndItem">"collection" and "item" Links</a></h1>
+<p><a href="#RFC6573">RFC 6573</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6573]</cite> defines and registers the "item" and "collection" link relation types.  JSON Hyper-Schema imposes additional semantics on collection resources indicated by these types.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.3.p.2">Implementations MUST recognize the target of a "collection" link and the context of an "item" link as collections.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.3.p.3">A well-known design pattern in hypermedia is to use a collection resource to create a member of the collection and give it a server-assigned URI.  If the protocol indicated by the URI scheme defines a specific method that is suited to creating a resource with a server-assigned URI, then a collection resource, as identified by these link relation types, MUST NOT define semantics for that method that conflict with the semantics of creating a collection member.  Collection resources MAY implement item creation via such a protocol method, and user agents MAY assume that any such operation, if it exists, has item creation semantics.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.3.p.4">As such a method would correspond to JSON Hyper-Schema's data submission concept, the <a href="#submissionSchema">"submissionSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[submissionSchema]</cite> field for the link SHOULD be compatible with the schema of the representation of the collection's items, as indicated by the "item" link's target resource or the "self" link of the "collection" link's context resource.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.4"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2.4">6.2.4.</a> <a href="#extensionRelationTypes" id="extensionRelationTypes">Using Extension Relation Types</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.4.p.1">When no registered relation (aside from "related") applies, users are encouraged to mint their own extension relation types, as described in <a href="#RFC8288">section 2.1.2 of RFC 8288</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC8288]</cite>.  The simplest approaches for choosing link relation type URIs are to either use a URI scheme that is already in use to identify the system's primary resources, or to use a human-readable, non-dereferenceable URI scheme such as <a href="#RFC4151">"tag", defined by RFC 4151</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC4151]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.4.p.2">Extension relation type URIs need not be dereferenceable, even when using a scheme that allows it.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.3">6.3.</a> <a href="#target" id="target">Link Target</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.p.1">The target URI template is used to identify the link's target, potentially making use of instance data.  Additionally, with <a href="#hrefSchema">"hrefSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[hrefSchema]</cite>, this template can identify a set of possible target resources to use based on client input.  The full process of resolving the URI template, with or without client input, is covered in the <a href="#uriTemplating">URI Templating</a> <cite title="NONE">[uriTemplating]</cite> section.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.3.1">6.3.1.</a> <a href="#href" id="href">href</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.1.p.1">The value of the "href" link description property is a template used to determine the target URI of the related resource.  The value of the instance property MUST be resolved as a <a href="#RFC3986">URI-reference</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC3986]</cite> against the base URI of the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.1.p.2">This property is REQUIRED.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4"><a href="#rfc.section.6.4">6.4.</a> Adjusting URI Template Resolution</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.1">The keywords in this section are used when resolving all URI Templates involved in hyper-schema: "base", "anchor", and "href".  See the <a href="#uriTemplating">URI Templating</a> <cite title="NONE">[uriTemplating]</cite> section for the complete template resolution algorithm.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.2">Note that when resolving a "base" template, the attachment point from which resolution begins is the attachment point of the "href" or "anchor" keyword being resolved which requires "base" templates to be resolved, not the attachment point of the "base" keyword itself.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.4.1">6.4.1.</a> <a href="#templatePointers" id="templatePointers">templatePointers</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.1.p.1">The value of the "templatePointers" link description property MUST be an object.  Each property value in the object MUST be a valid <a href="#RFC6901">JSON Pointer</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite>, or a valid <a href="#relative-json-pointer">Relative JSON Pointer</a> <cite title="NONE">[relative-json-pointer]</cite> which is evaluated relative to the attachment point of the link for which the template is being resolved.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.1.p.2">For each property name in the object that matches a variable name in the template being resolved, the value of that property adjusts the starting position of variable resolution for that variable.  Properties which do not match template variable names in the template being resolved MUST be ignored.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.4.2">6.4.2.</a> <a href="#templateRequired" id="templateRequired">templateRequired</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.2.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be an array, and the elements MUST be unique.  Each element SHOULD match a variable in the link's URI Template, without percent-encoding.  After completing the entire URI Template resolution process, if any variable that is present in this array does not have a value, the link MUST NOT be used.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5">6.5.</a> <a href="#targetAttributes" id="targetAttributes">Link Target Attributes</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.p.1">All properties in this section are advisory only.  While keywords such as "title" and "description" are used primarily to present the link to users, those keywords that predict the nature of a link interaction or response MUST NOT be considered authoritative.  The runtime behavior of the target resource MUST be respected whenever it conflicts with the target attributes in the LDO.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.1">6.5.1.</a> title</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.1.p.1">This property defines a title for the link.  The value MUST be a string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.1.p.2">User agents MAY use this title when presenting the link to the user.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.2">6.5.2.</a> description</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.2.p.1">This property provides additional information beyond what is present in the title.  The value MUST be a string.  While a title is preferably short, a description can be used to go into more detail about the purpose and usage of the link.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.2.p.2">User agents MAY use this description when presenting the link to the user.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.3">6.5.3.</a> targetMediaType</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.1">The value of this property represents the media type <a href="#RFC2046">RFC 2046</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC2046]</cite>, that is expected to be returned when fetching this resource.  This property value MAY be a media range instead, using the same pattern defined in <a href="#RFC7231">RFC 7231, section 5.3.2 - HTTP "Accept" header</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7231]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.2">This property is analogous to the "type" property of other link serialization formats.  User agents MAY use this information to inform the interface they present to the user before the link is followed, but MUST NOT use this information in the interpretation of the resulting data.  Instead, a user agent MUST use the media type given by the response for run-time interpretation.  See the section on <a href="#security">"Security Concerns"</a> <cite title="NONE">[security]</cite> for a detailed examination of mis-use of "targetMediaType".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.3">For protocols supporting content-negotiation, implementations MAY choose to describe possible target media types using protocol-specific information in <a href="#headerSchema">"headerSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[headerSchema]</cite>.  If both protocol-specific information and "targetMediaType" are present, then the value of "targetMediaType" MUST be compatible with the protocol-specific information, and SHOULD indicate the media type that will be returned in the absence of content negotiation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.4">When no such protocol-specific information is available, or when the implementation does not recognize the protocol involved, then the value SHOULD be taken to be "application/json".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.4"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.4">6.5.4.</a> <a href="#targetSchema" id="targetSchema">targetSchema</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.4.p.1">This property provides a schema that is expected to describe the link target's representation.  Depending on the protocol, the schema may or may not describe the request or response to any particular operation performed with the link.  See the <a href="#HTTP">JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP</a> <cite title="NONE">[HTTP]</cite> section for an in-depth discussion of how this keyword is used with HTTP.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.5"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.5">6.5.5.</a> <a href="#targetHints" id="targetHints">targetHints</a></h1>
+<p><a id="CREF1" class="info">[CREF1]<span class="info">This section attempts to strike a balance between comprehensiveness and flexibility by deferring most of its structure to the protocol indicated by the URI scheme.  Note that a resource can be identified by a URI with a dereferenceable scheme, yet not be accessible over that protocol.  While currently very loose, this section is expected to become more well-defined based on draft feedback, and may change significantly in future drafts.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.2">The value of this property is advisory only.  It represents information that is expected to be discoverable through interacting with the target resource, typically in the form of protocol-specific control information or meta-data such as headers returned in response to an HTTP HEAD or OPTIONS request.  The protocol is determined by the "href" URI scheme, although note that resources are not guaranteed to be accessible over such a protocol.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.3">The value of this property SHOULD be an object.  The keys to this object SHOULD be lower-cased forms of the control data field names.  Each value SHOULD be an array, in order to uniformly handle multi-valued fields.  Multiple values MUST be presented as an array, and not as a single string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.4">Protocols with control information not suitable for representation as a JSON object MAY be represented by another data type, such as an array.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.5">Values that cannot be understood as part of the indicated protocol MUST be ignored by a JSON Hyper-Schema implementation.  Applications MAY make use of such values, but MUST NOT assume interoperability with other implementations.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.6">Implementations MUST NOT assume that all discoverable information is accounted for in this object.  Client applications MUST properly handle run-time responses that contradict this property's values.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.7">Client applications MUST NOT assume that an implementation will automatically take any action based on the value of this property.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.8">See <a href="#HTTP">"JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP"</a> <cite title="NONE">[HTTP]</cite> for guidance on using this keyword with HTTP and analogous protocols.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6">6.6.</a> <a href="#input" id="input">Link Input</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.p.1">There are four ways to use client input with a link, and each is addressed by a separate link description object keyword.  When performing operations, user agents SHOULD ignore schemas that are not relevant to their semantics.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6.1">6.6.1.</a> <a href="#hrefSchema" id="hrefSchema">hrefSchema</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.1">The value of the "hrefSchema" link description property MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  This schema is used to validate user input or other user agent data for filling out the URI Template in <a href="#href">"href"</a> <cite title="NONE">[href]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.2">Omitting "hrefSchema" or setting the entire schema to "false" prevents any user agent data from being accepted.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.3">Setting any subschema that applies to a particular variable to the JSON literal value "false" prevents any user agent data from being accepted for that single variable.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.4">For template variables that can be resolved from the instance data, if the instance data is valid against all applicable subschemas in "hrefSchema", then it MUST be used to pre-populate the input data set for that variable.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.5">Note that even when data is pre-populated from the instance, the validation schema for that variable in "hrefSchema" need not be identical to the validation schema(s) that apply to the instance data's location.  This allows for different validation rules for user agent data, such as supporting spelled-out months for date-time input, but using the standard date-time format for storage.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.6">After input is accepted, potentially overriding the pre-populated instance data, the resulting data set MUST successfully validate against the value of "hrefSchema".  If it does not then the link MUST NOT be used.  If it is valid, then the process given in the "URI Templating" section continues with this updated data set.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6.2">6.6.2.</a> <a href="#headerSchema" id="headerSchema">headerSchema</a></h1>
+<p><a id="CREF2" class="info">[CREF2]<span class="info">As with "targetHints", this keyword is somewhat under-specified to encourage experimentation and feedback as we try to balance flexibility and clarity.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.2">If present, this property is a schema for protocol-specific request headers or analogous control and meta-data.  The value of this object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  The protocol is determined by the "href" URI scheme, although note that resources are not guaranteed to be accessible over such a protocol.  The schema is advisory only; the target resource's behavior is not constrained by its presence.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.3">The purpose of this keyword is to advertise target resource interaction features, and indicate to user agents and client applications what headers and header values are likely to be useful.  User agents and client applications MAY use the schema to validate relevant headers, but MUST NOT assume that missing headers or values are forbidden from use.  While schema authors MAY set "additionalProperties" to false, this is NOT RECOMMENDED and MUST NOT prevent client applications or user agents from supplying additional headers when requests are made.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.4">The exact mapping of the JSON data model into the headers is protocol-dependent.  However, in most cases this schema SHOULD specify a type of "object", and the property names SHOULD be lower-cased forms of the control data field names.  See the <a href="#HTTP">"JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP"</a> <cite title="NONE">[HTTP]</cite> section for detailed guidance on using this keyword with HTTP and analogous protocols.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.5">"headerSchema" is applicable to any request method or command that the protocol supports.  When generating a request, user agents and client applications SHOULD ignore schemas for headers that are not relevant to that request.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6.3">6.6.3.</a> Manipulating the Target Resource Representation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.3.p.1">In JSON Hyper-Schema, <a href="#targetSchema">"targetSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[targetSchema]</cite> supplies a non-authoritative description of the target resource's representation.  A client application can use "targetSchema" to structure input for replacing or modifying the representation, or as the base representation for building a patch document based on a patch media type.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.3.p.2">Alternatively, if "targetSchema" is absent or if the client application prefers to only use authoritative information, it can interact with the target resource to confirm or discover its representation structure.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.3.p.3">"targetSchema" is not intended to describe link operation responses, except when the response semantics indicate that it is a representation of the target resource.  In all cases, the schema indicated by the response itself is authoritative.  See <a href="#HTTP">"JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP"</a> <cite title="NONE">[HTTP]</cite> for detailed examples.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.4"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6.4">6.6.4.</a> Submitting Data for Processing</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.p.1">The <a href="#submissionSchema">"submissionSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[submissionSchema]</cite> and <a href="#submissionMediaType">"submissionMediaType"</a> <cite title="NONE">[submissionMediaType]</cite> keywords describe the domain of the processing function implemented by the target resource.  Otherwise, as noted above, the submission schema and media type are ignored for operations to which they are not relevant.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.4.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6.4.1">6.6.4.1.</a> <a href="#submissionMediaType" id="submissionMediaType">submissionMediaType</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.1.p.1">If present, this property indicates the media type format the client application and user agent should use for the request payload described by <a href="#submissionSchema">"submissionSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[submissionSchema]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.1.p.2">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of application/json.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.1.p.3">Note that "submissionMediaType" and "submissionSchema" are not restricted to HTTP URIs.  <a id="CREF3" class="info">[CREF3]<span class="info">This statement might move to wherever the example ends up.</span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.4.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6.4.2">6.6.4.2.</a> <a href="#submissionSchema" id="submissionSchema">submissionSchema</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.2.p.1">This property contains a schema which defines the acceptable structure of the document to be encoded according to the "submissionMediaType" property and sent to the target resource for processing.  This can be viewed as describing the domain of the processing function implemented by the target resource.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.2.p.2">This is a separate concept from the <a href="#targetSchema">"targetSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[targetSchema]</cite> property, which describes the target information resource (including for replacing the contents of the resource in a PUT request), unlike "submissionSchema" which describes the user-submitted request data to be evaluated by the resource.  "submissionSchema" is intended for use with requests that have payloads that are not necessarily defined in terms of the target representation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.2.p.3">Omitting "submissionSchema" has the same behavior as a value of "true".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7"><a href="#rfc.section.7">7.</a> <a href="#implementation" id="implementation">Implementation Requirements</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.1">At a high level, a conforming implementation will meet the following requirements.  Each of these requirements is covered in more detail in the individual keyword sections and keyword group overviews.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.2">Note that the requirements around how an implementation MUST recognize "self", "collection", and "item" links are thoroughly covered in the <a href="#relationType">link relation type</a> <cite title="NONE">[relationType]</cite> section and are not repeated here.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.3">While it is not a mandatory format for implementations, the output format used in the test suite summarizes what needs to be computed for each link before it can be used: </p>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>contextUri</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The fully resolved URI (with scheme) of the context resource.  If the context is not the entire resource and there is a usable fragment identifier syntax, then the URI includes a fragment.  Note that there is no such syntax for application/json.  </dd>
+  <dt>contextPointer</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The JSON Pointer for the location within the instance of the context resource.  If the instance media type supports JSON Pointers as fragment identifiers, this pointer will be the same as the one encoded in the fragment of the "contextUri" field.  </dd>
+  <dt>rel</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The link relation type, as it appears in the LDO.  </dd>
+  <dt>targetUri</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The fully resolved URI (with a scheme) of the target resource.  If the link accepts input, this can only be produced once the input has been supplied.  </dd>
+  <dt>hrefInputTemplates</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The list of partially resolved URI references for a link that accepts input.  The first entry in the list is the partially resolved "href".  The additional entries, if any, are the partially resolved "base" values ordered from the most immediate out to the root of the schema.  Template variables that are pre-populated in the input are not resolved at this stage, as the pre-populated value can be overridden.  </dd>
+  <dt>hrefPrepopulatedInput</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The data set that the user agent should use to prepopulate any input mechanism before accepting client input.  If input is to be accepted but no fields are to be pre-populated, then this will be an empty object.  </dd>
+  <dt>attachmentPointer</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The JSON Pointer for the location within the instance to which the link is attached.  By default, "contextUri" and "attachmentUri" are the same, but "contextUri" can be changed by LDO keywords, while "attachmentUri" cannot.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> Other LDO keywords that are not involved in producing the above information are included exactly as they appear when producing output for the test suite.  Those fields will not be further discussed here unless specifically relevant.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.1"><a href="#rfc.section.7.1">7.1.</a> Link Discovery and Look-Up</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.1">Before links can be used, they must be discovered by applying the hyper-schema to the instance and finding all applicable and valid links.  Note that in addition to collecting valid links, any <a href="#base">"base"</a> <cite title="NONE">[base]</cite> values necessary to resolve each LDO's URI Templates must also be located and associated with the LDO through whatever mechanism is most useful for the implementation's URI Template resolution process.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.2">And implementation MUST support looking up links by either their attachment pointer or context pointer, either by performing the look-up or by providing the set of all links with both pointers determined so that user agents can implement the look-up themselves.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.3">When performing look-ups by context pointer, links that are attached to elements of the same array MUST be returned in the same order as the array elements to which they are attached.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2"><a href="#rfc.section.7.2">7.2.</a> <a href="#uriTemplating" id="uriTemplating">URI Templating</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.1">Three hyper-schema keywords are <a href="#RFC6570">URI Templates</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6570]</cite>: "base", "anchor", and "href".  Each are resolved separately to URI-references, and then the anchor or href URI-reference is resolved against the base (which is itself resolved against earlier bases as needed, each of which was first resolved from a URI Template to a URI-reference).  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.2">All three keywords share the same algorithm for resolving variables from instance data, which makes use of the "templatePointers" and "templateRequired" keywords.  When resolving "href", both it and any "base" templates needed for resolution to an absolute URI, the algorithm is modified to optionally accept user input based on the "hrefSchema" keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.3">For each URI Template (T), the following pseudocode describes an algorithm for resolving T into a URI-reference (R).  For the purpose of this algorithm: </p>
+
+<ul>
+  <li>"ldo.templatePointers" is an empty object if the keyword was not present and "ldo.templateRequired" is likewise an empty array.  </li>
+  <li>"attachmentPointer" is the absolute JSON Pointer for the attachment location of the LDO.  </li>
+  <li>"getApplicableSchemas()" returns an iterable set of all (sub)schemas that apply to the attachment point in the instance.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.4">This algorithm should be applied first to either "href" or "anchor", and then as needed to each successive "base".  The order is important, as it is not always possible to tell whether a template will resolve to a full URI or a URI-reference.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.5">In English, the high-level algorithm is: </p>
+
+<ol>
+  <li>Populate template variable data from the instance</li>
+  <li>If input is desired, accept input</li>
+  <li>Check that all required variables have a value</li>
+  <li>Encode values into strings and fill out the template</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p>This is the high-level algorithm as pseudocode.  "T" comes from either "href" or "anchor" within the LDO, or from "base" in a containing schema.  Pseudocode for each step follows.  "initialTemplateKeyword" indicates which of the two started the process (since "base" is always resolved in order to finish resolving one or the other of those keywords).  </p>
+<pre>
+
+templateData = populateDataFromInstance(T, ldo, instance)
+
+if initialTemplateKeyword == "href" and ldo.hrefSchema exists:
+    inputData = acceptInput(ldo, instance, templateData)
+    for varname in inputData:
+        templateData[varname] = inputData[varname]
+
+for varname in ldo.templateRequired:
+    if not exists templateData[varname]
+        fatal("Missing required variable(s)")
+
+templateData = stringEncode(templateData)
+R = rfc6570ResolutionAlgorithm(T, templateData)
+
+                    </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2.1"><a href="#rfc.section.7.2.1">7.2.1.</a> Populating Template Data From the Instance</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.1.p.1">This step looks at various locations in the instance for variable values.  For each variable: </p>
+
+<ol>
+  <li>Use "templatePointers" to find a value if the variable appears in that keyword's value </li>
+  <li>Otherwise, look for a property name matching the variable in the instance location to which the link is attached </li>
+  <li>In either case, if there is a value at the location, put it in the template resolution data set </li>
+</ol>
+
+<p> </p>
+<pre>
+
+for varname in T:
+    varname = rfc3986PercentDecode(varname)
+    if varname in ldo.templatePointers:
+        valuePointer = templatePointers[varname]
+        if valuePointer is relative:
+            valuePointer = resolveRelative(attachmentPointer,
+                                           valuePointer)
+    else
+        valuePointer = attachmentPointer + "/" + varname
+
+    value = instance.valueAt(valuePointer)
+    if value is defined:
+        templateData[varname] = value
+
+                        </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2.2"><a href="#rfc.section.7.2.2">7.2.2.</a> Accepting Input for Template Data</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.2.p.1">This step is relatively complex, as there are several cases to support.  Some variables will forbid input and some will allow it.  Some will have initial values that need to be presented in the input interface, and some will not.  </p>
+<p/>
+
+<ol>
+  <li>Determine which variables can accept input </li>
+  <li>Pre-populate the input data set if the template resolution data set has a value </li>
+  <li>Accept input (present a web form, make a callback, etc.) </li>
+  <li>Validate the input data set, (not the template resolution data set) </li>
+  <li>Put the input in the template resolution data set, overriding any existing values </li>
+</ol>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p>"InputForm" represents whatever sort of input mechanism is appropriate.  This may be a literal web form, or may be a more programmatic construct such as a callback function accepting specific fields and data types, with the given initial values, if any.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+form = new InputForm()
+for varname in T:
+    useField = true
+    useInitialData = true
+    for schema in getApplicableSchemas(ldo.hrefSchema,
+                                       "/" + varname):
+        if schema is false:
+            useField = false
+            break
+
+        if varname in templateData and
+           not isValid(templateData[varname], schema)):
+            useInitialData = false
+            break
+
+    if useField:
+        if useInitialData:
+            form.addInputFieldFor(varname, ldo.hrefSchema,
+                                  templateData[varname])
+        else:
+            form.addInputFieldFor(varname, ldo.hrefSchema)
+
+inputData = form.acceptInput()
+
+if not isValid(inputData, hrefSchema):
+    fatal("Input invalid, link is not usable")
+
+return inputData:
+
+                        </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2.3"><a href="#rfc.section.7.2.3">7.2.3.</a> Encoding Data as Strings</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.3.p.1">This section is straightforward, converting literals to their names as strings, and converting numbers to strings in the most obvious manner, and percent-encoding as needed for use in the URI.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+for varname in templateData:
+    value = templateData[varname]
+    if value is true:
+        templateData[varname] = "true"
+    else if value is false:
+        temlateData[varname] = "false"
+    else if value is null:
+        templateData[varname] = "null"
+    else if value is a number:
+        templateData[varname] =
+            bestEffortOriginalJsonString(value)
+    else:
+        templateData[varname] = rfc3986PercentEncode(value)
+
+                        </pre>
+<p>In some software environments the original JSON representation of a number will not be available (there is no way to tell the difference between 1.0 and 1), so any reasonable representation should be used.  Schema and API authors should bear this in mind, and use other types (such as string or boolean) if the exact representation is important.  If the number was provide as input in the form of a string, the string used as input SHOULD be used.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3"><a href="#rfc.section.7.3">7.3.</a> Providing Access to LDO Keywords</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.1">For a given link, an implementation MUST make the values of all target attribute keywords directly available to the user agent.  Implementations MAY provide additional interfaces for using this information, as discussed in each keyword's section.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.2">For a given link, an implementation MUST make the value of each input schema keyword directly available to the user agent.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.3">To encourage encapsulation of the URI Template resolution process, implementations MAY omit the LDO keywords that are used only to construct URIs.  However, implementations MUST provide access to the link relation type.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.4">Unrecognized keywords SHOULD be made available to the user agent, and MUST otherwise be ignored.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.4"><a href="#rfc.section.7.4">7.4.</a> Requests</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.1">A hyper-schema implementation SHOULD provide access to all information needed to construct any valid request to the target resource.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.2">The LDO can express all information needed to perform any operation on a link.  This section explains what hyper-schema fields a user agent should examine to build requests from any combination of instance data and client input.  A hyper-schema implementation is not itself expected to construct and send requests.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.3">Target URI construction rules, including "hrefSchema" for accepting input, are identical for all possible requests.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.4">Requests that do not carry a body payload do not require additional keyword support.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.5">Requests that take a target representation as a payload SHOULD use the "targetSchema" and "targetMediaType" keywords for input description and payload validation.  If a protocol allows an operation taking a payload that is based on the representation as modified by a media type (such as a patch media type), then such a media type SHOULD be indicated through "targetHints" in a protocol-specific manner.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.6">Requests that take a payload that is not derived from the target resource's representation SHOULD use the "submissionSchema" and "submissionMediaType" keywords for input description and payload validation.  Protocols used in hypermedia generally only support one such non-representation operation per link.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.7">RPC systems that pipe many application operations with arbitrarily different request structures through a single hypermedia protocol operation are outside of the scope of a hypermedia format such as JSON Hyper-Schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.5"><a href="#rfc.section.7.5">7.5.</a> Responses</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.1">As a hypermedia format, JSON Hyper-Schema is concerned with describing a resource, including describing its links in sufficient detail to make all valid requests.  It is not concerned with directly describing all possible responses for those requests.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.2">As in any hypermedia system, responses are expected to be self-describing.  In the context of hyper-schema, this means that each response MUST link its own hyper-schema(s).  While responses that consist of a representation of the target resource are expected to be valid against "targetSchema" and "targetMediaType", those keywords are advisory only and MUST be ignored if contradicted by the response itself.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.3">Other responses, including error responses, complex redirections, and processing status representations SHOULD also link to their own schemas and use appropriate media types (e.g. <a href="#RFC7807">"application/problem+json"</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7807]</cite> for errors).  Certain errors might not link a schema due to being generated by an intermediary that is not aware of hyper-schema, rather than by the origin.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.4">User agents are expected to understand protocol status codes and response media types well enough to handle common situations, and provide enough information to client applications to handle domain-specific responses.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.5">Statically mapping all possible responses and their schemas at design time is outside of the scope of JSON Hyper-Schema, but may be within the scope of other JSON Schema vocabularies which build on hyper-schema (see <a href="#staticAnalysis">Appendix A.3</a>).  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.6"><a href="#rfc.section.7.6">7.6.</a> <a href="#streaming" id="streaming">Streaming Parsers</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.p.1">The requirements around discovering links based on their context, or using the context of links to identify collections, present unique challenges when used with streaming parsers.  It is not possible to authoritatively fulfill these requirements without processing the entire schema and instance documents.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.p.2">Such implementations MAY choose to return non-authoritative answers based on data processed to date.  When offering this approach, implementations MUST be clear on the nature of the response, and MUST offer an option to block and wait until all data is processed and an authoritative answer can be returned.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8"><a href="#rfc.section.8">8.</a> <a href="#HTTP" id="HTTP">JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.1">While JSON Hyper-Schema is a hypermedia format and therefore protocol-independent, it is expected that its most common use will be in HTTP systems, or systems using protocols such as CoAP that are explicitly analogous to HTTP.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.2">This section provides guidance on how to use each common HTTP method with a link, and how collection resources impose additional constraints on HTTP POST.  Additionally, guidance is provided on hinting at HTTP response header values and describing possible HTTP request headers that are relevant to the given resource.  </p>
+<p><a href="#json-schema">Section 11 of the JSON Schema core specification</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema]</cite> provides guidance on linking instances in a hypermedia system to their schemas.  This may be done with network-accessible schemas, or may simply identify schemas which were pre-packaged within the client application.  JSON Hyper-Schema intentionally does not constrain this mechanism, although it is RECOMMENDED that the techniques outlined in the core specification be used to whatever extent is possible.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1"><a href="#rfc.section.8.1">8.1.</a> One Link Per Target and Relation Type</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.1">Link Description Objects do not directly indicate what operations, such as HTTP methods, are supported by the target resource.  Instead, operations should be inferred primarily from link <a href="#rel">relation types</a> <cite title="NONE">[rel]</cite> and URI schemes.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.2">This means that for each target resource and link relation type pair, schema authors SHOULD only define a single LDO.  While it is possible to use "allow" with "targetHints" to repeat a relation type and target pair with different HTTP methods marked as allowed, this is NOT RECOMMENDED and may not be well-supported by conforming implementations.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.3">All information necessary to use each HTTP method can be conveyed in a single LDO as explained in this section.  The "allow" field in "targetHints" is intended simply to hint at which operations are supported, not to separately define each operation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.4">Note, however, that a resource may always decline an operation at runtime, for instance due to authorization failure, or due to other application state that controls the operation's availability.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2"><a href="#rfc.section.8.2">8.2.</a> <a href="#targetHTTP" id="targetHTTP">"targetSchema" and HTTP</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.1">"targetSchema" describes the resource on the target end of the link, while "targetMediaType" defines that resource's media type.  With HTTP links, "headerSchema" can also be used to describe valid values for use in an "Accept" request header, which can support multiple media types or media ranges.  When both ways of indicating the target media type are present, "targetMediaType" SHOULD indicate the default representation media type, while the schema for "accept" in "headerSchema" SHOULD include the default as well as any alternate media types or media ranges that can be requested.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.2">Since the semantics of many HTTP methods are defined in terms of the target resource, "targetSchema" is used for requests and/or responses for several HTTP methods.  In particular, "targetSchema" suggests what a client application can expect for the response to an HTTP GET or any response for which the "Content-Location" header is equal to the request URI, and what a client application should send if it replaces the resource in an HTTP PUT request.  These correlations are defined by <a href="#RFC7231">RFC 7231, section 4.3.1 - "GET", section 4.3.4 "PUT", and section 3.1.4.2, "Content-Location"</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7231]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.3">Per <a href="#RFC5789">RFC 5789</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC5789]</cite>, the request structure for an HTTP PATCH is determined by the combination of "targetSchema" and the request media type, which is conveyed by the "Accept-Patch" header, which may be included in "targetHints".  Media types that are suitable for PATCH-ing define a syntax for expressing changes to a document, which can be applied to the representation described by "targetSchema" to determine the set of syntactically valid request payloads.  Often, the simplest way to validate a PATCH request is to apply it and validate the result as a normal representation.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.3"><a href="#rfc.section.8.3">8.3.</a> <a href="#post" id="post">HTTP POST and the "submission*" keywords</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema allows for resources that process arbitrary data in addition to or instead of working with the target's representation.  This arbitrary data is described by the "submissionSchema" and "submissionMediaType" keywords.  In the case of HTTP, the POST method is the only one that handles such data.  While there are certain conventions around using POST with collections, the semantics of a POST request are defined by the target resource, not HTTP.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.2">In addition to the protocol-neutral "submission*" keywords (see <a href="#mailto">Section 9.3</a> for a non-HTTP example), the "Accept-Post" header can be used to specify the necessary media type, and MAY be advertised via the "targetHints" field.  <a id="CREF4" class="info">[CREF4]<span class="info">What happens if both are used?  Also, "submissionSchema" is a MUST to support, while "targetHints" are at most a SHOULD.  But forbidding the use of "Accept-Post" in "targetHints" seems incorrect.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.3">Successful responses to POST other than a 201 or a 200 with "Content-Location" set likewise have no HTTP-defined semantics.  As with all HTTP responses, any representation in the response should link to its own hyper-schema to indicate how it may be processed.  As noted in <a href="#responses">Appendix A.2</a>, connecting hyperlinks with all possible operation responses is not within the scope of JSON Hyper-Schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.4"><a href="#rfc.section.8.4">8.4.</a> Optimizing HTTP Discoverability With "targetHints"</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF5" class="info">[CREF5]<span class="info">It would be good to also include a section with CoAP examples.</span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.2">JSON serializations of HTTP response header information SHOULD follow the guidelines established by the work in progress <a href="#I-D.reschke-http-jfv">"A JSON Encoding for HTTP Header Field Values"</a> <cite title="NONE">[I-D.reschke-http-jfv]</cite>.  Approaches shown in that document's examples SHOULD be applied to other similarly structured headers wherever possible.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.3">Headers for all possible HTTP method responses all share "headerSchema".  In particular, both headers that appear in a HEAD response and those that appear in an OPTIONS response can appear.  No distinction is made within "headerSchema" as to which method response contains which header.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.4">It is RECOMMENDED that schema authors provide hints for the values of the following types of HTTP headers whenever applicable: </p>
+
+<ul>
+  <li>Method allowance</li>
+  <li>Method-specific request media types</li>
+  <li>Authentication challenges</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.5">In general, headers that are likely to have different values at different times SHOULD NOT be included in "targetHints".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.5"><a href="#rfc.section.8.5">8.5.</a> Advertising HTTP Features With "headerSchema"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.5.p.1">Schemas SHOULD be written to describe JSON serializations that follow guidelines established by the work in progress <a href="#I-D.reschke-http-jfv">"A JSON Encoding for HTTP Header Field Values"</a> <cite title="NONE">[I-D.reschke-http-jfv]</cite> Approaches shown in that document's examples SHOULD be applied to other similarly structured headers wherever possible.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.5.p.2">It is RECOMMENDED that schema authors describe the available usage of the following types of HTTP headers whenever applicable: </p>
+
+<ul>
+  <li>Content negotiation</li>
+  <li>Authentication and authorization</li>
+  <li>Range requests</li>
+  <li>The "Prefer" header</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.5.p.3">Headers such as cache control and conditional request headers are generally implemented by intermediaries rather than the resource, and are therefore not generally useful to describe.  While the resource must supply the information needed to use conditional requests, the runtime handling of such headers and related responses is not resource-specific.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.6"><a href="#rfc.section.8.6">8.6.</a> Creating Resources Through Collections</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.6.p.1">When using HTTP, or a protocol such as CoAP that is explicitly analogous to HTTP, this is done by POST-ing a representation of the individual resource to be created to the collection resource.  The process for recognizing collection and item resources is described in <a href="#collectionAndItem">Section 6.2.3</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.7"><a href="#rfc.section.8.7">8.7.</a> Content Negotiation and Schema Evolution</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.7.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema facilitates HTTP content negotiation, and allows for a hybrid of the proactive and reactive strategies.  As mentioned above, a hyper-schema can include a schema for HTTP headers such as "Accept", "Accept-Charset", "Accept-Language", etc with the "headerSchema" keyword.  A user agent or client application can use information in this schema, such as an enumerated list of supported languages, in lieu of making an initial request to start the reactive negotiation process.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.7.p.2">In this way, the proactive content negotiation technique of setting these headers can be informed by server information about what values are possible, similar to examining a list of alternatives in reactive negotiation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.7.p.3">For media types that allow specifying a schema as a media type parameter, the "Accept" values sent in a request or advertised in "headerSchema" can include the URI(s) of the schema(s) to which the negotiated representation is expected to conform.  One possible use for schema parameters in content negotiation is if the resource has conformed to several different schema versions over time.  The client application can indicate what version(s) it understands in the "Accept" header in this way.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9"><a href="#rfc.section.9">9.</a> <a href="#examples" id="examples">Examples</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.1">This section shows how the keywords that construct URIs and JSON Pointers are used.  The results are shown in the format used by the test suite.  <a id="CREF6" class="info">[CREF6]<span class="info">Need to post that and link it, but it should be pretty self-explanatory to those of you reviewing things at this stage.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.2">Most other keywords are either straightforward ("title" and "description"), apply validation to specific sorts of input, requests, or responses, or have protocol-specific behavior.  Examples demonstrating HTTP usage are available in <a href="#HTTP">an Appendix</a> <cite title="NONE">[HTTP]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.1"><a href="#rfc.section.9.1">9.1.</a> <a href="#entryPoint" id="entryPoint">Entry Point Links, No Templates</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.1">For this example, we will assume an example API with a documented entry point URI of https://example.com, which is an empty JSON object with a link to a schema.  Here, the entry point has no data of its own and exists only to provide an initial set of links: </p>
+<pre>
+
+GET https://api.example.com HTTP/1.1
+
+200 OK
+Content-Type: application/json
+Link: &lt;https://schema.example.com/entry&gt; rel=describedBy
+{}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.2">The linked hyper-schema defines the API's base URI and provides two links:  an "about" link to API documentation, and a "self" link indicating that this is a schema for the base URI.  In this case the base URI is also the entry point URI.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/entry",
+    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema#",
+    "base": "https://api.example.com/",
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": ""
+        }, {
+            "rel": "about",
+            "href": "/docs"
+        }
+    ]
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.3">These are the simplest possible links, with only a relation type and an "href" with no template variables.  They resolve as follows: </p>
+<pre>
+[
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "self",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com",
+        "attachmentPointer": ""
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "about",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/docs",
+        "attachmentPointer": ""
+    }
+]
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.4">The attachment pointer is the root pointer (the only possibility with an empty object for the instance).  The context URI is the default, which is the requested document.  Since application/json does not allow for fragments, the context pointer is necessary to fully describe the context.  Its default behavior is to be the same as the attachment pointer.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2"><a href="#rfc.section.9.2">9.2.</a> Individually Identified Resources</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.1">Let's add "things" to our system, starting with an individual thing: </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/thing",
+    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema#",
+    "base": "https://api.example.com/",
+    "type": "object",
+    "required": ["data"],
+    "properties": {
+        "id": {"$ref": "#/definitions/id"},
+        "data": true
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "things/{id}",
+            "templateRequired": ["id"],
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }
+    ],
+    "definitions": {
+        "id": {
+            "type": "integer",
+            "minimum": 1,
+            "readOnly": true
+        }
+    }
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.2">Our "thing" has a server-assigned id, which is required in order to construct the "self" link.  It also has a "data" field which can be of any type.  The reason for the "definitions" section will be clear in the next example.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.3">Note that "id" is not required by the validation schema, but is required by the self link.  This makes sense: a "thing" only has a URI if it has been created, and the server has assigned an id.  However, you can use this schema with an instance containing only the data field, which allows you to validate "thing" instances that you are about to create.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.4">Let's add a link to our entry point schema that lets you jump directly to a particular thing if you can supply it's id as input.  To save space, only the new LDO is shown.  Unlike "self" and "about", there is no IANA-registered relationship about hypothetical things, so an extension relationship is defined using the <a href="#RFC4151">"tag:" URI scheme</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC4151]</cite>: </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "rel": "tag:rel.example.com,2017:thing",
+    "href": "things/{id}",
+    "hrefSchema": {
+        "required": ["id"],
+        "properties": {
+            "id": {"$ref": "thing#/definitions/id"}
+        }
+    },
+    "targetSchema": {"$ref": "thing#"}
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.5">The "href" value here is the same, but everything else is different.  Recall that the instance is an empty object, so "id" cannot be resolved from instance data.  Instead it is required as client input.  This LDO could also have used "templateRequired" but with "required" in "hrefSchema" it is not strictly necessary.  Providing "templateRequired" without marking "id" as required in "hrefSchema" would lead to errors, as client input is the only possible source for resolving this link.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3"><a href="#rfc.section.9.3">9.3.</a> <a href="#mailto" id="mailto">Submitting a Payload and Accepting URI Input</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.1">This example covers using the "submission" fields for non-representation input, as well as using them alongside of resolving the URI Template with input.  Unlike HTML forms, which require either constructing a URI or sending a payload, but do not allow not both at once, JSON Hyper-Schema can describe both sorts of input for the same operation on the same link.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.2">The "submissionSchema" and "submissionMediaType" fields are for describing payloads that are not representations of the target resource.  When used with "http(s)://" URIs, they generally refer to a POST request payload, as seen in the <a href="#HTTP">appendix on HTTP usage</a> <cite title="NONE">[HTTP]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.3">In this case, we use a "mailto:" URI, which, per <a href="#RFC6068">RFC 6068, Section 3"</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6068]</cite>, does not provide any operation for retrieving a resource.  It can only be used to construct a message for sending.  Since there is no concept of a retrievable, replaceable, or deletable target resource, "targetSchema" and "targetMediaType" are not used.  Non-representation payloads are described by "submissionSchema" and "submissionMediaType".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.4">We use "submissionMediaType" to indicate a multipart/alternative payload format, providing two representations of the same data (HTML and plain text).  Since a multipart/alternative message is an ordered sequence (the last part is the most preferred alternative), we model the sequence as an array in "submissionSchema".  Since each part is itself a document with a media type, we model each item in the array as a string, using "contentMediaType" to indicate the format within the string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.5">Note that media types such as multipart/form-data, which associate a name with each part and are not ordered, should be modeled as JSON objects rather than arrays.  </p>
+<p>Note that some lines are wrapped to fit this document's width restrictions.  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/interesting-stuff",
+    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema#",
+    "required": ["stuffWorthEmailingAbout", "email", "title"],
+    "properties": {
+        "title": {
+            "type": "string"
+        },
+        "stuffWorthEmailingAbout": {
+            "type": "string"
+        },
+        "email": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "format": "email"
+        },
+        "cc": false
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "author",
+            "href": "mailto:{email}?subject={title}{&amp;cc}",
+            "templateRequired": ["email"],
+            "hrefSchema": {
+                "required": ["title"],
+                "properties": {
+                    "title": {
+                        "type": "string"
+                    },
+                    "cc": {
+                        "type": "string",
+                        "format": "email"
+                    },
+                    "email": false
+                }
+            },
+            "submissionMediaType":
+                    "multipart/alternative; boundary=ab2",
+            "submissionSchema": {
+                "type": "array",
+                "items": [
+                    {
+                        "type": "string",
+                        "contentMediaType":
+                                "text/plain; charset=utf8"
+                    },
+                    {
+                        "type": "string",
+                        "contentMediaType": "text/html"
+                    }
+                ],
+                "minItems": 2
+            }
+        }
+    ]
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.6">For the URI parameters, each of the three demonstrates a different way of resolving the input: </p>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>email:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">This variable's presence in "templateRequired" means that it must be resolved for the template to be used.  Since the "false" schema assigned to it in "hrefSchema" excludes it from the input data set, it must be resolved from the instance.  </dd>
+  <dt>title:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The instance field matching this variable is required, and it is also allowed in the input data.  So its instance value is used to pre-populate the input data set before accepting client input.  The client application can opt to leave the instance value in place.  Since this field is required in "hrefSchema", the client application cannot delete it (although it could set it to an empty string).  </dd>
+  <dt>cc:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The "false" schema set for this in the main schema prevents this field from having an instance value.  If it is present at all, it must come from client input.  As it is not required in "hrefSchema", it may not be used at all.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.7">So, given the following instance retrieved from "https://api.example.com/stuff": </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "title": "The Awesome Thing",
+    "stuffWorthEmailingAbout": "Lots of text here...",
+    "email": "someone@exapmle.com"
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.8">We can partially resolve the link as follows, before asking the client application for input.  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/stuff",
+    "contextPointer": "",
+    "rel": "author",
+    "hrefInputTemplates": [
+      "mailto:someone@example.com?subject={title}{&amp;cc}"
+    ],
+    "hrefPrepopulatedInput": {
+        "title": "The Really Awesome Thing"
+    },
+    "attachmentPointer": ""
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.9">Notice the "href*" keywords in place of "targetUri".  These are three possible kinds of "targetUri" values covering different sorts of input.  Here are examples of each: </p>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>No additional or changed input:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">"mailto:someone@example.com?subject=The%20Awesome%20Thing" </dd>
+  <dt>Change "title" to "your work":</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">"mailto:someone@example.com?subject=your%20work" </dd>
+  <dt>Change title and add a "cc" of "other@elsewhere.org":</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">"mailto:someone@example.com?subject=your%20work&amp;cc=other@elsewhere.org" </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.4"><a href="#rfc.section.9.4">9.4.</a> "anchor", "base" and URI Template Resolution</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.1">A link is a typed connection from a context resource to a target resource.  Older link serializations support a "rev" keyword that takes a link relation type as "rel" does, but reverses the semantics.  This has long been deprecated, so JSON Hyper-Schema does not support it.  Instead, "anchor"'s ability to change the context URI can be used to reverse the direction of a link.  It can also be used to describe a link between two resources, neither of which is the current resource.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.2">As an example, there is an IANA-registered "up" relation, but there is no "down".  In an HTTP Link header, you could implement "down" as <samp>"rev": "up"</samp>.  </p>
+<p>First let's look at how this could be done in HTTP, showing a "self" link and two semantically identical links, one with "rev": "up" and the other using "anchor" with "rel": "up" (line wrapped due to formatting limitations).  </p>
+<pre>
+
+GET https://api.example.com/trees/1/nodes/123 HTTP/1.1
+
+200 OK
+Content-Type: application/json
+Link: &lt;https://api.example.com/trees/1/nodes/123&gt; rel=self
+Link: &lt;https://api.example.com/trees/1/nodes/123&gt; rel=up
+        anchor=&lt;https://api.example.com/trees/1/nodes/456&gt;
+Link: &lt;https://api.example.com/trees/1/nodes/456&gt; rev=up
+{
+    "id": 123,
+    "treeId": 1,
+    "childIds": [456]
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Note that the "rel=up" link has a target URI identical to the "rel=self" link, and sets "anchor" (which identifies the link's context) to the child's URI.  This sort of reversed link is easily detectable by tools when a "self" link is also present.  </p>
+<p>The following hyper-schema, applied to the instance in the response above, would produce the same "self" link and "up" link with "anchor".  It also shows the use of a templated "base" URI, plus both absolute and relative JSON Pointers in "templatePointers".  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/tree-node",
+    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema#",
+    "base": "trees/{treeId}/",
+    "properties": {
+        "id": {"type": "integer"},
+        "treeId": {"type": "integer"},
+        "childIds": {
+            "type": "array",
+            "items": {
+                "type": "integer",
+                "links": [
+                    {
+                        "anchor": "nodes/{thisNodeId}",
+                        "rel": "up",
+                        "href": "nodes/{childId}",
+                        "templatePointers": {
+                            "thisNodeId": "/id",
+                            "childId": "0"
+                        }
+                    }
+                ]
+            }
+        }
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "nodes/{id}"
+        }
+    ]
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p>The "base" template is evaluated identically for both the target ("href") and context ("anchor") URIs.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.3">Note the two different sorts of templatePointers used.  "thisNodeId" is mapped to an absolute JSON Pointer, "/id", while "childId" is mapped to a relative pointer, "0", which indicates the value of the current item.  Absolute JSON Pointers do not support any kind of wildcarding, so there is no way to specify a concept like "current item" without a relative JSON Pointer.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.5"><a href="#rfc.section.9.5">9.5.</a> Collections</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.1">In many systems, individual resources are grouped into collections.  Those collections also often provide a way to create individual item resources with server-assigned identifiers.  </p>
+<p>For this example, we will re-use the individual thing schema as shown in an earlier section.  It is repeated here for convenience, with an added "collection" link with a "targetSchema" reference pointing to the collection schema we will introduce next.  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/thing",
+    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema#",
+    "base": "https://api.example.com/",
+    "type": "object",
+    "required": ["data"],
+    "properties": {
+        "id": {"$ref": "#/definitions/id"},
+        "data": true
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "things/{id}",
+            "templateRequired": ["id"],
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }, {
+            "rel": "collection",
+            "href": "/things",
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "thing-collection#"},
+            "submissionSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }
+    ],
+    "definitions": {
+        "id": {
+            "type": "integer",
+            "minimum": 1,
+            "readOnly": true
+        }
+    }
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p>The "collection" link is the same for all items, so there are no URI Template variables.  The "submissionSchema" is that of the item itself.  As described in <a href="#collectionAndItem">Section 6.2.3</a>, if a "collection" link supports a submission mechanism (POST in HTTP) then it MUST implement item creation semantics.  Therefore "submissionSchema" is the schema for creating a "thing" via this link.  </p>
+<p>Now we want to describe collections of "thing"s.  This schema describes a collection where each item representation is identical to the individual "thing" representation.  While many collection representations only include subset of the item representations, this example uses the entirety to minimize the number of schemas involved.  The actual collection items appear as an array within an object, as we will add more fields to the object in the next example.  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/thing-collection",
+    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema#",
+    "base": "https://api.example.com/",
+    "type": "object",
+    "required": ["elements"],
+    "properties": {
+        "elements": {
+            "type": "array",
+            "items": {
+                "allOf": [{"$ref": "thing#"}],
+                "links": [
+                    {
+                        "anchorPointer": "",
+                        "rel": "item",
+                        "href": "things/{id}",
+                        "templateRequired": ["id"],
+                        "targetSchema": {"$ref": "thing#"}
+                    }
+                ]
+            }
+        }
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "things",
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"},
+            "submissionSchema": {"$ref": "thing"}
+        }
+    ]
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p>Here is a simple two-element collection instance: </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "elements": [
+        {"id": 12345, "data": {}},
+        {"id": 67890, "data": {}}
+    ]
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p>Here are all of the links that apply to this instance, including those that are defined in the referenced individual "thing" schema: </p>
+<pre>
+[
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "self",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "attachmentPointer": ""
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "/elements/0",
+        "rel": "self",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/things/12345",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/0"
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "/elements/1",
+        "rel": "self",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/things/67890",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/1"
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "item",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/things/12345",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/0"
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "item",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/things/67890",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/1"
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "/elements/0",
+        "rel": "collection",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/0"
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "/elements/1",
+        "rel": "collection",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/1"
+    }
+]
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>In all cases, the context URI is shown for an instance of media type application/json, which does not support fragments.  If the instance media type was application/instance+json, which supports JSON Pointer fragments, then the context URIs would contain fragments identical to the context pointer field.  For application/json and other media types without fragments, it is critically important to consider the context pointer as well as the context URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.2">There are three "self" links, one for the collection, and one for each item in the "elements" array.  The item "self" links are defined in the individual "thing" schema which is referenced with "$ref".  The three links can be distinguished by their context or attachment pointers.  We will revisit the "submissionSchema" of the collection's "self" link in <a href="#firstItem">Section 9.5.2</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.3">There are two "item" links, one for each item in the "elements" array.  Unlike the "self" links, these are defined only in the collection schema.  Each of them have the same target URI as the corresponding "self" link that shares the same attachment pointer.  However, each has a different context pointer.  The context of the "self" link is the entry in "elements", while the context of the "item" link is always the entire collection regardless of the specific item.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.4">Finally, there are two "collection" links, one for each item in "elements".  In the individual item schema, these produce links with the item resource as the context.  When referenced from the collection schema, the context is the location in the "elements" array of the relevant "thing", rather than that "thing"'s own separate resource URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.5">The collection links have identical target URIs as there is only one relevant collection URI.  While calculating both links as part of a full set of constructed links may not seem useful, when constructing links on an as-needed basis, this arrangement means that there is a "collection" link definition close at hand no matter which "elements" entry you are processing.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.5.1"><a href="#rfc.section.9.5.1">9.5.1.</a> Pagination</h1>
+<p>Here we add pagination to our collection.  There is a "meta" section to hold the information about current, next, and previous pages.  Most of the schema is the same as in the previous section and has been omitted.  Only new fields and new or (in the case of the main "self" link) changed links are shown in full.  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "properties": {
+        "elements": {
+            ...
+        },
+        "meta": {
+            "type": "object",
+            "properties": {
+                "prev": {"$ref": "#/definitions/pagination"},
+                "current": {"$ref": "#/definitions/pagination"},
+                "next": {"$ref": "#/definitions/pagination"}
+            }
+        }
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "things{?offset,limit}",
+            "templateRequired": ["offset", "limit"],
+            "templatePointers": {
+                "offset": "/meta/current/offset",
+                "limit": "/meta/current/limit"
+            },
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }, {
+            "rel": "prev",
+            "href": "things{?offset,limit}",
+            "templateRequired": ["offset", "limit"],
+            "templatePointers": {
+                "offset": "/meta/prev/offset",
+                "limit": "/meta/prev/limit"
+            },
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }, {
+            "rel": "next",
+            "href": "things{?offset,limit}",
+            "templateRequired": ["offset", "limit"],
+            "templatePointers": {
+                "offset": "/meta/next/offset",
+                "limit": "/meta/next/limit"
+            },
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }
+    ],
+    "definitions": {
+        "pagination": {
+            "type": "object",
+            "properties": {
+                "offset": {
+                    "type": "integer",
+                    "minimum": 0,
+                    "default": 0
+                },
+                "limit": {
+                    "type": "integer",
+                    "minimum": 1,
+                    "maximum": 100,
+                    "default": 10
+                }
+            }
+        }
+    }
+}
+                        </pre>
+<p>Notice that the "self" link includes the pagination query that produced the exact representation, rather than being a generic link to the collection allowing selecting the page via input.  </p>
+<p>Given this instance: </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "elements": [
+        {"id": 12345, "data": {}},
+        {"id": 67890, "data": {}}
+    ],
+    "meta": {
+        "current": {
+            "offset": 0,
+            "limit": 2
+        },
+        "next": {
+            "offset": 3,
+            "limit": 2
+        }
+    }
+}
+                        </pre>
+<p>Here are all of the links that apply to this instance that either did not appear in the previous example or have been changed with pagination added.  </p>
+<pre>
+[
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "self",
+        "targetUri":
+            "https://api.example.com/things?offset=20,limit=2",
+        "attachmentPointer": ""
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "next",
+        "targetUri":
+            "https://api.example.com/things?offset=22,limit=2",
+        "attachmentPointer": ""
+    }
+]
+                        </pre>
+<p>Note that there is no "prev" link in the output, as we are looking at the first page.  The lack of a "prev" field under "meta", together with the "prev" link's "templateRequired" values, means that the link is not usable with this particular instance.  </p>
+<p><a id="CREF7" class="info">[CREF7]<span class="info">It's not clear how pagination should work with the link from the "collection" links in the individual "thing" schema.  Technically, a link from an item to a paginated or filtered collection should go to a page/filter that contains the item (in this case the "thing") that is the link context.  See GitHub issue #421 for more discussion.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.1.p.2">Let's add a link for this collection to the entry point schema (<a href="#entryPoint">Section 9.1</a>), including pagination input in order to allow client applications to jump directly to a specific page.  Recall that the entry point schema consists only of links, therefore we only show the newly added link: </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "rel": "tag:rel.example.com,2017:thing-collection",
+    "href": "/things{?offset,limit}",
+    "hrefSchema": {
+        "$ref": "thing-collection#/definitions/pagination"
+    },
+    "submissionSchema": {
+        "$ref": "thing#"
+    },
+    "targetSchema": {
+        "$ref": "thing-collection#"
+    }
+}
+                        </pre>
+<p>Now we see the pagination parameters being accepted as input, so we can jump to any page within the collection.  The link relation type is a custom one as the generic "collection" link can only be used with an item as its context, not an entry point or other resource.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.5.2"><a href="#rfc.section.9.5.2">9.5.2.</a> <a href="#firstItem" id="firstItem">Creating the First Item</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.2.p.1">When we do not have any "thing"s, we do not have any resources with a relevant "collection" link.  Therefore we cannot use a "collection" link's submission keywords to create the first "thing"; hyper-schemas must be evaluated with respect to an instance.  Since the "elements" array in the collection instance would be empty, it cannot provide us with a collection link either.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.2.p.2">However, our entry point link can take us to the empty collection, and we can use the presence of "item" links in the hyper-schema to recognize that it is a collection.  Since the context of the "item" link is the collection, we simply look for a "self" link with the same context, which we can then treat as collection for the purposes of a creation operation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.2.p.3">Presumably, our custom link relation type in the entry point schema was sufficient to ensure that we have found the right collection.  A client application that recognizes that custom link relation type may know that it can immediately assume that the target is a collection, but a generic user agent cannot do so.  Despite the presence of a "-collection" suffix in our example, a generic user agent would have no way of knowing whether that substring indicates a hypermedia resource collection, or some other sort of collection.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.2.p.4">Once we have recognized the "self" link as being for the correct collection, we can use its "submissionSchema" and/or "submissionMediaType" keywords to perform an item creation operation.  <a id="CREF8" class="info">[CREF8]<span class="info">This works perfectly if the collection is unfiltered and unpaginated.  However, one should generally POST to a collection that will contain the created resource, and a "self" link MUST include any filters, pagination, or other query parameters.  Is it still valid to POST to such a "self" link even if the resulting item would not match the filter or appear within that page?  See GitHub issue #421 for further discussion.  </span></a> <a id="CREF9" class="info">[CREF9]<span class="info">Draft-04 of Hyper-Schema defined a "create" link relation that had the schema, rather than the instance, as its context.  This did not fit into the instance-based link model, and incorrectly used an operation name for a link relation type.  However, defining a more correctly designed link from the schema to the collection instance may be one possible approach to solving this.  Again, see GitHub issue #421 for more details.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10"><a href="#rfc.section.10">10.</a> <a href="#security" id="security">Security Considerations</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema defines a vocabulary for JSON Schema core and concerns all the security considerations listed there.  As a link serialization format, the security considerations of <a href="#RFC8288">RFC 8288 Web Linking</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC8288]</cite> also apply, with appropriate adjustments (e.g. "anchor" as an LDO keyword rather than an HTTP Link header attribute).  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.1"><a href="#rfc.section.10.1">10.1.</a> Target Attributes</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.1">As stated in <a href="#targetAttributes">Section 6.5</a>, all LDO keywords describing the target resource are advisory and MUST NOT be used in place of the authoritative information supplied by the target resource in response to an operation.  Target resource responses SHOULD indicate their own hyper-schema, which is authoritative.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.2">If the hyper-schema in the target response matches (by "$id") the hyper-schema in which the current LDO was found, then the target attributes MAY be considered authoritative.  <a id="CREF10" class="info">[CREF10]<span class="info">Need to add something about the risks of spoofing by "$id", but given that other parts of the specification discourage always re-downloading the linked schema, the risk mitigation options are unclear.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.3">User agents or client applications MUST NOT use the value of "targetSchema" to aid in the interpretation of the data received in response to following the link, as this leaves "safe" data open to re-interpretation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.4">When choosing how to interpret data, the type information provided by the server (or inferred from the filename, or any other usual method) MUST be the only consideration, and the "targetMediaType" property of the link MUST NOT be used.  User agents MAY use this information to determine how they represent the link or where to display it (for example hover-text, opening in a new tab).  If user agents decide to pass the link to an external program, they SHOULD first verify that the data is of a type that would normally be passed to that external program.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.5">This is to guard against re-interpretation of "safe" data, similar to the precautions for "targetSchema".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.6">Protocol meta-data values conveyed in "targetHints" MUST NOT be considered authoritative.  Any security considerations defined by the protocol that may apply based on incorrect assumptions about meta-data values apply.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.7">Even when no protocol security considerations are directly applicable, implementations MUST be prepared to handle responses that do not match the link's "targetHints" values.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2"><a href="#rfc.section.10.2">10.2.</a> "self" Links</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.p.1">When link relation of "self" is used to denote a full representation of an object, the user agent SHOULD NOT consider the representation to be the authoritative representation of the resource denoted by the target URI if the target URI is not equivalent to or a sub-path of the URI used to request the resource representation which contains the target URI with the "self" link.  <a id="CREF11" class="info">[CREF11]<span class="info">It is no longer entirely clear what was intended by the "sub-path" option in this paragraph.  It may have been intended to allow "self" links for embedded item representations in a collection, which usually have target URIs that are sub-paths of that collection's URI, to be considered authoritative.  However, this is simply a common design convention and does not appear to be based in RFC 3986 or any other guidance on URI usage.  See GitHub issue #485 for further discussion.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.11"><a href="#rfc.section.11">11.</a> Acknowledgments</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.1">Thanks to Gary Court, Francis Galiegue, Kris Zyp, and Geraint Luff for their work on the initial drafts of JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.2">Thanks to Jason Desrosiers, Daniel Perrett, Erik Wilde, Ben Hutton, Evgeny Poberezkin, Brad Bowman, Gowry Sankar, Donald Pipowitch, Dave Finlay, and Denis Laxalde for their submissions and patches to the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.references"><a href="#rfc.references">12.</a> References</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.1"><a href="#rfc.references.1">12.1.</a> Normative References</h1>
+<table>
+  <tbody>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Bradner, S.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</a>", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC3986">[RFC3986]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Berners-Lee, T.</a>, <a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>L. Masinter</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986">Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax</a>", STD 66, RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC4287">[RFC4287]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Nottingham, M.</a> and <a>R. Sayre</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287">The Atom Syndication Format</a>", RFC 4287, DOI 10.17487/RFC4287, December 2005.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC6570">[RFC6570]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Gregorio, J.</a>, <a>Fielding, R.</a>, <a>Hadley, M.</a>, <a>Nottingham, M.</a> and <a>D. Orchard</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6570">URI Template</a>", RFC 6570, DOI 10.17487/RFC6570, March 2012.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC6573">[RFC6573]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Amundsen, M.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6573">The Item and Collection Link Relations</a>", RFC 6573, DOI 10.17487/RFC6573, April 2012.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC6901">[RFC6901]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Bryan, P.</a>, <a>Zyp, K.</a> and <a>M. Nottingham</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6901">JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Pointer</a>", RFC 6901, DOI 10.17487/RFC6901, April 2013.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC8288">[RFC8288]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Nottingham, M.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8288">Web Linking</a>", RFC 8288, DOI 10.17487/RFC8288, October 2017.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="relative-json-pointer">[relative-json-pointer]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Luff, G.</a> and <a title="Cloudflare, Inc.">H. Andrews</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01">Relative JSON Pointers</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01, January 2018.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="json-schema">[json-schema]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Wright, A.</a> and <a title="Cloudflare, Inc.">H. Andrews</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-00">JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-json-schema-00, November 2017.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="json-schema-validation">[json-schema-validation]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Wright, A.</a>, <a title="Cloudflare, Inc.">Andrews, H.</a> and <a>G. Luff</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-00">JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-00, November 2017.</td>
+    </tr>
+  </tbody>
+</table>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.2"><a href="#rfc.references.2">12.2.</a> Informative References</h1>
+<table>
+  <tbody>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC2046">[RFC2046]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Freed, N.</a> and <a>N. Borenstein</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2046">Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types</a>", RFC 2046, DOI 10.17487/RFC2046, November 1996.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC4151">[RFC4151]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Kindberg, T.</a> and <a>S. Hawke</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4151">The 'tag' URI Scheme</a>", RFC 4151, DOI 10.17487/RFC4151, October 2005.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC5789">[RFC5789]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Dusseault, L.</a> and <a>J. Snell</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5789">PATCH Method for HTTP</a>", RFC 5789, DOI 10.17487/RFC5789, March 2010.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC6068">[RFC6068]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Duerst, M.</a>, <a>Masinter, L.</a> and <a>J. Zawinski</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6068">The 'mailto' URI Scheme</a>", RFC 6068, DOI 10.17487/RFC6068, October 2010.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC7230">[RFC7230]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>J. Reschke</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230">Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing</a>", RFC 7230, DOI 10.17487/RFC7230, June 2014.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC7231">[RFC7231]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>J. Reschke</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231">Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content</a>", RFC 7231, DOI 10.17487/RFC7231, June 2014.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC7807">[RFC7807]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Nottingham, M.</a> and <a>E. Wilde</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7807">Problem Details for HTTP APIs</a>", RFC 7807, DOI 10.17487/RFC7807, March 2016.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="I-D.reschke-http-jfv">[I-D.reschke-http-jfv]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Reschke, J.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-reschke-http-jfv-06">A JSON Encoding for HTTP Header Field Values</a>", Internet-Draft draft-reschke-http-jfv-06, June 2017.</td>
+    </tr>
+  </tbody>
+</table>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A"><a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Appendix A.</a> <a href="#apis" id="apis">Using JSON Hyper-Schema in APIs</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.1">Hypermedia APIs, which follow the constraints of the REST architectural style, enable the creation of generic user agents.  Such a user agent has no application-specific knowledge.  Rather, it understands pre-defined media types, URI schemes, protocols, and link relations, often by recognizing these and coordinating the use of existing software that implements support for them.  Client applications can then be built on top of such a user agent, focusing on their own semantics and logic rather than the mechanics of the interactions.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.2">Hyper-schema is only concerned with one resource and set of associated links at a time.  Just as a web browser works with only one HTML page at a time, with no concept of whether or how that page functions as part of a "site", a hyper-schema-aware user agent works with one resource at a time, without any concept of whether or how that resource fits into an API.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.3">Therefore, hyper-schema is suitable for use within an API, but is not suitable for the description of APIs as complete entities in their own right.  There is no way to describe concepts at the API scope, rather than the resource and link scope, and such descriptions are outside of the boundaries of JSON Hyper-Schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A.1"><a href="#rfc.appendix.A.1">A.1.</a> Resource Evolution With Hyper-Schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.1.p.1">Since a given JSON Hyper-Schema is used with a single resource at a single point in time, it has no inherent notion of versioning.  However, a given resource can change which schema or schemas it uses over time, and the URIs of these schemas can be used to indicate versioning information.  When used with a media type that supports indicating a schema with a media type parameter, these versioned schema URIs can be used in content negotiation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.1.p.2">A resource can indicate that it is an instance of multiple schemas, which allows supporting multiple compatible versions simultaneously.  A client application can then make use of the hyper-schema that it recognizes, and ignore newer or older versions.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A.2"><a href="#rfc.appendix.A.2">A.2.</a> <a href="#responses" id="responses">Responses and Errors</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.2.p.1">Because a hyper-schema represents a single resource at a time, it does not provide for an enumeration of all possible responses to protocol operations performed with links.  Each response, including errors, is considered its own (possibly anonymous) resource, and should identify its own hyper-schema, and optionally use an appropriate media type such as <a href="#RFC7807">RFC 7807's "application/problem+json"</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7807]</cite>, to allow the user agent or client application to interpret any information that is provided beyond the protocol's own status reporting.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A.3"><a href="#rfc.appendix.A.3">A.3.</a> <a href="#staticAnalysis" id="staticAnalysis">Static Analysis of an API's Hyper-Schemas</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.3.p.1">It is possible to statically analyze a set of hyper-schemas without instance data in order to generate output such as documentation or code.  However, the full feature set of both validation and hyper-schema cannot be accessed without runtime instance data.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.3.p.2">This is an intentional design choice to provide the maximum runtime flexibility for hypermedia systems.  JSON Schema as a media type allows for establishing additional vocabularies for static analysis and content generation, which are not addressed in this specification.  Additionally, individual systems may restrict their usage to subsets that can be analyzed statically if full design-time description is a goal.  <a id="CREF12" class="info">[CREF12]<span class="info">Vocabularies for API documentation and other purposes have been proposed, and contributions are welcome at https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-vocabularies </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.B"><a href="#rfc.appendix.B">Appendix B.</a> ChangeLog</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF13" class="info">[CREF13]<span class="info">This section to be removed before leaving Internet-Draft status.</span></a> </p>
+<p/>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-01</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>This draft is purely a bug fix with no functional changes</li>
+      <li>Fixed erroneous meta-schema URI (draft-07, not draft-07-wip)</li>
+      <li>Removed stray "work in progress" language left over from review period</li>
+      <li>Fixed missing trailing "/" in various "base" examples</li>
+      <li>Fixed incorrect draft name in changelog (luff-*-00, not -01)</li>
+      <li>Update relative pointer ref to handrews-*-01, also purely a bug fix</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-00</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Top to bottom reorganization and rewrite</li>
+      <li>Group keywords per RFC 8288 context/relation/target/target attributes</li>
+      <li>Additional keyword groups for template resolution and describing input</li>
+      <li>Clarify implementation requirements with a suggested output format</li>
+      <li>Expanded overview to provide context</li>
+      <li>Consolidated examples into their own section, illustrate real-world patterns</li>
+      <li>Consolidated HTTP guidance in its own section</li>
+      <li>Added a subsection on static analysis of hyper-schemas</li>
+      <li>Consolidated security concerns in their own section</li>
+      <li>Added an appendix on usage in APIs</li>
+      <li>Moved "readOnly" to the validation specification</li>
+      <li>Moved "media" to validation as "contentMediaType"/"contentEncoding"</li>
+      <li>Renamed "submissionEncType" to "submissionMediaType"</li>
+      <li>Renamed "mediaType" to "targetMediaType"</li>
+      <li>Added "anchor" and "anchorPointer"</li>
+      <li>Added "templatePointers" and "templateRequired"</li>
+      <li>Clarified how "hrefSchema" is used</li>
+      <li>Added "targetHints" and "headerSchema"</li>
+      <li>Added guidance on "self", "collection" and "item" link usage</li>
+      <li>Added "description" as an LDO keyword</li>
+      <li>Added "$comment" in LDOs to match the schema keyword</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-01</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Fixed examples</li>
+      <li>Added "hrefSchema" for user input to "href" URI Templates</li>
+      <li>Removed URI Template pre-processing</li>
+      <li>Clarified how links and data submission work</li>
+      <li>Clarified how validation keywords apply hyper-schema keywords and links</li>
+      <li>Clarified HTTP use with "targetSchema"</li>
+      <li>Renamed "schema" to "submissionSchema"</li>
+      <li>Renamed "encType" to "submissionEncType"</li>
+      <li>Removed "method"</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-00</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>"rel" is now optional</li>
+      <li>rel="self" no longer changes URI base</li>
+      <li>Added "base" keyword to change instance URI base</li>
+      <li>Removed "root" link relation</li>
+      <li>Removed "create" link relation</li>
+      <li>Removed "full" link relation</li>
+      <li>Removed "instances" link relation</li>
+      <li>Removed special behavior for "describedBy" link relation</li>
+      <li>Removed "pathStart" keyword</li>
+      <li>Removed "fragmentResolution" keyword</li>
+      <li>Updated references to JSON Pointer, HTML</li>
+      <li>Changed behavior of "method" property to align with hypermedia best current practices</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-luff-json-hyper-schema-00</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Split from main specification.</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.authors">
+  <a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a>
+</h1>
+<div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Henry Andrews</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Andrews</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline">Cloudflare, Inc.</span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality">San Francisco</span>,  
+		<span class="region">CA</span> 
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline">USA</span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:henry@cloudflare.com">henry@cloudflare.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Austin Wright</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Wright</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:aaa@bzfx.net">aaa@bzfx.net</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/draft-07/json-schema-release-notes.md b/draft-07/json-schema-release-notes.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..99cee747
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-07/json-schema-release-notes.md
@@ -0,0 +1,129 @@
+---
+title: JSON Schema Draft-07 Release Notes
+layout: page
+---
+
+For the Core and Validation specifications, draft-07 is a relatively
+minor update.  In terms of validation keywords and outcomes, it is fully
+backwards-compatible with draft-06.
+
+Some differences exist with keywords moved over from Hyper-Schema, and with
+how instances and schemas are recommended to be linked together.  Finally,
+the process of collecting annotation keyword values has been defined
+more clearly than before.
+
+* TOC
+{:toc}
+
+### Keywords
+
+* No keywords changed behavior
+* No keywords were removed
+* Some keywords were moved from Hyper-Schema, and two of those were renamed
+
+keyword | change | notes
+---- | ---- | ----
+[`"$comment"`](json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.9) | added to Core | Intended for notes to schema maintainers, as opposed to [`"description"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.10.1) which is suitable for display to end users
+[`"if"`, `"then"`, `"else"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.6.6) | added to Validation | explicit conditional schema evaluation 
+[`"readOnly"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.10.3) | moved from Hyper-Schema to Validation | not limited to hypermedia environments
+[`"writeOnly"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.10.3) | added to Validation | general write-only fields, including but not limited to passwords
+[`"contentMediaType"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.8) | moved from Hyper-Schema to Validation | formerly [`"media": {"type": "..."}`](../draft-06/json-schema-hypermedia.html#rfc.section.5.3)
+[`"contentEncoding"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.8)  | moved from Hyper-Schema to Validation | formerly [`"media": {"binaryEncoding": "..."}`](../draft-06/json-schema-hypermedia.html#rfc.section.5.3)
+
+Note that the `"content*"` keywords do not _require_ validation.
+
+### Formats
+
+Numerous formats were added, clarified, or restored from older drafts.
+
+format | change | notes
+---- | ---- | ----
+[`"iri"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7.3.5) | added | I18N equivalent of `"uri"`
+[`"iri-reference"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7.3.5) | added | I18N equivalent of `"uri-reference"`
+[`"uri-template"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7.3.6) | noted IRI support | There is no separate IRI Template standard
+[`"idn-email"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7.3.2) | added | I18N equivalent of `"email"`
+[`"idn-hostname"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7.3.3) | added | I18N equivalent of `"hostname"`
+[`"json-pointer"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7.3.7) | clarified | Use for string form only, not URI fragment
+[`"relative-json-pointer"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7.3.7) | added | Revived [Relative JSON Pointer](relative-json-pointer.html) draft
+[`"regex"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7.3.8) | restored from draft-03 | ECMA 262 regular expressions
+[`"date"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7.3.1) | restored from draft-03 | RFC 3339 "full-date"
+[`"time"`](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7.3.1) | restored from draft-03 | RFC 3339 "full-time"
+
+All other RFC 3339 date, time, and duration names are reserved for future
+consideration.  If added as extension formats, they SHOULD be implemented
+in a way that is compatible with their use in the RFC to ensure future
+compatibility.
+
+### Classification of Keywords
+
+While it does not have a direct impact on the validation process, this set
+of drafts classifies keywords by their behavior.  The names of these
+classifications are used throughout the documents, so they are useful
+to know:
+
+* [Applicability](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.3.1)
+* [Assertions](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.3.2)
+* [Annotations](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.3.3)
+
+Note that `definitions` does not fit any of these categories, nor do the
+dollar-prefixed Core keywords.
+
+### Collecting Annotation Values
+
+[Annotation keywords](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.10) (formerly
+called [metadata keywords](../draft-06/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7)
+now provide guidance on
+[how to collect multiple values](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.3.3)
+that apply to the same location in the instance.  By default, all values
+that are not found within
+[negated schemas](json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.3.3.1) are collected
+as an unordered set.  The following exceptions are documented under the
+approprite keywords:
+
+* `readOnly` and `writeOnly` should be logically ORed
+* `examples` should be flattened into a single collected array
+
+### JSON Schema in Hypermedia Environments
+
+These changes are not relevant to many Validation use cases, and are more
+of interest to Hyper-Schema users.  However, even without Hyper-Schema,
+if you are accessing instance documents over HTTP or through other hypermedia
+environments, you may find this section useful.
+
+#### Linking Instances and Schemas
+
+After discussions with the author of the "profile" specification, we concluded
+that its use for JSON Schema was not correct.  The new guidance for
+[what relations to use](json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.11.1)
+to link instances to schemas is:
+
+link relation | change | notes
+---- | ---- | ----
+"describedBy" | no change | network-accessible URL
+"profile" | removed; use "schema" | opaque identifying URI
+"schema" | added | opaque identifying URI
+
+"schema", like "profile" in past drafts, can also be used as a
+[media type parameter](json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.11.2).
+
+#### Instance Media Type
+
+Changes in the section are more relevant to JSON Hyper-Schema than to
+Validation, but as they are part of the core specification, they are
+explained here.
+
+Media types determine their own parameters, as well as their own
+URI fragment syntax(es).  `application/json` does not allow any parameters
+or URI fragments.
+
+[`application/schema-instance+json`](json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.4.2.2)
+ is an optional media type for use with instances that supports "schema"
+as a media type parameter, and allows for URI fragments using the JSON Pointer
+syntax.
+
+Supporting "schema" as a media type parameter allows for
+schema-based content negotiation in hypermedia environments.
+
+Supporting JSON Pointer URI fragments is primarily useful with JSON Hyper-Schema,
+as many URIs involved in hyper-schema usage originate from or point to
+locations within an instance document rather than the entire document.
diff --git a/draft-07/json-schema-validation.html b/draft-07/json-schema-validation.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..77c144ba
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-07/json-schema-validation.html
@@ -0,0 +1,1305 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
+  "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
+<head profile="http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/">
+  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" />
+
+  <title>JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON </title>
+
+  <style type="text/css" title="Xml2Rfc (sans serif)">
+  /*<![CDATA[*/
+	  a {
+	  text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+      /* info code from SantaKlauss at http://www.madaboutstyle.com/tooltip2.html */
+      a.info {
+          /* This is the key. */
+          position: relative;
+          z-index: 24;
+          text-decoration: none;
+      }
+      a.info:hover {
+          z-index: 25;
+          color: #FFF; background-color: #900;
+      }
+      a.info span { display: none; }
+      a.info:hover span.info {
+          /* The span will display just on :hover state. */
+          display: block;
+          position: absolute;
+          font-size: smaller;
+          top: 2em; left: -5em; width: 15em;
+          padding: 2px; border: 1px solid #333;
+          color: #900; background-color: #EEE;
+          text-align: left;
+      }
+	  a.smpl {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  a:hover {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  a:active {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  address {
+	  margin-top: 1em;
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  body {
+	  color: black;
+	  font-family: verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  max-width: 55em;
+	  
+	  }
+	  cite {
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  dd {
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  dl {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.empty {
+	  list-style-type: none;
+	  }
+	  ul.empty li {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  dl p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  dt {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  h1 {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h1.np {
+	  page-break-before: always;
+	  }
+	  h1 a {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  }
+	  h2 {
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 15pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h2 a, h3 a, h4 a, h5 a, h6 a {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  img {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  }
+	  li {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  p {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  pre {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  background-color: lightyellow;
+	  padding: .25em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text2 {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f0f0f0;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.inline {
+	  background-color: white;
+	  padding: 0em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.drawing {
+	  border-style: solid;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  padding: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table.tt {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt td {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full td {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt th {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full th {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers th {
+	  border-style: none none inset none;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.left {
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.right {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.center {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  caption {
+	  caption-side: bottom;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+	  border-spacing: 1px;
+	  width: 95%;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.top {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  td.topnowrap {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap; 
+	  }
+	  table.header td {
+	  background-color: gray;
+	  width: 50%;
+	  }
+	  table.header a {
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.reference {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap;
+	  padding-right: 1em;
+	  }
+	  thead {
+	  display:table-header-group;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc, ul.toc ul {
+	  list-style: none;
+	  margin-left: 1.5em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  padding-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li {
+	  line-height: 150%;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li li {
+	  line-height: normal;
+	  font-weight: normal;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  li.excluded {
+	  font-size: 0pt;
+	  }
+	  ul p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	
+	  .comment {
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	  .center {
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .error {
+	  color: red;
+	  font-style: italic;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .figure {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  }
+	  .filename {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .fn {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .hidden {
+	  display: none;
+	  }
+	  .left {
+	  text-align: left;
+	  }
+	  .right {
+	  text-align: right;
+	  }
+	  .title {
+	  color: #990000;
+	  font-size: 18pt;
+	  line-height: 18pt;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  margin-top: 36pt;
+	  }
+	  .vcardline {
+	  display: block;
+	  }
+	  .warning {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	
+	
+	  @media print {
+	  .noprint {
+		display: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  a {
+		color: black;
+		text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+		width: 90%;
+	  }
+	
+	  td.header {
+		width: 50%;
+		color: black;
+		background-color: white;
+		vertical-align: top;
+		font-size: 12pt;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.toc a::after {
+		content: leader('.') target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.ind li li a {
+		content: target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  .print2col {
+		column-count: 2;
+		-moz-column-count: 2;
+		column-fill: auto;
+	  }
+	  }
+	
+	  @page {
+	  @top-left {
+		   content: "Internet-Draft"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-right {
+		   content: "December 2010"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-center {
+		   content: "Abbreviated Title";
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-left {
+		   content: "Doe"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-center {
+		   content: "Expires June 2011"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-right {
+		   content: "[Page " counter(page) "]"; 
+	  } 
+	  }
+	
+	  @page:first { 
+		@top-left {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-right {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-center {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+	  }
+  /*]]>*/
+  </style>
+
+  <link href="#rfc.toc" rel="Contents"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.1" rel="Chapter" title="1 Introduction"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.2" rel="Chapter" title="2 Conventions and Terminology"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3" rel="Chapter" title="3 Overview"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="3.1 Applicability"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.1.1" rel="Chapter" title="3.1.1 Keyword Independence"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="3.2 Assertions"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="3.2.1 Assertions and Instance Primitive Types"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.3" rel="Chapter" title="3.3 Annotations"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="3.3.1 Annotations and Validation Outcomes"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="3.3.2 Annotations and Short-Circuit Validation"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4" rel="Chapter" title="4 Interoperability Considerations"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.1" rel="Chapter" title="4.1 Validation of String Instances"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.2" rel="Chapter" title="4.2 Validation of Numeric Instances"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3" rel="Chapter" title="4.3 Regular Expressions"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.5" rel="Chapter" title="5 Meta-Schema"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6" rel="Chapter" title="6 Validation Keywords"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.1 Validation Keywords for Any Instance Type"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.1.1 type"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.1.2 enum"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.1.3 const"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.2 Validation Keywords for Numeric Instances (number and integer)"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.1 multipleOf"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.2 maximum"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.3 exclusiveMaximum"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.4 minimum"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.5 exclusiveMinimum"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.3 Validation Keywords for Strings"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.3.1 maxLength"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.3.2 minLength"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.3.3 pattern"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.4 Validation Keywords for Arrays"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.1 items"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.2 additionalItems"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.3 maxItems"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.4 minItems"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.5 uniqueItems"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.6" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.6 contains"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.5 Validation Keywords for Objects"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.1 maxProperties"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.2 minProperties"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.3 required"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.4 properties"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.5 patternProperties"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.6" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.6 additionalProperties"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.7" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.7 dependencies"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.8" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.8 propertyNames"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6" rel="Chapter" title="6.6 Keywords for Applying Subschemas Conditionally"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.6.1 if"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.6.2 then"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.6.3 else"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.7" rel="Chapter" title="6.7 Keywords for Applying Subschemas With Boolean Logic"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.7.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.7.1 allOf"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.7.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.7.2 anyOf"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.7.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.7.3 oneOf"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.7.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.7.4 not"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7" rel="Chapter" title="7 Semantic Validation With &quot;format&quot;"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.1 Foreword"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.2 Implementation Requirements"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.3 Defined Formats"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.1 Dates and Times"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.2 Email Addresses"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.3 Hostnames"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.4" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.4 IP Addresses"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.5" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.5 Resource Identifiers"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.6" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.6 uri-template"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.7" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.7 JSON Pointers"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.8" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.8 regex"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8" rel="Chapter" title="8 String-Encoding Non-JSON Data"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1" rel="Chapter" title="8.1 Foreword"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2" rel="Chapter" title="8.2 Implementation Requirements"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.3" rel="Chapter" title="8.3 contentEncoding"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.4" rel="Chapter" title="8.4 contentMediaType"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.5" rel="Chapter" title="8.5 Example"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9" rel="Chapter" title="9 Schema Re-Use With &quot;definitions&quot;"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10" rel="Chapter" title="10 Schema Annotations"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.1" rel="Chapter" title="10.1 &quot;title&quot; and &quot;description&quot;"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.2" rel="Chapter" title="10.2 &quot;default&quot;"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.3" rel="Chapter" title="10.3 &quot;readOnly&quot; and &quot;writeOnly&quot;"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.4" rel="Chapter" title="10.4 &quot;examples&quot;"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.11" rel="Chapter" title="11 Security Considerations"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references" rel="Chapter" title="12 References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references.1" rel="Chapter" title="12.1 Normative References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references.2" rel="Chapter" title="12.2 Informative References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A" rel="Chapter" title="A Acknowledgments"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.B" rel="Chapter" title="B ChangeLog"/>
+<link href="#rfc.authors" rel="Chapter"/>
+
+
+  <meta name="generator" content="xml2rfc version 2.5.1 - http://tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc" />
+  <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" />
+
+  <meta name="dct.creator" content="Wright, A., Ed., Andrews, H., Ed., and G. Luff" />
+  <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01" />
+  <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2018-3-19" />
+  <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Schema (application/schema+json) has several purposes, one of which is JSON instance validation.  This document specifies a vocabulary for JSON Schema to describe the meaning of JSON documents, provide hints for user interfaces working with JSON data, and to make assertions about what a valid document must look like.  " />
+  <meta name="description" content="JSON Schema (application/schema+json) has several purposes, one of which is JSON instance validation.  This document specifies a vocabulary for JSON Schema to describe the meaning of JSON documents, provide hints for user interfaces working with JSON data, and to make assertions about what a valid document must look like.  " />
+
+</head>
+
+<body>
+
+  <table class="header">
+    <tbody>
+    
+    	<tr>
+  <td class="left">Internet Engineering Task Force</td>
+  <td class="right">A. Wright, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
+  <td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Intended status: Informational</td>
+  <td class="right">H. Andrews, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Expires: September 20, 2018</td>
+  <td class="right">Cloudflare, Inc.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left"></td>
+  <td class="right">G. Luff</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left"></td>
+  <td class="right">March 19, 2018</td>
+</tr>
+
+    	
+    </tbody>
+  </table>
+
+  <p class="title">JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON <br />
+  <span class="filename">draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01</span></p>
+  
+  <h1 id="rfc.abstract">
+  <a href="#rfc.abstract">Abstract</a>
+</h1>
+<p>JSON Schema (application/schema+json) has several purposes, one of which is JSON instance validation.  This document specifies a vocabulary for JSON Schema to describe the meaning of JSON documents, provide hints for user interfaces working with JSON data, and to make assertions about what a valid document must look like.  </p>
+<h1>
+  <a>Note to Readers</a>
+</h1>
+<p>The issues list for this draft can be found at <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues">https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>For additional information, see <span>&lt;</span><a href="http://json-schema.org/">http://json-schema.org/</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>To provide feedback, use this issue tracker, the communication methods listed on the homepage, or email the document editors.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.status">
+  <a href="#rfc.status">Status of This Memo</a>
+</h1>
+<p>This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.</p>
+<p>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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.</p>
+<p>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."</p>
+<p>This Internet-Draft will expire on September 20, 2018.</p>
+<h1 id="rfc.copyrightnotice">
+  <a href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a>
+</h1>
+<p>Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors.  All rights reserved.</p>
+<p>This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://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.</p>
+
+  
+  <hr class="noprint" />
+  <h1 class="np" id="rfc.toc"><a href="#rfc.toc">Table of Contents</a></h1>
+  <ul class="toc">
+
+  	<li>1.   <a href="#rfc.section.1">Introduction</a></li>
+<li>2.   <a href="#rfc.section.2">Conventions and Terminology</a></li>
+<li>3.   <a href="#rfc.section.3">Overview</a></li>
+<ul><li>3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.1">Applicability</a></li>
+<ul><li>3.1.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.1.1">Keyword Independence</a></li>
+</ul><li>3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.2">Assertions</a></li>
+<ul><li>3.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.2.1">Assertions and Instance Primitive Types</a></li>
+</ul><li>3.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.3">Annotations</a></li>
+<ul><li>3.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.3.1">Annotations and Validation Outcomes</a></li>
+<li>3.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.3.2">Annotations and Short-Circuit Validation</a></li>
+</ul></ul><li>4.   <a href="#rfc.section.4">Interoperability Considerations</a></li>
+<ul><li>4.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.1">Validation of String Instances</a></li>
+<li>4.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.2">Validation of Numeric Instances</a></li>
+<li>4.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3">Regular Expressions</a></li>
+</ul><li>5.   <a href="#rfc.section.5">Meta-Schema</a></li>
+<li>6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6">Validation Keywords</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1">Validation Keywords for Any Instance Type</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.1.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1.1">type</a></li>
+<li>6.1.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1.2">enum</a></li>
+<li>6.1.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1.3">const</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2">Validation Keywords for Numeric Instances (number and integer)</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.1">multipleOf</a></li>
+<li>6.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.2">maximum</a></li>
+<li>6.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.3">exclusiveMaximum</a></li>
+<li>6.2.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.4">minimum</a></li>
+<li>6.2.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.5">exclusiveMinimum</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3">Validation Keywords for Strings</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3.1">maxLength</a></li>
+<li>6.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3.2">minLength</a></li>
+<li>6.3.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3.3">pattern</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4">Validation Keywords for Arrays</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.4.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.1">items</a></li>
+<li>6.4.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.2">additionalItems</a></li>
+<li>6.4.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.3">maxItems</a></li>
+<li>6.4.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.4">minItems</a></li>
+<li>6.4.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.5">uniqueItems</a></li>
+<li>6.4.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.6">contains</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5">Validation Keywords for Objects</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.1">maxProperties</a></li>
+<li>6.5.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.2">minProperties</a></li>
+<li>6.5.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.3">required</a></li>
+<li>6.5.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.4">properties</a></li>
+<li>6.5.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.5">patternProperties</a></li>
+<li>6.5.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.6">additionalProperties</a></li>
+<li>6.5.7.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.7">dependencies</a></li>
+<li>6.5.8.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.8">propertyNames</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6">Keywords for Applying Subschemas Conditionally</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.6.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6.1">if</a></li>
+<li>6.6.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6.2">then</a></li>
+<li>6.6.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6.3">else</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.7.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.7">Keywords for Applying Subschemas With Boolean Logic</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.7.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.7.1">allOf</a></li>
+<li>6.7.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.7.2">anyOf</a></li>
+<li>6.7.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.7.3">oneOf</a></li>
+<li>6.7.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.7.4">not</a></li>
+</ul></ul><li>7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7">Semantic Validation With "format"</a></li>
+<ul><li>7.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.1">Foreword</a></li>
+<li>7.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2">Implementation Requirements</a></li>
+<li>7.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3">Defined Formats</a></li>
+<ul><li>7.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.1">Dates and Times</a></li>
+<li>7.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.2">Email Addresses</a></li>
+<li>7.3.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.3">Hostnames</a></li>
+<li>7.3.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.4">IP Addresses</a></li>
+<li>7.3.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.5">Resource Identifiers</a></li>
+<li>7.3.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.6">uri-template</a></li>
+<li>7.3.7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.7">JSON Pointers</a></li>
+<li>7.3.8.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.8">regex</a></li>
+</ul></ul><li>8.   <a href="#rfc.section.8">String-Encoding Non-JSON Data</a></li>
+<ul><li>8.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1">Foreword</a></li>
+<li>8.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2">Implementation Requirements</a></li>
+<li>8.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.3">contentEncoding</a></li>
+<li>8.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.4">contentMediaType</a></li>
+<li>8.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.5">Example</a></li>
+</ul><li>9.   <a href="#rfc.section.9">Schema Re-Use With "definitions"</a></li>
+<li>10.   <a href="#rfc.section.10">Schema Annotations</a></li>
+<ul><li>10.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.1">"title" and "description"</a></li>
+<li>10.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.2">"default"</a></li>
+<li>10.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.3">"readOnly" and "writeOnly"</a></li>
+<li>10.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.4">"examples"</a></li>
+</ul><li>11.   <a href="#rfc.section.11">Security Considerations</a></li>
+<li>12.   <a href="#rfc.references">References</a></li>
+<ul><li>12.1.   <a href="#rfc.references.1">Normative References</a></li>
+<li>12.2.   <a href="#rfc.references.2">Informative References</a></li>
+</ul><li>Appendix A.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Acknowledgments</a></li>
+<li>Appendix B.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.B">ChangeLog</a></li>
+<li><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a></li>
+
+
+  </ul>
+
+  <h1 id="rfc.section.1"><a href="#rfc.section.1">1.</a> Introduction</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.1">JSON Schema can be used to require that a given JSON document (an instance) satisfies a certain number of criteria. These criteria are asserted by using keywords described in this specification. In addition, a set of keywords is also defined to assist in interactive user interface instance generation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.2">This specification will use the concepts, syntax, and terminology defined by the <a href="#json-schema">JSON Schema core</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema]</cite> specification.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.2"><a href="#rfc.section.2">2.</a> Conventions and Terminology</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.1">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 <a href="#RFC2119">RFC 2119</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC2119]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.2">This specification uses the term "container instance" to refer to both array and object instances. It uses the term "children instances" to refer to array elements or object member values.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.3">Elements in an array value are said to be unique if no two elements of this array are <a href="#json-schema">equal</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3"><a href="#rfc.section.3">3.</a> Overview</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.1">JSON Schema validation applies schemas to locations within the instance, and asserts constraints on the structure of the data at each location.  An instance location that satisfies all asserted constraints is then annotated with any keywords that contain non-assertion information, such as descriptive metadata and usage hints.  If all locations within the instance satisfy all asserted constraints, then the instance is said to be valid against the schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.2">Each schema object is independently evaluated against each instance location to which it applies.  This greatly simplifies the implementation requirements for validators by ensuring that they do not need to maintain state across the document-wide validation process.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.1"><a href="#rfc.section.3.1">3.1.</a> Applicability</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.1">Validation begins by applying the root schema to the complete instance document.  From there, various keywords are used to determine which additional subschemas are applied to either the current location, or a child location.  These keywords also define whether and how subschema assertion results are modified and/or combined.  Such keywords do not assert conditions on their own.  Rather, they control how assertions are applied and evaluated.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.2">The keywords in the <a href="#logic">boolean logic</a> <cite title="NONE">[logic]</cite> and <a href="#conditional">conditional</a> <cite title="NONE">[conditional]</cite> sections of this specification apply subschemas to the same location as the parent schema.  The former group defines boolean operations on the subschema assertion results, while the latter evaluates one subschema and uses its assertion results to determine which of two other subschemas to apply as well.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.3">Several keywords determine which subschemas are applied to array items, object property values, and object property names.  They are: "items", "additionalItems", "contains", "properties", "patternProperties", "additionalProperties", and "propertyNames".  The "contains" keyword only requires its subschema to be valid against at least one child instance, while the other keywords require that all subschemas are valid against all child instances to which they apply.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.1.1"><a href="#rfc.section.3.1.1">3.1.1.</a> Keyword Independence</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.1.p.1">Validation keywords typically operate independently, without affecting each other's outcomes.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.1.p.2">For schema author convenience, there are some exceptions among the keywords that control subschema applicability: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+  <li>"additionalProperties", whose behavior is defined in terms of "properties" and "patternProperties"; and </li>
+  <li>"additionalItems", whose behavior is defined in terms of "items".  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.2"><a href="#rfc.section.3.2">3.2.</a> <a href="#assertions" id="assertions">Assertions</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.1">Validation is a process of checking assertions.  Each assertion adds constraints that an instance must satisfy in order to successfully validate.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.2">Assertion keywords that are absent never restrict validation.  In some cases, this no-op behavior is identical to a keyword that exists with certain values, and these values are noted where known.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.3">All of the keywords in the <a href="#general">general</a> <cite title="NONE">[general]</cite>, <a href="#numeric">numeric</a> <cite title="NONE">[numeric]</cite>, and <a href="#string">string</a> <cite title="NONE">[string]</cite> sections are assertions, as well as "minItems", "maxItems", "uniqueItems", "minProperties", "maxProperties", and "required".  Additionally, "dependencies" is shorthand for a combination of conditional and assertion keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.4">The "format", "contentType", and "contentEncoding" keywords can also be implemented as assertions, although that functionality is an optional part of this specification, and the keywords convey additional non-assertion information.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.2.1"><a href="#rfc.section.3.2.1">3.2.1.</a> Assertions and Instance Primitive Types</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.1.p.1">Most validation assertions only constrain values within a certain primitive type.  When the type of the instance is not of the type targeted by the keyword, the instance is considered to conform to the assertion.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.1.p.2">For example, the "maxLength" keyword will only restrict certain strings (that are too long) from being valid.  If the instance is a number, boolean, null, array, or object, then it is valid against this assertion.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.3"><a href="#rfc.section.3.3">3.3.</a> <a href="#annotations" id="annotations">Annotations</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.3.p.1">In addition to assertions, this specification provides a small vocabulary of metadata keywords that can be used to annotate the JSON instance with useful information.  The <a href="#format">Section 7</a> and <a href="#content">Section 8</a> keywords are also useful as annotations as well as being optional assertions, as they convey additional usage guidance for the instance data.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.3.p.2">A schema that is applicable to a particular location in the instance, against which the instance location is valid, attaches its annotations to that location in the instance.  Since many subschemas can be applicable to any single location, annotation keywords need to specify any unusual handling of multiple applicable occurrences of the keyword with different values.  The default behavior is simply to collect all values.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.3.p.3">Additional vocabularies SHOULD make use of this mechanism for applying their own annotations to instances.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.3.1"><a href="#rfc.section.3.3.1">3.3.1.</a> Annotations and Validation Outcomes</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.3.1.p.1">Annotations are collected whenever an instance is valid against a schema object, and all of that schema object's parent schemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.3.1.p.2">In particular, annotations in a subschema contained within a "not", at any depth, including any number of intervening additional "not" subschemas, MUST be ignored.  If the instance was valid against the "not" subschema, then by definition it is not valid against the schema that contains the "not", so the "not" subschema's annotations are not used.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.3.1.p.3">Similarly, annotations within a failing branch of a "oneOf", "anyOf", "then", or "else" MUST be ignored even when the instance successfully validates against the complete schema document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.3.2"><a href="#rfc.section.3.3.2">3.3.2.</a> Annotations and Short-Circuit Validation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.3.2.p.1">Annotation keywords MUST be applied to all possible sub-instances.  Even if such application can be short-circuited when only assertion evaluation is needed.  For instance, the "contains" keyword need only be checked for assertions until at least one array item proves valid.  However, when working with annotations, all items in the array must be evaluated to determine all items with which the annotations should be associated.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4"><a href="#rfc.section.4">4.</a> Interoperability Considerations</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.1"><a href="#rfc.section.4.1">4.1.</a> Validation of String Instances</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.1">It should be noted that the nul character (\u0000) is valid in a JSON string. An instance to validate may contain a string value with this character, regardless of the ability of the underlying programming language to deal with such data.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.2"><a href="#rfc.section.4.2">4.2.</a> Validation of Numeric Instances</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.p.1">The JSON specification allows numbers with arbitrary precision, and JSON Schema does not add any such bounds.  This means that numeric instances processed by JSON Schema can be arbitrarily large and/or have an arbitrarily long decimal part, regardless of the ability of the underlying programming language to deal with such data.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3"><a href="#rfc.section.4.3">4.3.</a> <a href="#regexInterop" id="regexInterop">Regular Expressions</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.p.1">Two validation keywords, "pattern" and "patternProperties", use regular expressions to express constraints, and the "regex" value for the "format" keyword constrains the instance value to be a regular expression.  These regular expressions SHOULD be valid according to the <a href="#ecma262">ECMA 262</a> <cite title="NONE">[ecma262]</cite> regular expression dialect.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.p.2">Furthermore, given the high disparity in regular expression constructs support, schema authors SHOULD limit themselves to the following regular expression tokens: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+  <li>individual Unicode characters, as defined by the <a href="#RFC7159">JSON specification</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7159]</cite>;</li>
+  <li>simple character classes ([abc]), range character classes ([a-z]);</li>
+  <li>complemented character classes ([^abc], [^a-z]);</li>
+  <li>simple quantifiers: "+" (one or more), "*" (zero or more), "?" (zero or one), and their lazy versions ("+?", "*?", "??");</li>
+  <li>range quantifiers: "{x}" (exactly x occurrences), "{x,y}" (at least x, at most y, occurrences), {x,} (x occurrences or more), and their lazy versions;</li>
+  <li>the beginning-of-input ("^") and end-of-input ("$") anchors;</li>
+  <li>simple grouping ("(...)") and alternation ("|").</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.p.3">Finally, implementations MUST NOT take regular expressions to be anchored, neither at the beginning nor at the end. This means, for instance, the pattern "es" matches "expression".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5"><a href="#rfc.section.5">5.</a> Meta-Schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.1">The current URI for the JSON Schema Validation is <span>&lt;</span><a href="http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#">http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6"><a href="#rfc.section.6">6.</a> Validation Keywords</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.1">Validation keywords in a schema impose requirements for successful validation of an instance.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.1">6.1.</a> <a href="#general" id="general">Validation Keywords for Any Instance Type</a></h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.1.1">6.1.1.</a> type</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.1.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be either a string or an array. If it is an array, elements of the array MUST be strings and MUST be unique.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.1.p.2">String values MUST be one of the six primitive types ("null", "boolean", "object", "array", "number", or "string"), or "integer" which matches any number with a zero fractional part.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.1.p.3">An instance validates if and only if the instance is in any of the sets listed for this keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.1.2">6.1.2.</a> enum</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be an array. This array SHOULD have at least one element. Elements in the array SHOULD be unique.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.2">An instance validates successfully against this keyword if its value is equal to one of the elements in this keyword's array value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.3">Elements in the array might be of any value, including null.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.1.3">6.1.3.</a> const</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.3.p.1">The value of this keyword MAY be of any type, including null.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.3.p.2">An instance validates successfully against this keyword if its value is equal to the value of the keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2">6.2.</a> <a href="#numeric" id="numeric">Validation Keywords for Numeric Instances (number and integer)</a></h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2.1">6.2.1.</a> multipleOf</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.1.p.1">The value of "multipleOf" MUST be a number, strictly greater than 0.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.1.p.2">A numeric instance is valid only if division by this keyword's value results in an integer.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2.2">6.2.2.</a> maximum</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.2.p.1">The value of "maximum" MUST be a number, representing an inclusive upper limit for a numeric instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.2.p.2">If the instance is a number, then this keyword validates only if the instance is less than or exactly equal to "maximum".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2.3">6.2.3.</a> exclusiveMaximum</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.3.p.1">The value of "exclusiveMaximum" MUST be number, representing an exclusive upper limit for a numeric instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.3.p.2">If the instance is a number, then the instance is valid only if it has a value strictly less than (not equal to) "exclusiveMaximum".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.4"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2.4">6.2.4.</a> minimum</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.4.p.1">The value of "minimum" MUST be a number, representing an inclusive lower limit for a numeric instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.4.p.2">If the instance is a number, then this keyword validates only if the instance is greater than or exactly equal to "minimum".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.5"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2.5">6.2.5.</a> exclusiveMinimum</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.5.p.1">The value of "exclusiveMinimum" MUST be number, representing an exclusive lower limit for a numeric instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.5.p.2">If the instance is a number, then the instance is valid only if it has a value strictly greater than (not equal to) "exclusiveMinimum".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.3">6.3.</a> <a href="#string" id="string">Validation Keywords for Strings</a></h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.3.1">6.3.1.</a> maxLength</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.1.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.</p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.1.p.2">A string instance is valid against this keyword if its length is less than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.1.p.3">The length of a string instance is defined as the number of its characters as defined by <a href="#RFC7159">RFC 7159</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7159]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.3.2">6.3.2.</a> minLength</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.2.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.2.p.2">A string instance is valid against this keyword if its length is greater than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.2.p.3">The length of a string instance is defined as the number of its characters as defined by <a href="#RFC7159">RFC 7159</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7159]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.2.p.4">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of 0.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.3.3">6.3.3.</a> pattern</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.3.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a string. This string SHOULD be a valid regular expression, according to the ECMA 262 regular expression dialect.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.3.p.2">A string instance is considered valid if the regular expression matches the instance successfully. Recall: regular expressions are not implicitly anchored.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4"><a href="#rfc.section.6.4">6.4.</a> Validation Keywords for Arrays</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.4.1">6.4.1.</a> items</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.1.p.1">The value of "items" MUST be either a valid JSON Schema or an array of valid JSON Schemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.1.p.2">This keyword determines how child instances validate for arrays, and does not directly validate the immediate instance itself.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.1.p.3">If "items" is a schema, validation succeeds if all elements in the array successfully validate against that schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.1.p.4">If "items" is an array of schemas, validation succeeds if each element of the instance validates against the schema at the same position, if any.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.1.p.5">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.4.2">6.4.2.</a> additionalItems</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.2.p.1">The value of "additionalItems" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.2.p.2">This keyword determines how child instances validate for arrays, and does not directly validate the immediate instance itself.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.2.p.3">If "items" is an array of schemas, validation succeeds if every instance element at a position greater than the size of "items" validates against "additionalItems".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.2.p.4">Otherwise, "additionalItems" MUST be ignored, as the "items" schema (possibly the default value of an empty schema) is applied to all elements.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.2.p.5">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.4.3">6.4.3.</a> maxItems</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.3.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.3.p.2">An array instance is valid against "maxItems" if its size is less than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.4"><a href="#rfc.section.6.4.4">6.4.4.</a> minItems</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.4.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.4.p.2">An array instance is valid against "minItems" if its size is greater than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.4.p.3">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of 0.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.5"><a href="#rfc.section.6.4.5">6.4.5.</a> uniqueItems</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.5.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a boolean.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.5.p.2">If this keyword has boolean value false, the instance validates successfully. If it has boolean value true, the instance validates successfully if all of its elements are unique.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.5.p.3">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of false.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.6"><a href="#rfc.section.6.4.6">6.4.6.</a> contains</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.6.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.6.p.2">An array instance is valid against "contains" if at least one of its elements is valid against the given schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5">6.5.</a> Validation Keywords for Objects</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.1">6.5.1.</a> maxProperties</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.1.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.1.p.2">An object instance is valid against "maxProperties" if its number of properties is less than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.2">6.5.2.</a> minProperties</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.2.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.2.p.2">An object instance is valid against "minProperties" if its number of properties is greater than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.2.p.3">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of 0.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.3">6.5.3.</a> required</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be an array.  Elements of this array, if any, MUST be strings, and MUST be unique.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.2">An object instance is valid against this keyword if every item in the array is the name of a property in the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.3">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty array.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.4"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.4">6.5.4.</a> properties</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.4.p.1">The value of "properties" MUST be an object.  Each value of this object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.4.p.2">This keyword determines how child instances validate for objects, and does not directly validate the immediate instance itself.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.4.p.3">Validation succeeds if, for each name that appears in both the instance and as a name within this keyword's value, the child instance for that name successfully validates against the corresponding schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.4.p.4">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty object.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.5"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.5">6.5.5.</a> patternProperties</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.1">The value of "patternProperties" MUST be an object. Each property name of this object SHOULD be a valid regular expression, according to the ECMA 262 regular expression dialect. Each property value of this object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.2">This keyword determines how child instances validate for objects, and does not directly validate the immediate instance itself.  Validation of the primitive instance type against this keyword always succeeds.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.3">Validation succeeds if, for each instance name that matches any regular expressions that appear as a property name in this keyword's value, the child instance for that name successfully validates against each schema that corresponds to a matching regular expression.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.4">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty object.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.6"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.6">6.5.6.</a> additionalProperties</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.6.p.1">The value of "additionalProperties" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.6.p.2">This keyword determines how child instances validate for objects, and does not directly validate the immediate instance itself.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.6.p.3">Validation with "additionalProperties" applies only to the child values of instance names that do not match any names in "properties", and do not match any regular expression in "patternProperties".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.6.p.4">For all such properties, validation succeeds if the child instance validates against the "additionalProperties" schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.6.p.5">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.7"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.7">6.5.7.</a> dependencies</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF1" class="info">[CREF1]<span class="info">This keyword may be split into two, with the variation that uses an array of property names rather than a subschema getting a new name.  The dual behavior is confusing and relatively difficult to implement.  In the previous draft, we proposed dropping the keyword altogether, or dropping one of its forms, but we received feedback in support of keeping it.  See issues #442 and #528 at &lt;https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues&gt; for further discussion.  Further feedback is encouraged.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.7.p.2">This keyword specifies rules that are evaluated if the instance is an object and contains a certain property.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.7.p.3">This keyword's value MUST be an object. Each property specifies a dependency.  Each dependency value MUST be an array or a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.7.p.4">If the dependency value is a subschema, and the dependency key is a property in the instance, the entire instance must validate against the dependency value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.7.p.5">If the dependency value is an array, each element in the array, if any, MUST be a string, and MUST be unique. If the dependency key is a property in the instance, each of the items in the dependency value must be a property that exists in the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.7.p.6">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty object.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.8"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.8">6.5.8.</a> propertyNames</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.8.p.1">The value of "propertyNames" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.8.p.2">If the instance is an object, this keyword validates if every property name in the instance validates against the provided schema.  Note the property name that the schema is testing will always be a string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.8.p.3">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6">6.6.</a> <a href="#conditional" id="conditional">Keywords for Applying Subschemas Conditionally</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.p.1">These keywords work together to implement conditional application of a subschema based on the outcome of another subschema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.p.2">These keywords MUST NOT interact with each other across subschema boundaries.  In other words, an "if" in one branch of an "allOf" MUST NOT have an impact on a "then" or "else" in another branch.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.p.3">There is no default behavior for any of these keywords when they are not present.  In particular, they MUST NOT be treated as if present with an empty schema, and when "if" is not present, both "then" and "else" MUST be entirely ignored.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6.1">6.6.1.</a> if</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.2">This validation outcome of this keyword's subschema has no direct effect on the overall validation result.  Rather, it controls which of the "then" or "else" keywords are evaluated.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.3">Instances that successfully validate against this keyword's subschema MUST also be valid against the subschema value of the "then" keyword, if present.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.4">Instances that fail to validate against this keyword's subschema MUST also be valid against the subschema value of the "else" keyword, if present.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.5">If <a href="#annotations">annotations</a> <cite title="NONE">[annotations]</cite> are being collected, they are collected from this keyword's subschema in the usual way, including when the keyword is present without either "then" or "else".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6.2">6.6.2.</a> then</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.2">When "if" is present, and the instance successfully validates against its subschema, then valiation succeeds against this keyword if the instance also successfully validates against this keyword's subschema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.3">This keyword has no effect when "if" is absent, or when the instance fails to validate against its subschema.  Implementations MUST NOT evaluate the instance against this keyword, for either validation or annotation collection purposes, in such cases.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6.3">6.6.3.</a> else</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.3.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.3.p.2">When "if" is present, and the instance fails to validate against its subschema, then valiation succeeds against this keyword if the instance successfully validates against this keyword's subschema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.3.p.3">This keyword has no effect when "if" is absent, or when the instance successfully validates against its subschema.  Implementations MUST NOT evaluate the instance against this keyword, for either validation or annotation collection purposes, in such cases.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.7"><a href="#rfc.section.6.7">6.7.</a> <a href="#logic" id="logic">Keywords for Applying Subschemas With Boolean Logic</a></h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.7.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.7.1">6.7.1.</a> allOf</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.7.1.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a non-empty array.  Each item of the array MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.7.1.p.2">An instance validates successfully against this keyword if it validates successfully against all schemas defined by this keyword's value.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.7.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.7.2">6.7.2.</a> anyOf</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.7.2.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a non-empty array.  Each item of the array MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.7.2.p.2">An instance validates successfully against this keyword if it validates successfully against at least one schema defined by this keyword's value.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.7.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.7.3">6.7.3.</a> oneOf</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.7.3.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a non-empty array.  Each item of the array MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.7.3.p.2">An instance validates successfully against this keyword if it validates successfully against exactly one schema defined by this keyword's value.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.7.4"><a href="#rfc.section.6.7.4">6.7.4.</a> not</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.7.4.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.7.4.p.2">An instance is valid against this keyword if it fails to validate successfully against the schema defined by this keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7"><a href="#rfc.section.7">7.</a> <a href="#format" id="format">Semantic Validation With "format"</a></h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.1"><a href="#rfc.section.7.1">7.1.</a> Foreword</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.1">Structural validation alone may be insufficient to validate that an instance meets all the requirements of an application. The "format" keyword is defined to allow interoperable semantic validation for a fixed subset of values which are accurately described by authoritative resources, be they RFCs or other external specifications.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.2">The value of this keyword is called a format attribute. It MUST be a string. A format attribute can generally only validate a given set of instance types. If the type of the instance to validate is not in this set, validation for this format attribute and instance SHOULD succeed.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2"><a href="#rfc.section.7.2">7.2.</a> Implementation Requirements</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.1">The "format" keyword functions as both an annotation (<a href="#annotations">Section 3.3</a>) and as an assertion (<a href="#assertions">Section 3.2</a>).  While no special effort is required to implement it as an annotation conveying semantic meaning, implementing validation is non-trivial.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.2">Implementations MAY support the "format" keyword as a validation assertion.  Should they choose to do so: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+  <li>they SHOULD implement validation for attributes defined below;</li>
+  <li>they SHOULD offer an option to disable validation for this keyword.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.3">Implementations MAY add custom format attributes. Save for agreement between parties, schema authors SHALL NOT expect a peer implementation to support this keyword and/or custom format attributes.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3"><a href="#rfc.section.7.3">7.3.</a> Defined Formats</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.1"><a href="#rfc.section.7.3.1">7.3.1.</a> Dates and Times</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.1.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.1.p.2">Date and time format names are derived from <a href="#RFC3339">RFC 3339, section 5.6</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC3339]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.1.p.3">Implementations supporting formats SHOULD implement support for the following attributes: </p>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>date-time:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid representation according to the "date-time" production.  </dd>
+  <dt>date:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid representation according to the "full-date" production.  </dd>
+  <dt>time:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid representation according to the "full-time" production.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.1.p.4">Implementations MAY support additional attributes using the other production names defined in that section.  If "full-date" or "full-time" are implemented, the corresponding short form ("date" or "time" respectively) MUST be implemented, and MUST behave identically.  Implementations SHOULD NOT define extension attributes with any name matching an RFC 3339 production unless it validates according to the rules of that production.  <a id="CREF2" class="info">[CREF2]<span class="info">There is not currently consensus on the need for supporting all RFC 3339 formats, so this approach of reserving the namespace will encourage experimentation without committing to the entire set.  Either the format implementation requirements will become more flexible in general, or these will likely either be promoted to fully specified attributes or dropped.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.2"><a href="#rfc.section.7.3.2">7.3.2.</a> Email Addresses</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.2.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.2.p.2">A string instance is valid against these attributes if it is a valid Internet email address as follows: </p>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>email:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">As defined by <a href="#RFC5322">RFC 5322, section 3.4.1</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC5322]</cite>.  </dd>
+  <dt>idn-email:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">As defined by <a href="#RFC6531">RFC 6531</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6531]</cite> </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> Note that all strings valid against the "email" attribute are also valid against the "idn-email" attribute.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.3"><a href="#rfc.section.7.3.3">7.3.3.</a> Hostnames</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.3.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.3.p.2">A string instance is valid against these attributes if it is a valid representation for an Internet hostname as follows: </p>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>hostname:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">As defined by <a href="#RFC1034">RFC 1034, section 3.1</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC1034]</cite>, including host names produced using the Punycode algorithm specified in <a href="#RFC5891">RFC 5891, section 4.4</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC5891]</cite>.  </dd>
+  <dt>idn-hostname:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">As defined by either RFC 1034 as for hostname, or an internationalized hostname as defined by <a href="#RFC5890">RFC 5890, section 2.3.2.3</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC5890]</cite>.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> Note that all strings valid against the "hostname" attribute are also valid against the "idn-hostname" attribute.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.4"><a href="#rfc.section.7.3.4">7.3.4.</a> IP Addresses</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.4.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.4.p.2">A string instance is valid against these attributes if it is a valid representation of an IP address as follows: </p>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>ipv4:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">An IPv4 address according to the "dotted-quad" ABNF syntax as defined in <a href="#RFC2673">RFC 2673, section 3.2</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC2673]</cite>.  </dd>
+  <dt>ipv6:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">An IPv6 address as defined in <a href="#RFC4291">RFC 4291, section 2.2</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC4291]</cite>.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.5"><a href="#rfc.section.7.3.5">7.3.5.</a> Resource Identifiers</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.5.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p/>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>uri:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid URI, according to <a href="#RFC3986">[RFC3986]</a>.  </dd>
+  <dt>uri-reference:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid URI Reference (either a URI or a relative-reference), according to <a href="#RFC3986">[RFC3986]</a>.  </dd>
+  <dt>iri:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid IRI, according to <a href="#RFC3987">[RFC3987]</a>.  </dd>
+  <dt>iri-reference:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid IRI Reference (either an IRI or a relative-reference), according to <a href="#RFC3987">[RFC3987]</a>.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> Note that all valid URIs are valid IRIs, and all valid URI References are also valid IRI References.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.6"><a href="#rfc.section.7.3.6">7.3.6.</a> uri-template</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.6.p.1">This attribute applies to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.6.p.2">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid URI Template (of any level), according to <a href="#RFC6570">[RFC6570]</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.6.p.3">Note that URI Templates may be used for IRIs; there is no separate IRI Template specification.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.7"><a href="#rfc.section.7.3.7">7.3.7.</a> JSON Pointers</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.7.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p/>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>json-pointer:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid JSON string representation of a JSON Pointer, according to <a href="#RFC6901">RFC 6901, section 5</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite>.  </dd>
+  <dt>relative-json-pointer:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid <a href="#relative-json-pointer">Relative JSON Pointer</a> <cite title="NONE">[relative-json-pointer]</cite>.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> To allow for both absolute and relative JSON Pointers, use "anyOf" or "oneOf" to indicate support for either format.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.8"><a href="#rfc.section.7.3.8">7.3.8.</a> regex</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.8.p.1">This attribute applies to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.8.p.2">A regular expression, which SHOULD be valid according to the <a href="#ecma262">ECMA 262</a> <cite title="NONE">[ecma262]</cite> regular expression dialect.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.8.p.3">Implementations that validate formats MUST accept at least the subset of ECMA 262 defined in the <a href="#regexInterop">Regular Expressions</a> <cite title="NONE">[regexInterop]</cite> section of this specification, and SHOULD accept all valid ECMA 262 expressions.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8"><a href="#rfc.section.8">8.</a> <a href="#content" id="content">String-Encoding Non-JSON Data</a></h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1"><a href="#rfc.section.8.1">8.1.</a> Foreword</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.1">Properties defined in this section indicate that an instance contains non-JSON data encoded in a JSON string.  They describe the type of content and how it is encoded.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.2">These properties provide additional information required to interpret JSON data as rich multimedia documents.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2"><a href="#rfc.section.8.2">8.2.</a> Implementation Requirements</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.1">The content keywords function as both annotations (<a href="#annotations">Section 3.3</a>) and as assertions (<a href="#assertions">Section 3.2</a>).  While no special effort is required to implement them as annotations conveying how applications can interpret the data in the string, implementing validation of conformance to the media type and encoding is non-trivial.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.2">Implementations MAY support the "contentMediaType" and "contentEncoding" keywords as validation assertions.  Should they choose to do so, they SHOULD offer an option to disable validation for these keywords.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.3"><a href="#rfc.section.8.3">8.3.</a> contentEncoding</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.1">If the instance value is a string, this property defines that the string SHOULD be interpreted as binary data and decoded using the encoding named by this property.  <a href="#RFC2045">RFC 2045, Sec 6.1</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC2045]</cite> lists the possible values for this property.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.2">The value of this property MUST be a string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.3">The value of this property SHOULD be ignored if the instance described is not a string.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.4"><a href="#rfc.section.8.4">8.4.</a> contentMediaType</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.1">The value of this property must be a media type, as defined by <a href="#RFC2046">RFC 2046</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC2046]</cite>. This property defines the media type of instances which this schema defines.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.2">The value of this property MUST be a string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.3">The value of this property SHOULD be ignored if the instance described is not a string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.4">If the "contentEncoding" property is not present, but the instance value is a string, then the value of this property SHOULD specify a text document type, and the character set SHOULD be the character set into which the JSON string value was decoded (for which the default is Unicode).  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.5"><a href="#rfc.section.8.5">8.5.</a> Example</h1>
+<p>Here is an example schema, illustrating the use of "contentEncoding" and "contentMediaType": </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": "string",
+    "contentEncoding": "base64",
+    "contentMediaType": "image/png"
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Instances described by this schema should be strings, and their values should be interpretable as base64-encoded PNG images.  </p>
+<p>Another example: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": "string",
+    "contentMediaType": "text/html"
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Instances described by this schema should be strings containing HTML, using whatever character set the JSON string was decoded into (default is Unicode).  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9"><a href="#rfc.section.9">9.</a> Schema Re-Use With "definitions"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.1">The "definitions" keywords provides a standardized location for schema authors to inline re-usable JSON Schemas into a more general schema.  The keyword does not directly affect the validation result.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.2">This keyword's value MUST be an object.  Each member value of this object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": "array",
+    "items": { "$ref": "#/definitions/positiveInteger" },
+    "definitions": {
+        "positiveInteger": {
+            "type": "integer",
+            "exclusiveMinimum": 0
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.3">As an example, here is a schema describing an array of positive integers, where the positive integer constraint is a subschema in "definitions": </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10"><a href="#rfc.section.10">10.</a> Schema Annotations</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.1">Schema validation is a useful mechanism for annotating instance data with additional information.  The rules for determining when and how annotations are associated with an instance are outlined in section <a href="#annotations">3.3</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.2">These general-purpose annotation keywords provide commonly used information for documentation and user interface display purposes.  They are not intended to form a comprehensive set of features.  Rather, additional vocabularies can be defined for more complex annotation-based applications.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.1"><a href="#rfc.section.10.1">10.1.</a> "title" and "description"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.1">The value of both of these keywords MUST be a string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.2">Both of these keywords can be used to decorate a user interface with information about the data produced by this user interface. A title will preferably be short, whereas a description will provide explanation about the purpose of the instance described by this schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2"><a href="#rfc.section.10.2">10.2.</a> "default"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.p.1">There are no restrictions placed on the value of this keyword.  When multiple occurrences of this keyword are applicable to a single sub-instance, implementations SHOULD remove duplicates.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.p.2">This keyword can be used to supply a default JSON value associated with a particular schema. It is RECOMMENDED that a default value be valid against the associated schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3"><a href="#rfc.section.10.3">10.3.</a> "readOnly" and "writeOnly"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.1">The value of these keywords MUST be a boolean.  When multiple occurrences of these keywords are applicable to a single sub-instance, the resulting value MUST be true if any occurrence specifies a true value, and MUST be false otherwise.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.2">If "readOnly" has a value of boolean true, it indicates that the value of the instance is managed exclusively by the owning authority, and attempts by an application to modify the value of this property are expected to be ignored or rejected by that owning authority.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.3">An instance document that is marked as "readOnly for the entire document MAY be ignored if sent to the owning authority, or MAY result in an error, at the authority's discretion.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.4">If "writeOnly" has a value of boolean true, it indicates that the value is never present when the instance is retrieved from the owning authority.  It can be present when sent to the owning authority to update or create the document (or the resource it represents), but it will not be included in any updated or newly created version of the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.5">An instance document that is marked as "writeOnly" for the entire document MAY be returned as a blank document of some sort, or MAY produce an error upon retrieval, or have the retrieval request ignored, at the authority's discretion.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.6">For example, "readOnly" would be used to mark a database-generated serial number as read-only, while "writeOnly" would be used to mark a password input field.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.7">These keywords can be used to assist in user interface instance generation.  In particular, an application MAY choose to use a widget that hides input values as they are typed for write-only fields.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.8">Omitting these keywords has the same behavior as values of false.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.4"><a href="#rfc.section.10.4">10.4.</a> "examples"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.4.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be an array.  There are no restrictions placed on the values within the array.  When multiple occurrences of this keyword are applicable to a single sub-instance, implementations MUST provide a flat array of all values rather than an array of arrays.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.4.p.2">This keyword can be used to provide sample JSON values associated with a particular schema, for the purpose of illustrating usage.  It is RECOMMENDED that these values be valid against the associated schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.4.p.3">Implementations MAY use the value(s) of "default", if present, as an additional example.  If "examples" is absent, "default" MAY still be used in this manner.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.11"><a href="#rfc.section.11">11.</a> Security Considerations</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.1">JSON Schema validation defines a vocabulary for JSON Schema core and concerns all the security considerations listed there.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.2">JSON Schema validation allows the use of Regular Expressions, which have numerous different (often incompatible) implementations.  Some implementations allow the embedding of arbitrary code, which is outside the scope of JSON Schema and MUST NOT be permitted.  Regular expressions can often also be crafted to be extremely expensive to compute (with so-called "catastrophic backtracking"), resulting in a denial-of-service attack.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.3">Implementations that support validating or otherwise evaluating instance string data based on "contentEncoding" and/or "contentMediaType" are at risk of evaluating data in an unsafe way based on misleading information.  Applications can mitigate this risk by only performing such processing when a relationship between the schema and instance is established (e.g., they share the same authority).  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.4">Processing a media type or encoding is subject to the security considerations of that media type or encoding.  For example, the security considerations of <a href="#RFC4329">RFC 4329 Scripting Media Types</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC4329]</cite> apply when processing JavaScript or ECMAScript encoded within a JSON string.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.references"><a href="#rfc.references">12.</a> References</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.1"><a href="#rfc.references.1">12.1.</a> Normative References</h1>
+<table>
+  <tbody>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Bradner, S.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</a>", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC1034">[RFC1034]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Mockapetris, P.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1034">Domain names - concepts and facilities</a>", STD 13, RFC 1034, DOI 10.17487/RFC1034, November 1987.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC2045">[RFC2045]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Freed, N.</a> and <a>N. Borenstein</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2045">Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies</a>", RFC 2045, DOI 10.17487/RFC2045, November 1996.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC2046">[RFC2046]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Freed, N.</a> and <a>N. Borenstein</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2046">Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types</a>", RFC 2046, DOI 10.17487/RFC2046, November 1996.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC2673">[RFC2673]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Crawford, M.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2673">Binary Labels in the Domain Name System</a>", RFC 2673, DOI 10.17487/RFC2673, August 1999.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC3339">[RFC3339]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Klyne, G.</a> and <a>C. Newman</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3339">Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps</a>", RFC 3339, DOI 10.17487/RFC3339, July 2002.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC3986">[RFC3986]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Berners-Lee, T.</a>, <a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>L. Masinter</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986">Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax</a>", STD 66, RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC3987">[RFC3987]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Duerst, M.</a> and <a>M. Suignard</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3987">Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs)</a>", RFC 3987, DOI 10.17487/RFC3987, January 2005.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC4291">[RFC4291]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Hinden, R.</a> and <a>S. Deering</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4291">IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture</a>", RFC 4291, DOI 10.17487/RFC4291, February 2006.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC5322">[RFC5322]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Resnick, P.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322">Internet Message Format</a>", RFC 5322, DOI 10.17487/RFC5322, October 2008.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC5890">[RFC5890]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Klensin, J.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5890">Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework</a>", RFC 5890, DOI 10.17487/RFC5890, August 2010.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC5891">[RFC5891]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Klensin, J.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5891">Internationalized Domain Names in Applications (IDNA): Protocol</a>", RFC 5891, DOI 10.17487/RFC5891, August 2010.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC6570">[RFC6570]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Gregorio, J.</a>, <a>Fielding, R.</a>, <a>Hadley, M.</a>, <a>Nottingham, M.</a> and <a>D. Orchard</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6570">URI Template</a>", RFC 6570, DOI 10.17487/RFC6570, March 2012.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC6531">[RFC6531]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Yao, J.</a> and <a>W. Mao</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6531">SMTP Extension for Internationalized Email</a>", RFC 6531, DOI 10.17487/RFC6531, February 2012.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC6901">[RFC6901]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Bryan, P.</a>, <a>Zyp, K.</a> and <a>M. Nottingham</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6901">JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Pointer</a>", RFC 6901, DOI 10.17487/RFC6901, April 2013.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC7159">[RFC7159]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Bray, T.</a>, <a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7159">The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format</a>", RFC 7159, DOI 10.17487/RFC7159, March 2014.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr><td class="reference"><b id="ecma262">[ecma262]</b></td><td class="top"><a href="http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/Ecma-262.pdf">ECMA 262 specification</a>"</td>, "</tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="relative-json-pointer">[relative-json-pointer]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Luff, G.</a> and <a title="Cloudflare, Inc.">H. Andrews</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01">Relative JSON Pointers</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01, November 2017.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="json-schema">[json-schema]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Wright, A.</a> and <a title="Cloudflare, Inc.">H. Andrews</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-01">JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-json-schema-01, November 2017.</td>
+    </tr>
+  </tbody>
+</table>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.2"><a href="#rfc.references.2">12.2.</a> Informative References</h1>
+<table>
+  <tbody>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC4329">[RFC4329]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Hoehrmann, B.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4329">Scripting Media Types</a>", RFC 4329, DOI 10.17487/RFC4329, April 2006.</td>
+    </tr>
+  </tbody>
+</table>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A"><a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Appendix A.</a> Acknowledgments</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.1">Thanks to Gary Court, Francis Galiegue, Kris Zyp, and Geraint Luff for their work on the initial drafts of JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.2">Thanks to Jason Desrosiers, Daniel Perrett, Erik Wilde, Ben Hutton, Evgeny Poberezkin, Brad Bowman, Gowry Sankar, Donald Pipowitch, Dave Finlay, and Denis Laxalde for their submissions and patches to the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.B"><a href="#rfc.appendix.B">Appendix B.</a> ChangeLog</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF3" class="info">[CREF3]<span class="info">This section to be removed before leaving Internet-Draft status.</span></a> </p>
+<p/>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>This draft is purely a clarification with no functional changes</li>
+      <li>Provided the general principle behind ignoring annotations under "not" and similar cases</li>
+      <li>Clarified "if"/"then"/"else" validation interactions</li>
+      <li>Clarified "if"/"then"/"else" behavior for annotation</li>
+      <li>Minor formatting and cross-referencing improvements</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-00</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Added "if"/"then"/"else"</li>
+      <li>Classify keywords as assertions or annotations per the core spec</li>
+      <li>Warn of possibly removing "dependencies" in the future</li>
+      <li>Grouped validation keywords into sub-sections for readability</li>
+      <li>Moved "readOnly" from hyper-schema to validation meta-data</li>
+      <li>Added "writeOnly"</li>
+      <li>Added string-encoded media section, with former hyper-schema "media" keywords</li>
+      <li>Restored "regex" format (removal was unintentional)</li>
+      <li>Added "date" and "time" formats, and reserved additional RFC 3339 format names</li>
+      <li>I18N formats: "iri", "iri-reference", "idn-hostname", "idn-email"</li>
+      <li>Clarify that "json-pointer" format means string encoding, not URI fragment</li>
+      <li>Fixed typo that inverted the meaning of "minimum" and "exclusiveMinimum"</li>
+      <li>Move format syntax references into Normative References</li>
+      <li>JSON is a normative requirement</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-wright-json-schema-validation-01</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Standardized on hyphenated format names with full words ("uriref" becomes "uri-reference")</li>
+      <li>Add the formats "uri-template" and "json-pointer"</li>
+      <li>Changed "exclusiveMaximum"/"exclusiveMinimum" from boolean modifiers of "maximum"/"minimum" to independent numeric fields.</li>
+      <li>Split the additionalItems/items into two sections</li>
+      <li>Reworked properties/patternProperties/additionalProperties definition</li>
+      <li>Added "examples" keyword</li>
+      <li>Added "contains" keyword</li>
+      <li>Allow empty "required" and "dependencies" arrays</li>
+      <li>Fixed "type" reference to primitive types</li>
+      <li>Added "const" keyword</li>
+      <li>Added "propertyNames" keyword</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-wright-json-schema-validation-00</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Added additional security considerations</li>
+      <li>Removed reference to "latest version" meta-schema, use numbered version instead</li>
+      <li>Rephrased many keyword definitions for brevity</li>
+      <li>Added "uriref" format that also allows relative URI references</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-fge-json-schema-validation-00</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Initial draft.</li>
+      <li>Salvaged from draft v3.</li>
+      <li>Redefine the "required" keyword.</li>
+      <li>Remove "extends", "disallow"</li>
+      <li>Add "anyOf", "allOf", "oneOf", "not", "definitions", "minProperties", "maxProperties".</li>
+      <li>"dependencies" member values can no longer be single strings; at least one element is required in a property dependency array.</li>
+      <li>Rename "divisibleBy" to "multipleOf".</li>
+      <li>"type" arrays can no longer have schemas; remove "any" as a possible value.</li>
+      <li>Rework the "format" section; make support optional.</li>
+      <li>"format": remove attributes "phone", "style", "color"; rename "ip-address" to "ipv4"; add references for all attributes.</li>
+      <li>Provide algorithms to calculate schema(s) for array/object instances.</li>
+      <li>Add interoperability considerations.</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.authors">
+  <a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a>
+</h1>
+<div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Austin Wright</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Wright</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:aaa@bzfx.net">aaa@bzfx.net</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Henry Andrews</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Andrews</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline">Cloudflare, Inc.</span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality">San Francisco</span>,  
+		<span class="region">CA</span> 
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline">USA</span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:henry@cloudflare.com">henry@cloudflare.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Geraint Luff</span> 
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Luff</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality">Cambridge</span>,  
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline">UK</span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:luffgd@gmail.com">luffgd@gmail.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/draft-07/links b/draft-07/links
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..d91cc4c6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-07/links
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-07/links.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-07/obsolete/json-schema-hypermedia.html b/draft-07/obsolete/json-schema-hypermedia.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..ca0ff36e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-07/obsolete/json-schema-hypermedia.html
@@ -0,0 +1,1815 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
+  "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
+<head profile="http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/">
+  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" />
+
+  <title>JSON Hyper-Schema: A Vocabulary for Hypermedia Annotation of JSON </title>
+
+  <style type="text/css" title="Xml2Rfc (sans serif)">
+  /*<![CDATA[*/
+	  a {
+	  text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+      /* info code from SantaKlauss at http://www.madaboutstyle.com/tooltip2.html */
+      a.info {
+          /* This is the key. */
+          position: relative;
+          z-index: 24;
+          text-decoration: none;
+      }
+      a.info:hover {
+          z-index: 25;
+          color: #FFF; background-color: #900;
+      }
+      a.info span { display: none; }
+      a.info:hover span.info {
+          /* The span will display just on :hover state. */
+          display: block;
+          position: absolute;
+          font-size: smaller;
+          top: 2em; left: -5em; width: 15em;
+          padding: 2px; border: 1px solid #333;
+          color: #900; background-color: #EEE;
+          text-align: left;
+      }
+	  a.smpl {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  a:hover {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  a:active {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  address {
+	  margin-top: 1em;
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  body {
+	  color: black;
+	  font-family: verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  max-width: 55em;
+	  
+	  }
+	  cite {
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  dd {
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  dl {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.empty {
+	  list-style-type: none;
+	  }
+	  ul.empty li {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  dl p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  dt {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  h1 {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h1.np {
+	  page-break-before: always;
+	  }
+	  h1 a {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  }
+	  h2 {
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 15pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h2 a, h3 a, h4 a, h5 a, h6 a {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  img {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  }
+	  li {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  p {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  pre {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  background-color: lightyellow;
+	  padding: .25em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text2 {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f0f0f0;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.inline {
+	  background-color: white;
+	  padding: 0em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.drawing {
+	  border-style: solid;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  padding: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table.tt {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt td {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full td {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt th {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full th {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers th {
+	  border-style: none none inset none;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.left {
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.right {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.center {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  caption {
+	  caption-side: bottom;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+	  border-spacing: 1px;
+	  width: 95%;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.top {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  td.topnowrap {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap; 
+	  }
+	  table.header td {
+	  background-color: gray;
+	  width: 50%;
+	  }
+	  table.header a {
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.reference {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap;
+	  padding-right: 1em;
+	  }
+	  thead {
+	  display:table-header-group;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc, ul.toc ul {
+	  list-style: none;
+	  margin-left: 1.5em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  padding-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li {
+	  line-height: 150%;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li li {
+	  line-height: normal;
+	  font-weight: normal;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  li.excluded {
+	  font-size: 0pt;
+	  }
+	  ul p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	
+	  .comment {
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	  .center {
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .error {
+	  color: red;
+	  font-style: italic;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .figure {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  }
+	  .filename {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .fn {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .hidden {
+	  display: none;
+	  }
+	  .left {
+	  text-align: left;
+	  }
+	  .right {
+	  text-align: right;
+	  }
+	  .title {
+	  color: #990000;
+	  font-size: 18pt;
+	  line-height: 18pt;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  margin-top: 36pt;
+	  }
+	  .vcardline {
+	  display: block;
+	  }
+	  .warning {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	
+	
+	  @media print {
+	  .noprint {
+		display: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  a {
+		color: black;
+		text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+		width: 90%;
+	  }
+	
+	  td.header {
+		width: 50%;
+		color: black;
+		background-color: white;
+		vertical-align: top;
+		font-size: 12pt;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.toc a::after {
+		content: leader('.') target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.ind li li a {
+		content: target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  .print2col {
+		column-count: 2;
+		-moz-column-count: 2;
+		column-fill: auto;
+	  }
+	  }
+	
+	  @page {
+	  @top-left {
+		   content: "Internet-Draft"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-right {
+		   content: "December 2010"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-center {
+		   content: "Abbreviated Title";
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-left {
+		   content: "Doe"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-center {
+		   content: "Expires June 2011"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-right {
+		   content: "[Page " counter(page) "]"; 
+	  } 
+	  }
+	
+	  @page:first { 
+		@top-left {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-right {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-center {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+	  }
+  /*]]>*/
+  </style>
+
+  <link href="#rfc.toc" rel="Contents"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.1" rel="Chapter" title="1 Introduction"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.2" rel="Chapter" title="2 Notational Conventions"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3" rel="Chapter" title="3 Overview"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="3.1 Terminology"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="3.2 Functionality"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4" rel="Chapter" title="4 Meta-Schemas and Output Schema"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.5" rel="Chapter" title="5 Schema Keywords"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="5.1 base"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.5.2" rel="Chapter" title="5.2 links"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6" rel="Chapter" title="6 Link Description Object"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.1 Link Context"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.1.1 anchor"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.1.2 anchorPointer"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.2 Link Relation Type"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.1 rel"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.2 &quot;self&quot; Links"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.3 &quot;collection&quot; and &quot;item&quot; Links"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.4 Using Extension Relation Types"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.3 Link Target"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.3.1 href"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.4 Adjusting URI Template Resolution"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.1 templatePointers"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.2 templateRequired"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.5 Link Target Attributes"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.1 title"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.2 description"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.3 targetMediaType"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.4 targetSchema"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.5 targetHints"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6" rel="Chapter" title="6.6 Link Input"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.6.1 hrefSchema"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.6.2 headerSchema"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.6.3 Manipulating the Target Resource Representation"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.6.4 Submitting Data for Processing"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7" rel="Chapter" title="7 Implementation Requirements"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.1 Link Discovery and Look-Up"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.2 URI Templating"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.2.1 Populating Template Data From the Instance"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.2.2 Accepting Input for Template Data"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.2.3 Encoding Data as Strings"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.3 Providing Access to LDO Keywords"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.4" rel="Chapter" title="7.4 Requests"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.5" rel="Chapter" title="7.5 Responses"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.6" rel="Chapter" title="7.6 Streaming Parsers"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8" rel="Chapter" title="8 JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1" rel="Chapter" title="8.1 One Link Per Target and Relation Type"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2" rel="Chapter" title="8.2 &quot;targetSchema&quot; and HTTP"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.3" rel="Chapter" title="8.3 HTTP POST and the &quot;submission*&quot; keywords"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.4" rel="Chapter" title="8.4 Optimizing HTTP Discoverability With &quot;targetHints&quot;"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.5" rel="Chapter" title="8.5 Advertising HTTP Features With &quot;headerSchema&quot;"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.6" rel="Chapter" title="8.6 Creating Resources Through Collections"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.7" rel="Chapter" title="8.7 Content Negotiation and Schema Evolution"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9" rel="Chapter" title="9 Examples"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.1" rel="Chapter" title="9.1 Entry Point Links, No Templates"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.2" rel="Chapter" title="9.2 Individually Identified Resources"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.3" rel="Chapter" title="9.3 Submitting a Payload and Accepting URI Input"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.4" rel="Chapter" title="9.4 &quot;anchor&quot;, &quot;base&quot; and URI Template Resolution"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.5" rel="Chapter" title="9.5 Collections"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="9.5.1 Pagination"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.5.2" rel="Chapter" title="9.5.2 Creating the First Item"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10" rel="Chapter" title="10 Security Considerations"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.1" rel="Chapter" title="10.1 Target Attributes"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.2" rel="Chapter" title="10.2 &quot;self&quot; Links"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.11" rel="Chapter" title="11 Acknowledgments"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references" rel="Chapter" title="12 References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references.1" rel="Chapter" title="12.1 Normative References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references.2" rel="Chapter" title="12.2 Informative References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A" rel="Chapter" title="A Using JSON Hyper-Schema in APIs"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A.1" rel="Chapter" title="A.1 Resource Evolution With Hyper-Schema"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A.2" rel="Chapter" title="A.2 Responses and Errors"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A.3" rel="Chapter" title="A.3 Static Analysis of an API's Hyper-Schemas"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.B" rel="Chapter" title="B ChangeLog"/>
+<link href="#rfc.authors" rel="Chapter"/>
+
+
+  <meta name="generator" content="xml2rfc version 2.5.2 - http://tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc" />
+  <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" />
+
+  <meta name="dct.creator" content="Andrews, H., Ed. and A. Wright, Ed." />
+  <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-00" />
+  <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2017-11-20" />
+  <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Schema is a JSON-based format for describing JSON data using various vocabularies.  This document specifies a vocabulary for annotating JSON documents with hyperlinks.  These hyperlinks include attributes describing how to manipulate and interact with remote resources through hypermedia environments such as HTTP, as well as determining whether the link is usable based on the instance value.  The hyperlink serialization format described in this document is also usable independent of JSON Schema.  " />
+  <meta name="description" content="JSON Schema is a JSON-based format for describing JSON data using various vocabularies.  This document specifies a vocabulary for annotating JSON documents with hyperlinks.  These hyperlinks include attributes describing how to manipulate and interact with remote resources through hypermedia environments such as HTTP, as well as determining whether the link is usable based on the instance value.  The hyperlink serialization format described in this document is also usable independent of JSON Schema.  " />
+
+</head>
+
+<body>
+
+  <table class="header">
+    <tbody>
+    
+    	<tr>
+  <td class="left">Internet Engineering Task Force</td>
+  <td class="right">H. Andrews, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
+  <td class="right">Cloudflare, Inc.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Intended status: Informational</td>
+  <td class="right">A. Wright, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Expires: May 24, 2018</td>
+  <td class="right">November 20, 2017</td>
+</tr>
+
+    	
+    </tbody>
+  </table>
+
+  <p class="title">JSON Hyper-Schema: A Vocabulary for Hypermedia Annotation of JSON <br />
+  <span class="filename">draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-00</span></p>
+  
+  <h1 id="rfc.abstract">
+  <a href="#rfc.abstract">Abstract</a>
+</h1>
+<p>JSON Schema is a JSON-based format for describing JSON data using various vocabularies.  This document specifies a vocabulary for annotating JSON documents with hyperlinks.  These hyperlinks include attributes describing how to manipulate and interact with remote resources through hypermedia environments such as HTTP, as well as determining whether the link is usable based on the instance value.  The hyperlink serialization format described in this document is also usable independent of JSON Schema.  </p>
+<h1>
+  <a>Note to Readers</a>
+</h1>
+<p>The issues list for this draft can be found at <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues">https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>For additional information, see <span>&lt;</span><a href="http://json-schema.org/">http://json-schema.org/</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>To provide feedback, use this issue tracker, the communication methods listed on the homepage, or email the document editors.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.status">
+  <a href="#rfc.status">Status of This Memo</a>
+</h1>
+<p>This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.</p>
+<p>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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.</p>
+<p>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."</p>
+<p>This Internet-Draft will expire on May 24, 2018.</p>
+<h1 id="rfc.copyrightnotice">
+  <a href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a>
+</h1>
+<p>Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors.  All rights reserved.</p>
+<p>This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://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.</p>
+
+  
+  <hr class="noprint" />
+  <h1 class="np" id="rfc.toc"><a href="#rfc.toc">Table of Contents</a></h1>
+  <ul class="toc">
+
+  	<li>1.   <a href="#rfc.section.1">Introduction</a></li>
+<li>2.   <a href="#rfc.section.2">Notational Conventions</a></li>
+<li>3.   <a href="#rfc.section.3">Overview</a></li>
+<ul><li>3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.1">Terminology</a></li>
+<li>3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.2">Functionality</a></li>
+</ul><li>4.   <a href="#rfc.section.4">Meta-Schemas and Output Schema</a></li>
+<li>5.   <a href="#rfc.section.5">Schema Keywords</a></li>
+<ul><li>5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.5.1">base</a></li>
+<li>5.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.5.2">links</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6">Link Description Object</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1">Link Context</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.1.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1.1">anchor</a></li>
+<li>6.1.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1.2">anchorPointer</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2">Link Relation Type</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.1">rel</a></li>
+<li>6.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.2">"self" Links</a></li>
+<li>6.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.3">"collection" and "item" Links</a></li>
+<li>6.2.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.4">Using Extension Relation Types</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3">Link Target</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3.1">href</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4">Adjusting URI Template Resolution</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.4.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.1">templatePointers</a></li>
+<li>6.4.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.2">templateRequired</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5">Link Target Attributes</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.1">title</a></li>
+<li>6.5.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.2">description</a></li>
+<li>6.5.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.3">targetMediaType</a></li>
+<li>6.5.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.4">targetSchema</a></li>
+<li>6.5.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.5">targetHints</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6">Link Input</a></li>
+<ul><li>6.6.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6.1">hrefSchema</a></li>
+<li>6.6.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6.2">headerSchema</a></li>
+<li>6.6.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6.3">Manipulating the Target Resource Representation</a></li>
+<li>6.6.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6.4">Submitting Data for Processing</a></li>
+</ul></ul><li>7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7">Implementation Requirements</a></li>
+<ul><li>7.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.1">Link Discovery and Look-Up</a></li>
+<li>7.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2">URI Templating</a></li>
+<ul><li>7.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2.1">Populating Template Data From the Instance</a></li>
+<li>7.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2.2">Accepting Input for Template Data</a></li>
+<li>7.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2.3">Encoding Data as Strings</a></li>
+</ul><li>7.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3">Providing Access to LDO Keywords</a></li>
+<li>7.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.4">Requests</a></li>
+<li>7.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.5">Responses</a></li>
+<li>7.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.6">Streaming Parsers</a></li>
+</ul><li>8.   <a href="#rfc.section.8">JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP</a></li>
+<ul><li>8.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1">One Link Per Target and Relation Type</a></li>
+<li>8.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2">"targetSchema" and HTTP</a></li>
+<li>8.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.3">HTTP POST and the "submission*" keywords</a></li>
+<li>8.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.4">Optimizing HTTP Discoverability With "targetHints"</a></li>
+<li>8.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.5">Advertising HTTP Features With "headerSchema"</a></li>
+<li>8.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.6">Creating Resources Through Collections</a></li>
+<li>8.7.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.7">Content Negotiation and Schema Evolution</a></li>
+</ul><li>9.   <a href="#rfc.section.9">Examples</a></li>
+<ul><li>9.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.1">Entry Point Links, No Templates</a></li>
+<li>9.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.2">Individually Identified Resources</a></li>
+<li>9.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.3">Submitting a Payload and Accepting URI Input</a></li>
+<li>9.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.4">"anchor", "base" and URI Template Resolution</a></li>
+<li>9.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.5">Collections</a></li>
+<ul><li>9.5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.5.1">Pagination</a></li>
+<li>9.5.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.5.2">Creating the First Item</a></li>
+</ul></ul><li>10.   <a href="#rfc.section.10">Security Considerations</a></li>
+<ul><li>10.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.1">Target Attributes</a></li>
+<li>10.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.2">"self" Links</a></li>
+</ul><li>11.   <a href="#rfc.section.11">Acknowledgments</a></li>
+<li>12.   <a href="#rfc.references">References</a></li>
+<ul><li>12.1.   <a href="#rfc.references.1">Normative References</a></li>
+<li>12.2.   <a href="#rfc.references.2">Informative References</a></li>
+</ul><li>Appendix A.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Using JSON Hyper-Schema in APIs</a></li>
+<ul><li>A.1.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A.1">Resource Evolution With Hyper-Schema</a></li>
+<li>A.2.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A.2">Responses and Errors</a></li>
+<li>A.3.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A.3">Static Analysis of an API's Hyper-Schemas</a></li>
+</ul><li>Appendix B.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.B">ChangeLog</a></li>
+<li><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a></li>
+
+
+  </ul>
+
+  <h1 id="rfc.section.1"><a href="#rfc.section.1">1.</a> Introduction</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema is a JSON Schema vocabulary for annotating JSON documents with hyperlinks and instructions for processing and manipulating remote JSON resources through hypermedia environments such as HTTP.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.2">The term JSON Hyper-Schema is used to refer to a JSON Schema that uses these keywords.  The term "hyper-schema" on its own refers to a JSON Hyper-Schema within the scope of this specification.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.3">The primary mechanism introduced for specifying links is the Link Description Object (LDO), which is a serialization of the abstract link model defined in <a href="#RFC8288">RFC 8288, section 2</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC8288]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.4">This specification will use the concepts, syntax, and terminology defined by the <a href="#json-schema">JSON Schema core</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema]</cite> and <a href="#json-schema-validation">JSON Schema validation</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema-validation]</cite> specifications.  It is advised that readers have a copy of these specifications.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.2"><a href="#rfc.section.2">2.</a> Notational Conventions</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.1">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 <a href="#RFC2119">RFC 2119</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC2119]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3"><a href="#rfc.section.3">3.</a> Overview</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema makes it possible to build hypermedia systems from JSON documents by describing how to construct hyperlinks from instance data.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.2">The combination of a JSON instance document and a valid application/schema+json hyper-schema for that instance behaves as a single hypermedia representation.  By allowing this separation, hyper-schema-based systems can gracefully support applications that expect plain JSON, while providing full hypermedia capabilities for hyper-schema-aware applications and user agents.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.3">User agents can detect the presence of hyper-schema by looking for the application/schema+json media type and a "$schema" value that indicates the presence of the hyper-schema vocabulary.  A user agent can then use an implementation of JSON Hyper-Schema to provide an interface to the combination of the schema and instance documents as a single logical representation of a resource, just as with any single-document hypermedia representation format.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.4">Hyper-schemas allow representations to take up fewer bytes on the wire, and distribute the burden of link construction from the server to each client.  A user agent need not construct a link unless a client application requests that link.  JSON Hyper-Schema can also be used on the server side to generate other link serializations or representation formats at runtime, or pre-emptively follow links to facilitate server push usage.  </p>
+<p>Here is an example hyper-schema that adds a single link, with the IANA-registered link relation type "self", that is built from an instance with one known object field named "id": </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "type": "object",
+    "properties": {
+        "id": {
+            "type": "number",
+            "readOnly": true
+        }
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "thing/{id}"
+        }
+    ]
+}
+                </pre>
+<p>If the instance is {"id": 1234}, and its base URI according to <a href="#RFC3986">RFC 3986 section 5.1</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC3986]</cite>, is "https://api.example.com/", then "https://api.example.com/thing/1234" is the resulting link's target URI.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.1"><a href="#rfc.section.3.1">3.1.</a> Terminology</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.1">The terms "schema", "instance", and "meta-schema" are to be interpreted as defined in the <a href="#json-schema">JSON Schema core specification</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.2">The terms "applicable" and "attached" are to be interpreted as defined in <a href="#json-schema-validation">Section 3 of the JSON Schema validation specification</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema-validation]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.3">The terms "link", "link context" (or "context"), "link target" (or "target"), and "target attributes" are to be interpreted as defined in <a href="#RFC8288">Section 2 of RFC 8288</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC8288]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.4">The term "user agent" is to be interpreted as defined in <a href="#RFC7230">Section 2.1 of RFC 7230</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7230]</cite>, generalized to apply to any protocol that may be used in a hypermedia system rather than specifically being an HTTP client.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.5">This specification defines the following terms: </p>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>JSON Hyper-Schema</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A JSON Schema using the keywords defined by this specification.  </dd>
+  <dt>hyper-schema</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">Within this document, the term "hyper-schema" always refers to a JSON Hyper-Schema </dd>
+  <dt>link validity</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A valid link for an instance is one that is applicable to that instance and does not fail any requirement imposed by the keywords in the Link Description Object.  </dd>
+  <dt>generic user agent</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A user agent which can be used to interact with any resource, from any server, from among the standardized link relations, media types, URI schemes, and protocols that it supports; though it may be extendible to specially handle particular profiles of media types.  </dd>
+  <dt>client application</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">An application which uses a hypermedia system for a specific purpose.  Such an application may also be its own user agent, or it may be built on top of a generic user agent.  A client application is programmed with knowledge of link relations, media types, URI schemes, protocols, and data structures that are specific to the application's domain.  </dd>
+  <dt>client input</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">Data provided through a user agent, and most often also through a client application.  Such data may be requested from a user interactively, or provided before interaction in forms such as command-line arguments, configuration files, or hardcoded values in source code.  </dd>
+  <dt>operation</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">A specific use of a hyperlink, such as making a network request (for a URI with a scheme such as "http://" that indicates a protocol) or otherwise taking action based on a link (reading data from a "data:" URI, or constructing an email message based on a "mailto:" link).  For protocols such as HTTP that support multiple methods, each method is considered to be a separate operation on the same link.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.2"><a href="#rfc.section.3.2">3.2.</a> Functionality</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.1">A JSON Hyper-Schema implementation is able to take a hyper-schema, an instance, and in some cases client input, and produce a set of fully resolved valid links.  As defined by <a href="#RFC8288">RFC 8288, section 2</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC8288]</cite>, a link consists of a context, a typed relation, a target, and optionally additional target attributes.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.2">The relation type and target attributes are taken directly from each link's Link Description Object.  The context and target identifiers are constructed from some combination of URI Templates, instance data, and (in the case of the target identifier) client input.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.3">The target is always fully identified by a URI.  Due to the lack of a URI fragment identifier syntax for application/json and many other media types that can be used with JSON Hyper-Schema, the context may be only partially identified by a URI.  In such cases, the remaining identification will be provided as a JSON Pointer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.4">A few IANA-registered link relation types are given specific semantics in a JSON Hyper-Schema document.  A "self" link is used to interact with the resource that the instance document represents, while "collection" and "item" links identify resources for which collection-specific semantics can be assumed.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4"><a href="#rfc.section.4">4.</a> Meta-Schemas and Output Schema</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF1" class="info">[CREF1]<span class="info">The "draft-07-wip" is a placeholder.</span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.2">The current URI for the JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema is <span>&lt;</span><a href="http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema#">http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema#</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.3">The <a href="#ldo">link description format</a> <cite title="NONE">[ldo]</cite> can be used without JSON Schema, and use of this format can be declared by referencing the normative link description schema as the schema for the data structure that uses the links.  The URI of the normative link description schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="http://json-schema.org/draft-07/links#">http://json-schema.org/draft-07/links#</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.4">JSON Hyper-Schema implementations are free to provide output in any format.  However, a specific format is defined for use in the conformance test suite, which is also used to illustrate points in the <a href="#implementation">"Implementation Requirements"</a> <cite title="NONE">[implementation]</cite>, and to show the output generated by <a href="#examples">examples</a> <cite title="NONE">[examples]</cite>.  It is RECOMMENDED that implementations be capable of producing output in this format to facilitated testing.  The URI of the JSON Schema describing the recommended output format is <span>&lt;</span><a href="http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema-output#">http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema-output#</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5"><a href="#rfc.section.5">5.</a> Schema Keywords</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.1">Hyper-schema keywords from all schemas that are applicable to a position in an instance, as defined by <a href="#json-schema-validation">Section 3 of JSON Schema validation</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema-validation]</cite>, can be used with that instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.2">When multiple subschemas are applicable to a given sub-instance, all "link" arrays MUST be combined, in any order, into a single set.  Each object in the resulting set MUST retain its own list of applicable "base" values, in resolution order, from the same schema and any parent schemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.3">As with all JSON Schema keywords, all keywords described in this section are optional.  The minimal valid JSON Hyper-schema is the blank object.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5.1"><a href="#rfc.section.5.1">5.1.</a> <a href="#base" id="base">base</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.1">If present, this keyword MUST be first <a href="#uriTemplating">resolved as a URI Template</a> <cite title="NONE">[uriTemplating]</cite>, and then MUST be resolved as a URI Reference against the current URI base of the instance.  The result MUST be set as the new URI base for the instance while processing the sub-schema containing "base" and all sub-schemas within it.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.2">The process for resolving the "base" template can be different when being resolved for use with "anchor" than when being resolved for use with "href", which is explained in detail in the URI Templating section.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5.2"><a href="#rfc.section.5.2">5.2.</a> links</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.2.p.1">The "links" property of schemas is used to associate Link Description Objects with instances.  The value of this property MUST be an array, and the items in the array must be Link Description Objects, as defined below.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6"><a href="#rfc.section.6">6.</a> <a href="#ldo" id="ldo">Link Description Object</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.1">A Link Description Object (LDO) is a serialization of the abstract link model defined in <a href="#RFC8288">RFC 8288, section 2</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC8288]</cite>.  As described in that document, a link consists of a context, a relation type, a target, and optionally target attributes.  JSON Hyper-Schema's LDO provides all of these, along with additional features using JSON Schema to describe input for use with the links in various ways.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.2">Due to the use of URI Templates to identify link contexts and targets, as well as optional further use of client input when identifying targets, an LDO is a link template that may resolve to multiple links when used with a JSON instance document.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.3">A specific use of an LDO, typically involving a request and response across a protocol, is referred to as an operation.  For many protocols, multiple operations are possible on any given link.  The protocol is indicated by the target's URI scheme.  Note that not all URI schemes indicate a protocol that can be used for communications, and even resources with URI schemes that do indicate such protocols need not be available over that protocol.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.4">A Link Description Object MUST be an object, and the <a href="#href">"href"</a> <cite title="NONE">[href]</cite> and <a href="#rel">"rel"</a> <cite title="NONE">[rel]</cite> properties MUST be present.  Each keyword is covered briefly in this section, with additional usage explanation and comprehensive examples given later in the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.1">6.1.</a> <a href="#context" id="context">Link Context</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.p.1">In JSON Hyper-Schema, the link's context resource is, by default, the sub-instance to which it is attached (as defined by <a href="#json-schema-validation">Section 3 of the JSON Schema validation specification</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema-validation]</cite>).  This is often not the entire instance document.  This default context can be changed using the keywords in this section.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.p.2">Depending on the media type of the instance, it may or may not be possible to assign a URI to the exact default context resource.  In particular, application/json does not define a URI fragment resolution syntax, so properties or array elements within a plain JSON document cannot be fully identified by a URI.  When it is not possible to produce a complete URI, the position of the context SHOULD be conveyed by the URI of the instance document, together with a separate plain-string JSON Pointer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.p.3">Implementations MUST be able to construct the link context's URI, and (if necessary for full identification), a JSON Pointer in string representation form as per <a href="#RFC6901">RFC 6901, section 5</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite> in place of a URI fragment.  The process for constructing a URI based on a URI template is given in the <a href="#uriTemplating">URI Templating</a> <cite title="NONE">[uriTemplating]</cite> section.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.1.1">6.1.1.</a> <a href="#anchor" id="anchor">anchor</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.1.p.1">This property sets the context URI of the link.  The value of the property is a <a href="#RFC6570">URI Template</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6570]</cite>, and the resulting <a href="#RFC3986">URI-reference</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC3986]</cite> MUST be resolved against the base URI of the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.1.p.2">The URI is computed from the provided URI template using the same process described for the <a href="#href">"href"</a> <cite title="NONE">[href]</cite> property, with the exception that <a href="#hrefSchema">"hrefSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[hrefSchema]</cite> MUST NOT be applied.  Unlike target URIs, context URIs do not accept user input.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.1.2">6.1.2.</a> <a href="#anchorPointer" id="anchorPointer">anchorPointer</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.1">This property changes the point within the instance that is considered to be the context resource of the link.  The value of the property MUST be a valid JSON Pointer in JSON String representation form, or a valid <a href="#relative-json-pointer">Relative JSON Pointer</a> <cite title="NONE">[relative-json-pointer]</cite> which is evaluated relative to the default context.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.2">While an alternate context with a known URI is best set with the <a href="#anchor">"anchor"</a> <cite title="NONE">[anchor]</cite> keyword, the lack of a fragment identifier syntax for application/json means that it is usually not possible to change the context within a JSON instance using a URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.3">Even in "+json" media types that define JSON Pointer as a fragment identifier syntax, if the default context is nested within an array, it is not possible to obtain the index of the default context's position in that array in order to construct a pointer to another property in that same nested JSON object.  This will be demonstrated in the examples.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.4">The result of processing this keyword SHOULD be a URI fragment if the media type of the instance allows for such a fragment.  Otherwise it MUST be a string-encoded JSON Pointer.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2">6.2.</a> <a href="#relationType" id="relationType">Link Relation Type</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.p.1">The link's relation type identifies its semantics.  It is the primary means of conveying how an application can interact with a resource.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.p.2">Relationship definitions are not normally media type dependent, and users are encouraged to utilize the most suitable existing accepted relation definitions.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2.1">6.2.1.</a> <a href="#rel" id="rel">rel</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.1.p.1">The value of this property MUST be a string, and MUST be a single Link Relation Type as defined in RFC 8288, Section 2.1.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.1.p.2">This property is required.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2.2">6.2.2.</a> <a href="#self" id="self">"self" Links</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.2.p.1">A "self" link, as originally defined by <a href="#RFC4287">Section 4.2.7.2 of RFC 4287</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC4287]</cite>, indicates that the target URI identifies a resource equivalent to the link context.  In JSON Hyper-Schema, a "self" link MUST be resolvable from the instance, and therefore "hrefSchema" MUST NOT be present.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.2.p.2">Hyper-schema authors SHOULD use "templateRequired" to ensure that the "self" link has all instance data that is needed for use.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.2.p.3">A hyper-schema implementation MUST recognize that a link with relation type "self" that has the entire current instance document as its context describes how a user agent can interact with the resource represented by that instance document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2.3">6.2.3.</a> <a href="#collectionAndItem" id="collectionAndItem">"collection" and "item" Links</a></h1>
+<p><a href="#RFC6573">RFC 6573</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6573]</cite> defines and registers the "item" and "collection" link relation types.  JSON Hyper-Schema imposes additional semantics on collection resources indicated by these types.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.3.p.2">Implementations MUST recognize the target of a "collection" link and the context of an "item" link as collections.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.3.p.3">A well-known design pattern in hypermedia is to use a collection resource to create a member of the collection and give it a server-assigned URI.  If the protocol indicated by the URI scheme defines a specific method that is suited to creating a resource with a server-assigned URI, then a collection resource, as identified by these link relation types, MUST NOT define semantics for that method that conflict with the semantics of creating a collection member.  Collection resources MAY implement item creation via such a protocol method, and user agents MAY assume that any such operation, if it exists, has item creation semantics.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.3.p.4">As such a method would correspond to JSON Hyper-Schema's data submission concept, the <a href="#submissionSchema">"submissionSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[submissionSchema]</cite> field for the link SHOULD be compatible with the schema of the representation of the collection's items, as indicated by the "item" link's target resource or the "self" link of the "collection" link's context resource.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.4"><a href="#rfc.section.6.2.4">6.2.4.</a> <a href="#extensionRelationTypes" id="extensionRelationTypes">Using Extension Relation Types</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.4.p.1">When no registered relation (aside from "related") applies, users are encouraged to mint their own extension relation types, as described in <a href="#RFC8288">section 2.1.2 of RFC 8288</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC8288]</cite>.  The simplest approaches for choosing link relation type URIs are to either use a URI scheme that is already in use to identify the system's primary resources, or to use a human-readable, non-dereferenceable URI scheme such as <a href="#RFC4151">"tag", defined by RFC 4151</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC4151]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.4.p.2">Extension relation type URIs need not be dereferenceable, even when using a scheme that allows it.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.3">6.3.</a> <a href="#target" id="target">Link Target</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.p.1">The target URI template is used to identify the link's target, potentially making use of instance data.  Additionally, with <a href="#hrefSchema">"hrefSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[hrefSchema]</cite>, this template can identify a set of possible target resources to use based on client input.  The full process of resolving the URI template, with or without client input, is covered in the <a href="#uriTemplating">URI Templating</a> <cite title="NONE">[uriTemplating]</cite> section.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.3.1">6.3.1.</a> <a href="#href" id="href">href</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.1.p.1">The value of the "href" link description property is a template used to determine the target URI of the related resource.  The value of the instance property MUST be resolved as a <a href="#RFC3986">URI-reference</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC3986]</cite> against the base URI of the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.1.p.2">This property is REQUIRED.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4"><a href="#rfc.section.6.4">6.4.</a> Adjusting URI Template Resolution</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.1">The keywords in this section are used when resolving all URI Templates involved in hyper-schema: "base", "anchor", and "href".  See the <a href="#uriTemplating">URI Templating</a> <cite title="NONE">[uriTemplating]</cite> section for the complete template resolution algorithm.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.2">Note that when resolving a "base" template, the attachment point from which resolution begins is the attachment point of the "href" or "anchor" keyword being resolved which requires "base" templates to be resolved, not the attachment point of the "base" keyword itself.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.4.1">6.4.1.</a> <a href="#templatePointers" id="templatePointers">templatePointers</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.1.p.1">The value of the "templatePointers" link description property MUST be an object.  Each property value in the object MUST be a valid <a href="#RFC6901">JSON Pointer</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite>, or a valid <a href="#relative-json-pointer">Relative JSON Pointer</a> <cite title="NONE">[relative-json-pointer]</cite> which is evaluated relative to the attachment point of the link for which the template is being resolved.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.1.p.2">For each property name in the object that matches a variable name in the template being resolved, the value of that property adjusts the starting position of variable resolution for that variable.  Properties which do not match template variable names in the template being resolved MUST be ignored.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.4.2">6.4.2.</a> <a href="#templateRequired" id="templateRequired">templateRequired</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.2.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be an array, and the elements MUST be unique.  Each element SHOULD match a variable in the link's URI Template, without percent-encoding.  After completing the entire URI Template resolution process, if any variable that is present in this array does not have a value, the link MUST NOT be used.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5">6.5.</a> <a href="#targetAttributes" id="targetAttributes">Link Target Attributes</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.p.1">All properties in this section are advisory only.  While keywords such as "title" and "description" are used primarily to present the link to users, those keywords that predict the nature of a link interaction or response MUST NOT be considered authoritative.  The runtime behavior of the target resource MUST be respected whenever it conflicts with the target attributes in the LDO.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.1">6.5.1.</a> title</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.1.p.1">This property defines a title for the link.  The value MUST be a string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.1.p.2">User agents MAY use this title when presenting the link to the user.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.2">6.5.2.</a> description</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.2.p.1">This property provides additional information beyond what is present in the title.  The value MUST be a string.  While a title is preferably short, a description can be used to go into more detail about the purpose and usage of the link.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.2.p.2">User agents MAY use this description when presenting the link to the user.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.3">6.5.3.</a> targetMediaType</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.1">The value of this property represents the media type <a href="#RFC2046">RFC 2046</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC2046]</cite>, that is expected to be returned when fetching this resource.  This property value MAY be a media range instead, using the same pattern defined in <a href="#RFC7231">RFC 7231, section 5.3.2 - HTTP "Accept" header</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7231]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.2">This property is analogous to the "type" property of other link serialization formats.  User agents MAY use this information to inform the interface they present to the user before the link is followed, but MUST NOT use this information in the interpretation of the resulting data.  Instead, a user agent MUST use the media type given by the response for run-time interpretation.  See the section on <a href="#security">"Security Concerns"</a> <cite title="NONE">[security]</cite> for a detailed examination of mis-use of "targetMediaType".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.3">For protocols supporting content-negotiation, implementations MAY choose to describe possible target media types using protocol-specific information in <a href="#headerSchema">"headerSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[headerSchema]</cite>.  If both protocol-specific information and "targetMediaType" are present, then the value of "targetMediaType" MUST be compatible with the protocol-specific information, and SHOULD indicate the media type that will be returned in the absence of content negotiation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.4">When no such protocol-specific information is available, or when the implementation does not recognize the protocol involved, then the value SHOULD be taken to be "application/json".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.4"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.4">6.5.4.</a> <a href="#targetSchema" id="targetSchema">targetSchema</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.4.p.1">This property provides a schema that is expected to describe the link target's representation.  Depending on the protocol, the schema may or may not describe the request or response to any particular operation performed with the link.  See the <a href="#HTTP">JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP</a> <cite title="NONE">[HTTP]</cite> section for an in-depth discussion of how this keyword is used with HTTP.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.5"><a href="#rfc.section.6.5.5">6.5.5.</a> <a href="#targetHints" id="targetHints">targetHints</a></h1>
+<p><a id="CREF2" class="info">[CREF2]<span class="info">This section attempts to strike a balance between comprehensiveness and flexibility by deferring most of its structure to the protocol indicated by the URI scheme.  Note that a resource can be identified by a URI with a dereferenceable scheme, yet not be accessible over that protocol.  While currently very loose, this section is expected to become more well-defined based on draft feedback, and may change significantly in future drafts.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.2">The value of this property is advisory only.  It represents information that is expected to be discoverable through interacting with the target resource, typically in the form of protocol-specific control information or meta-data such as headers returned in response to an HTTP HEAD or OPTIONS request.  The protocol is determined by the "href" URI scheme, although note that resources are not guaranteed to be accessible over such a protocol.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.3">The value of this property SHOULD be an object.  The keys to this object SHOULD be lower-cased forms of the control data field names.  Each value SHOULD be an array, in order to uniformly handle multi-valued fields.  Multiple values MUST be presented as an array, and not as a single string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.4">Protocols with control information not suitable for representation as a JSON object MAY be represented by another data type, such as an array.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.5">Values that cannot be understood as part of the indicated protocol MUST be ignored by a JSON Hyper-Schema implementation.  Applications MAY make use of such values, but MUST NOT assume interoperability with other implementations.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.6">Implementations MUST NOT assume that all discoverable information is accounted for in this object.  Client applications MUST properly handle run-time responses that contradict this property's values.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.7">Client applications MUST NOT assume that an implementation will automatically take any action based on the value of this property.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.8">See <a href="#HTTP">"JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP"</a> <cite title="NONE">[HTTP]</cite> for guidance on using this keyword with HTTP and analogous protocols.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6">6.6.</a> <a href="#input" id="input">Link Input</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.p.1">There are four ways to use client input with a link, and each is addressed by a separate link description object keyword.  When performing operations, user agents SHOULD ignore schemas that are not relevant to their semantics.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6.1">6.6.1.</a> <a href="#hrefSchema" id="hrefSchema">hrefSchema</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.1">The value of the "hrefSchema" link description property MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  This schema is used to validate user input or other user agent data for filling out the URI Template in <a href="#href">"href"</a> <cite title="NONE">[href]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.2">Omitting "hrefSchema" or setting the entire schema to "false" prevents any user agent data from being accepted.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.3">Setting any subschema that applies to a particular variable to the JSON literal value "false" prevents any user agent data from being accepted for that single variable.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.4">For template variables that can be resolved from the instance data, if the instance data is valid against all applicable subschemas in "hrefSchema", then it MUST be used to pre-populate the input data set for that variable.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.5">Note that even when data is pre-populated from the instance, the validation schema for that variable in "hrefSchema" need not be identical to the validation schema(s) that apply to the instance data's location.  This allows for different validation rules for user agent data, such as supporting spelled-out months for date-time input, but using the standard date-time format for storage.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.6">After input is accepted, potentially overriding the pre-populated instance data, the resulting data set MUST successfully validate against the value of "hrefSchema".  If it does not then the link MUST NOT be used.  If it is valid, then the process given in the "URI Templating" section continues with this updated data set.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6.2">6.6.2.</a> <a href="#headerSchema" id="headerSchema">headerSchema</a></h1>
+<p><a id="CREF3" class="info">[CREF3]<span class="info">As with "targetHints", this keyword is somewhat under-specified to encourage experimentation and feedback as we try to balance flexibility and clarity.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.2">If present, this property is a schema for protocol-specific request headers or analogous control and meta-data.  The value of this object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  The protocol is determined by the "href" URI scheme, although note that resources are not guaranteed to be accessible over such a protocol.  The schema is advisory only; the target resource's behavior is not constrained by its presence.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.3">The purpose of this keyword is to advertise target resource interaction features, and indicate to user agents and client applications what headers and header values are likely to be useful.  User agents and client applications MAY use the schema to validate relevant headers, but MUST NOT assume that missing headers or values are forbidden from use.  While schema authors MAY set "additionalProperties" to false, this is NOT RECOMMENDED and MUST NOT prevent client applications or user agents from supplying additional headers when requests are made.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.4">The exact mapping of the JSON data model into the headers is protocol-dependent.  However, in most cases this schema SHOULD specify a type of "object", and the property names SHOULD be lower-cased forms of the control data field names.  See the <a href="#HTTP">"JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP"</a> <cite title="NONE">[HTTP]</cite> section for detailed guidance on using this keyword with HTTP and analogous protocols.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.5">"headerSchema" is applicable to any request method or command that the protocol supports.  When generating a request, user agents and client applications SHOULD ignore schemas for headers that are not relevant to that request.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.3"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6.3">6.6.3.</a> Manipulating the Target Resource Representation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.3.p.1">In JSON Hyper-Schema, <a href="#targetSchema">"targetSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[targetSchema]</cite> supplies a non-authoritative description of the target resource's representation.  A client application can use "targetSchema" to structure input for replacing or modifying the representation, or as the base representation for building a patch document based on a patch media type.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.3.p.2">Alternatively, if "targetSchema" is absent or if the client application prefers to only use authoritative information, it can interact with the target resource to confirm or discover its representation structure.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.3.p.3">"targetSchema" is not intended to describe link operation responses, except when the response semantics indicate that it is a representation of the target resource.  In all cases, the schema indicated by the response itself is authoritative.  See <a href="#HTTP">"JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP"</a> <cite title="NONE">[HTTP]</cite> for detailed examples.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.4"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6.4">6.6.4.</a> Submitting Data for Processing</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.p.1">The <a href="#submissionSchema">"submissionSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[submissionSchema]</cite> and <a href="#submissionMediaType">"submissionMediaType"</a> <cite title="NONE">[submissionMediaType]</cite> keywords describe the domain of the processing function implemented by the target resource.  Otherwise, as noted above, the submission schema and media type are ignored for operations to which they are not relevant.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.4.1"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6.4.1">6.6.4.1.</a> <a href="#submissionMediaType" id="submissionMediaType">submissionMediaType</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.1.p.1">If present, this property indicates the media type format the client application and user agent should use for the request payload described by <a href="#submissionSchema">"submissionSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[submissionSchema]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.1.p.2">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of application/json.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.1.p.3">Note that "submissionMediaType" and "submissionSchema" are not restricted to HTTP URIs.  <a id="CREF4" class="info">[CREF4]<span class="info">This statement might move to wherever the example ends up.</span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.4.2"><a href="#rfc.section.6.6.4.2">6.6.4.2.</a> <a href="#submissionSchema" id="submissionSchema">submissionSchema</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.2.p.1">This property contains a schema which defines the acceptable structure of the document to be encoded according to the "submissionMediaType" property and sent to the target resource for processing.  This can be viewed as describing the domain of the processing function implemented by the target resource.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.2.p.2">This is a separate concept from the <a href="#targetSchema">"targetSchema"</a> <cite title="NONE">[targetSchema]</cite> property, which describes the target information resource (including for replacing the contents of the resource in a PUT request), unlike "submissionSchema" which describes the user-submitted request data to be evaluated by the resource.  "submissionSchema" is intended for use with requests that have payloads that are not necessarily defined in terms of the target representation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.2.p.3">Omitting "submissionSchema" has the same behavior as a value of "true".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7"><a href="#rfc.section.7">7.</a> <a href="#implementation" id="implementation">Implementation Requirements</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.1">At a high level, a conforming implementation will meet the following requirements.  Each of these requirements is covered in more detail in the individual keyword sections and keyword group overviews.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.2">Note that the requirements around how an implementation MUST recognize "self", "collection", and "item" links are thoroughly covered in the <a href="#relationType">link relation type</a> <cite title="NONE">[relationType]</cite> section and are not repeated here.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.3">While it is not a mandatory format for implementations, the output format used in the test suite summarizes what needs to be computed for each link before it can be used: </p>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>contextUri</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The fully resolved URI (with scheme) of the context resource.  If the context is not the entire resource and there is a usable fragment identifier syntax, then the URI includes a fragment.  Note that there is no such syntax for application/json.  </dd>
+  <dt>contextPointer</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The JSON Pointer for the location within the instance of the context resource.  If the instance media type supports JSON Pointers as fragment identifiers, this pointer will be the same as the one encoded in the fragment of the "contextUri" field.  </dd>
+  <dt>rel</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The link relation type, as it appears in the LDO.  </dd>
+  <dt>targetUri</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The fully resolved URI (with a scheme) of the target resource.  If the link accepts input, this can only be produced once the input has been supplied.  </dd>
+  <dt>hrefInputTemplates</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The list of partially resolved URI references for a link that accepts input.  The first entry in the list is the partially resolved "href".  The additional entries, if any, are the partially resolved "base" values ordered from the most immediate out to the root of the schema.  Template variables that are pre-populated in the input are not resolved at this stage, as the pre-populated value can be overridden.  </dd>
+  <dt>hrefPrepopulatedInput</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The data set that the user agent should use to prepopulate any input mechanism before accepting client input.  If input is to be accepted but no fields are to be pre-populated, then this will be an empty object.  </dd>
+  <dt>attachmentPointer</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The JSON Pointer for the location within the instance to which the link is attached.  By default, "contextUri" and "attachmentUri" are the same, but "contextUri" can be changed by LDO keywords, while "attachmentUri" cannot.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> Other LDO keywords that are not involved in producing the above information are included exactly as they appear when producing output for the test suite.  Those fields will not be further discussed here unless specifically relevant.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.1"><a href="#rfc.section.7.1">7.1.</a> Link Discovery and Look-Up</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.1">Before links can be used, they must be discovered by applying the hyper-schema to the instance and finding all applicable and valid links.  Note that in addition to collecting valid links, any <a href="#base">"base"</a> <cite title="NONE">[base]</cite> values necessary to resolve each LDO's URI Templates must also be located and associated with the LDO through whatever mechanism is most useful for the implementation's URI Template resolution process.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.2">And implementation MUST support looking up links by either their attachment pointer or context pointer, either by performing the look-up or by providing the set of all links with both pointers determined so that user agents can implement the look-up themselves.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.3">When performing look-ups by context pointer, links that are attached to elements of the same array MUST be returned in the same order as the array elements to which they are attached.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2"><a href="#rfc.section.7.2">7.2.</a> <a href="#uriTemplating" id="uriTemplating">URI Templating</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.1">Three hyper-schema keywords are <a href="#RFC6570">URI Templates</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6570]</cite>: "base", "anchor", and "href".  Each are resolved separately to URI-references, and then the anchor or href URI-reference is resolved against the base (which is itself resolved against earlier bases as needed, each of which was first resolved from a URI Template to a URI-reference).  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.2">All three keywords share the same algorithm for resolving variables from instance data, which makes use of the "templatePointers" and "templateRequired" keywords.  When resolving "href", both it and any "base" templates needed for resolution to an absolute URI, the algorithm is modified to optionally accept user input based on the "hrefSchema" keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.3">For each URI Template (T), the following pseudocode describes an algorithm for resolving T into a URI-reference (R).  For the purpose of this algorithm: </p>
+
+<ul>
+  <li>"ldo.templatePointers" is an empty object if the keyword was not present and "ldo.templateRequired" is likewise an empty array.  </li>
+  <li>"attachmentPointer" is the absolute JSON Pointer for the attachment location of the LDO.  </li>
+  <li>"getApplicableSchemas()" returns an iterable set of all (sub)schemas that apply to the attachment point in the instance.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.4">This algorithm should be applied first to either "href" or "anchor", and then as needed to each successive "base".  The order is important, as it is not always possible to tell whether a template will resolve to a full URI or a URI-reference.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.5">In English, the high-level algorithm is: </p>
+
+<ol>
+  <li>Populate template variable data from the instance</li>
+  <li>If input is desired, accept input</li>
+  <li>Check that all required variables have a value</li>
+  <li>Encode values into strings and fill out the template</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p>This is the high-level algorithm as pseudocode.  "T" comes from either "href" or "anchor" within the LDO, or from "base" in a containing schema.  Pseudocode for each step follows.  "initialTemplateKeyword" indicates which of the two started the process (since "base" is always resolved in order to finish resolving one or the other of those keywords).  </p>
+<pre>
+
+templateData = populateDataFromInstance(T, ldo, instance)
+
+if initialTemplateKeyword == "href" and ldo.hrefSchema exists:
+    inputData = acceptInput(ldo, instance, templateData)
+    for varname in inputData:
+        templateData[varname] = inputData[varname]
+
+for varname in ldo.templateRequired:
+    if not exists templateData[varname]
+        fatal("Missing required variable(s)")
+
+templateData = stringEncode(templateData)
+R = rfc6570ResolutionAlgorithm(T, templateData)
+
+                    </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2.1"><a href="#rfc.section.7.2.1">7.2.1.</a> Populating Template Data From the Instance</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.1.p.1">This step looks at various locations in the instance for variable values.  For each variable: </p>
+
+<ol>
+  <li>Use "templatePointers" to find a value if the variable appears in that keyword's value </li>
+  <li>Otherwise, look for a property name matching the variable in the instance location to which the link is attached </li>
+  <li>In either case, if there is a value at the location, put it in the template resolution data set </li>
+</ol>
+
+<p> </p>
+<pre>
+
+for varname in T:
+    varname = rfc3986PercentDecode(varname)
+    if varname in ldo.templatePointers:
+        valuePointer = templatePointers[varname]
+        if valuePointer is relative:
+            valuePointer = resolveRelative(attachmentPointer,
+                                           valuePointer)
+    else
+        valuePointer = attachmentPointer + "/" + varname
+
+    value = instance.valueAt(valuePointer)
+    if value is defined:
+        templateData[varname] = value
+
+                        </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2.2"><a href="#rfc.section.7.2.2">7.2.2.</a> Accepting Input for Template Data</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.2.p.1">This step is relatively complex, as there are several cases to support.  Some variables will forbid input and some will allow it.  Some will have initial values that need to be presented in the input interface, and some will not.  </p>
+<p/>
+
+<ol>
+  <li>Determine which variables can accept input </li>
+  <li>Pre-populate the input data set if the template resolution data set has a value </li>
+  <li>Accept input (present a web form, make a callback, etc.) </li>
+  <li>Validate the input data set, (not the template resolution data set) </li>
+  <li>Put the input in the template resolution data set, overriding any existing values </li>
+</ol>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p>"InputForm" represents whatever sort of input mechanism is appropriate.  This may be a literal web form, or may be a more programmatic construct such as a callback function accepting specific fields and data types, with the given initial values, if any.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+form = new InputForm()
+for varname in T:
+    useField = true
+    useInitialData = true
+    for schema in getApplicableSchemas(ldo.hrefSchema,
+                                       "/" + varname):
+        if schema is false:
+            useField = false
+            break
+
+        if varname in templateData and
+           not isValid(templateData[varname], schema)):
+            useInitialData = false
+            break
+
+    if useField:
+        if useInitialData:
+            form.addInputFieldFor(varname, ldo.hrefSchema,
+                                  templateData[varname])
+        else:
+            form.addInputFieldFor(varname, ldo.hrefSchema)
+
+inputData = form.acceptInput()
+
+if not isValid(inputData, hrefSchema):
+    fatal("Input invalid, link is not usable")
+
+return inputData:
+
+                        </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2.3"><a href="#rfc.section.7.2.3">7.2.3.</a> Encoding Data as Strings</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.3.p.1">This section is straightforward, converting literals to their names as strings, and converting numbers to strings in the most obvious manner, and percent-encoding as needed for use in the URI.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+for varname in templateData:
+    value = templateData[varname]
+    if value is true:
+        templateData[varname] = "true"
+    else if value is false:
+        temlateData[varname] = "false"
+    else if value is null:
+        templateData[varname] = "null"
+    else if value is a number:
+        templateData[varname] =
+            bestEffortOriginalJsonString(value)
+    else:
+        templateData[varname] = rfc3986PercentEncode(value)
+
+                        </pre>
+<p>In some software environments the original JSON representation of a number will not be available (there is no way to tell the difference between 1.0 and 1), so any reasonable representation should be used.  Schema and API authors should bear this in mind, and use other types (such as string or boolean) if the exact representation is important.  If the number was provide as input in the form of a string, the string used as input SHOULD be used.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3"><a href="#rfc.section.7.3">7.3.</a> Providing Access to LDO Keywords</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.1">For a given link, an implementation MUST make the values of all target attribute keywords directly available to the user agent.  Implementations MAY provide additional interfaces for using this information, as discussed in each keyword's section.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.2">For a given link, an implementation MUST make the value of each input schema keyword directly available to the user agent.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.3">To encourage encapsulation of the URI Template resolution process, implementations MAY omit the LDO keywords that are used only to construct URIs.  However, implementations MUST provide access to the link relation type.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.4">Unrecognized keywords SHOULD be made available to the user agent, and MUST otherwise be ignored.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.4"><a href="#rfc.section.7.4">7.4.</a> Requests</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.1">A hyper-schema implementation SHOULD provide access to all information needed to construct any valid request to the target resource.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.2">The LDO can express all information needed to perform any operation on a link.  This section explains what hyper-schema fields a user agent should examine to build requests from any combination of instance data and client input.  A hyper-schema implementation is not itself expected to construct and send requests.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.3">Target URI construction rules, including "hrefSchema" for accepting input, are identical for all possible requests.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.4">Requests that do not carry a body payload do not require additional keyword support.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.5">Requests that take a target representation as a payload SHOULD use the "targetSchema" and "targetMediaType" keywords for input description and payload validation.  If a protocol allows an operation taking a payload that is based on the representation as modified by a media type (such as a patch media type), then such a media type SHOULD be indicated through "targetHints" in a protocol-specific manner.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.6">Requests that take a payload that is not derived from the target resource's representation SHOULD use the "submissionSchema" and "submissionMediaType" keywords for input description and payload validation.  Protocols used in hypermedia generally only support one such non-representation operation per link.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.7">RPC systems that pipe many application operations with arbitrarily different request structures through a single hypermedia protocol operation are outside of the scope of a hypermedia format such as JSON Hyper-Schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.5"><a href="#rfc.section.7.5">7.5.</a> Responses</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.1">As a hypermedia format, JSON Hyper-Schema is concerned with describing a resource, including describing its links in sufficient detail to make all valid requests.  It is not concerned with directly describing all possible responses for those requests.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.2">As in any hypermedia system, responses are expected to be self-describing.  In the context of hyper-schema, this means that each response MUST link its own hyper-schema(s).  While responses that consist of a representation of the target resource are expected to be valid against "targetSchema" and "targetMediaType", those keywords are advisory only and MUST be ignored if contradicted by the response itself.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.3">Other responses, including error responses, complex redirections, and processing status representations SHOULD also link to their own schemas and use appropriate media types (e.g. <a href="#RFC7807">"application/problem+json"</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7807]</cite> for errors).  Certain errors might not link a schema due to being generated by an intermediary that is not aware of hyper-schema, rather than by the origin.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.4">User agents are expected to understand protocol status codes and response media types well enough to handle common situations, and provide enough information to client applications to handle domain-specific responses.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.5">Statically mapping all possible responses and their schemas at design time is outside of the scope of JSON Hyper-Schema, but may be within the scope of other JSON Schema vocabularies which build on hyper-schema (see <a href="#staticAnalysis">Appendix A.3</a>).  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.6"><a href="#rfc.section.7.6">7.6.</a> <a href="#streaming" id="streaming">Streaming Parsers</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.p.1">The requirements around discovering links based on their context, or using the context of links to identify collections, present unique challenges when used with streaming parsers.  It is not possible to authoritatively fulfill these requirements without processing the entire schema and instance documents.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.p.2">Such implementations MAY choose to return non-authoritative answers based on data processed to date.  When offering this approach, implementations MUST be clear on the nature of the response, and MUST offer an option to block and wait until all data is processed and an authoritative answer can be returned.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8"><a href="#rfc.section.8">8.</a> <a href="#HTTP" id="HTTP">JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.1">While JSON Hyper-Schema is a hypermedia format and therefore protocol-independent, it is expected that its most common use will be in HTTP systems, or systems using protocols such as CoAP that are explicitly analogous to HTTP.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.2">This section provides guidance on how to use each common HTTP method with a link, and how collection resources impose additional constraints on HTTP POST.  Additionally, guidance is provided on hinting at HTTP response header values and describing possible HTTP request headers that are relevant to the given resource.  </p>
+<p><a href="#json-schema">Section 11 of the JSON Schema core specification</a> <cite title="NONE">[json-schema]</cite> provides guidance on linking instances in a hypermedia system to their schemas.  This may be done with network-accessible schemas, or may simply identify schemas which were pre-packaged within the client application.  JSON Hyper-Schema intentionally does not constrain this mechanism, although it is RECOMMENDED that the techniques outlined in the core specification be used to whatever extent is possible.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1"><a href="#rfc.section.8.1">8.1.</a> One Link Per Target and Relation Type</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.1">Link Description Objects do not directly indicate what operations, such as HTTP methods, are supported by the target resource.  Instead, operations should be inferred primarily from link <a href="#rel">relation types</a> <cite title="NONE">[rel]</cite> and URI schemes.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.2">This means that for each target resource and link relation type pair, schema authors SHOULD only define a single LDO.  While it is possible to use "allow" with "targetHints" to repeat a relation type and target pair with different HTTP methods marked as allowed, this is NOT RECOMMENDED and may not be well-supported by conforming implementations.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.3">All information necessary to use each HTTP method can be conveyed in a single LDO as explained in this section.  The "allow" field in "targetHints" is intended simply to hint at which operations are supported, not to separately define each operation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.4">Note, however, that a resource may always decline an operation at runtime, for instance due to authorization failure, or due to other application state that controls the operation's availability.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2"><a href="#rfc.section.8.2">8.2.</a> <a href="#targetHTTP" id="targetHTTP">"targetSchema" and HTTP</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.1">"targetSchema" describes the resource on the target end of the link, while "targetMediaType" defines that resource's media type.  With HTTP links, "headerSchema" can also be used to describe valid values for use in an "Accept" request header, which can support multiple media types or media ranges.  When both ways of indicating the target media type are present, "targetMediaType" SHOULD indicate the default representation media type, while the schema for "accept" in "headerSchema" SHOULD include the default as well as any alternate media types or media ranges that can be requested.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.2">Since the semantics of many HTTP methods are defined in terms of the target resource, "targetSchema" is used for requests and/or responses for several HTTP methods.  In particular, "targetSchema" suggests what a client application can expect for the response to an HTTP GET or any response for which the "Content-Location" header is equal to the request URI, and what a client application should send if it replaces the resource in an HTTP PUT request.  These correlations are defined by <a href="#RFC7231">RFC 7231, section 4.3.1 - "GET", section 4.3.4 "PUT", and section 3.1.4.2, "Content-Location"</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7231]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.3">Per <a href="#RFC5789">RFC 5789</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC5789]</cite>, the request structure for an HTTP PATCH is determined by the combination of "targetSchema" and the request media type, which is conveyed by the "Accept-Patch" header, which may be included in "targetHints".  Media types that are suitable for PATCH-ing define a syntax for expressing changes to a document, which can be applied to the representation described by "targetSchema" to determine the set of syntactically valid request payloads.  Often, the simplest way to validate a PATCH request is to apply it and validate the result as a normal representation.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.3"><a href="#rfc.section.8.3">8.3.</a> <a href="#post" id="post">HTTP POST and the "submission*" keywords</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema allows for resources that process arbitrary data in addition to or instead of working with the target's representation.  This arbitrary data is described by the "submissionSchema" and "submissionMediaType" keywords.  In the case of HTTP, the POST method is the only one that handles such data.  While there are certain conventions around using POST with collections, the semantics of a POST request are defined by the target resource, not HTTP.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.2">In addition to the protocol-neutral "submission*" keywords (see <a href="#mailto">Section 9.3</a> for a non-HTTP example), the "Accept-Post" header can be used to specify the necessary media type, and MAY be advertised via the "targetHints" field.  <a id="CREF5" class="info">[CREF5]<span class="info">What happens if both are used?  Also, "submissionSchema" is a MUST to support, while "targetHints" are at most a SHOULD.  But forbidding the use of "Accept-Post" in "targetHints" seems incorrect.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.3">Successful responses to POST other than a 201 or a 200 with "Content-Location" set likewise have no HTTP-defined semantics.  As with all HTTP responses, any representation in the response should link to its own hyper-schema to indicate how it may be processed.  As noted in <a href="#responses">Appendix A.2</a>, connecting hyperlinks with all possible operation responses is not within the scope of JSON Hyper-Schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.4"><a href="#rfc.section.8.4">8.4.</a> Optimizing HTTP Discoverability With "targetHints"</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF6" class="info">[CREF6]<span class="info">It would be good to also include a section with CoAP examples.</span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.2">JSON serializations of HTTP response header information SHOULD follow the guidelines established by the work in progress <a href="#I-D.reschke-http-jfv">"A JSON Encoding for HTTP Header Field Values"</a> <cite title="NONE">[I-D.reschke-http-jfv]</cite>.  Approaches shown in that document's examples SHOULD be applied to other similarly structured headers wherever possible.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.3">Headers for all possible HTTP method responses all share "headerSchema".  In particular, both headers that appear in a HEAD response and those that appear in an OPTIONS response can appear.  No distinction is made within "headerSchema" as to which method response contains which header.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.4">It is RECOMMENDED that schema authors provide hints for the values of the following types of HTTP headers whenever applicable: </p>
+
+<ul>
+  <li>Method allowance</li>
+  <li>Method-specific request media types</li>
+  <li>Authentication challenges</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.5">In general, headers that are likely to have different values at different times SHOULD NOT be included in "targetHints".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.5"><a href="#rfc.section.8.5">8.5.</a> Advertising HTTP Features With "headerSchema"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.5.p.1">Schemas SHOULD be written to describe JSON serializations that follow guidelines established by the work in progress <a href="#I-D.reschke-http-jfv">"A JSON Encoding for HTTP Header Field Values"</a> <cite title="NONE">[I-D.reschke-http-jfv]</cite> Approaches shown in that document's examples SHOULD be applied to other similarly structured headers wherever possible.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.5.p.2">It is RECOMMENDED that schema authors describe the available usage of the following types of HTTP headers whenever applicable: </p>
+
+<ul>
+  <li>Content negotiation</li>
+  <li>Authentication and authorization</li>
+  <li>Range requests</li>
+  <li>The "Prefer" header</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.5.p.3">Headers such as cache control and conditional request headers are generally implemented by intermediaries rather than the resource, and are therefore not generally useful to describe.  While the resource must supply the information needed to use conditional requests, the runtime handling of such headers and related responses is not resource-specific.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.6"><a href="#rfc.section.8.6">8.6.</a> Creating Resources Through Collections</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.6.p.1">When using HTTP, or a protocol such as CoAP that is explicitly analogous to HTTP, this is done by POST-ing a representation of the individual resource to be created to the collection resource.  The process for recognizing collection and item resources is described in <a href="#collectionAndItem">Section 6.2.3</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.7"><a href="#rfc.section.8.7">8.7.</a> Content Negotiation and Schema Evolution</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.7.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema facilitates HTTP content negotiation, and allows for a hybrid of the proactive and reactive strategies.  As mentioned above, a hyper-schema can include a schema for HTTP headers such as "Accept", "Accept-Charset", "Accept-Language", etc with the "headerSchema" keyword.  A user agent or client application can use information in this schema, such as an enumerated list of supported languages, in lieu of making an initial request to start the reactive negotiation process.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.7.p.2">In this way, the proactive content negotiation technique of setting these headers can be informed by server information about what values are possible, similar to examining a list of alternatives in reactive negotiation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.7.p.3">For media types that allow specifying a schema as a media type parameter, the "Accept" values sent in a request or advertised in "headerSchema" can include the URI(s) of the schema(s) to which the negotiated representation is expected to conform.  One possible use for schema parameters in content negotiation is if the resource has conformed to several different schema versions over time.  The client application can indicate what version(s) it understands in the "Accept" header in this way.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9"><a href="#rfc.section.9">9.</a> <a href="#examples" id="examples">Examples</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.1">This section shows how the keywords that construct URIs and JSON Pointers are used.  The results are shown in the format used by the test suite.  <a id="CREF7" class="info">[CREF7]<span class="info">Need to post that and link it, but it should be pretty self-explanatory to those of you reviewing things at this stage.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.2">Most other keywords are either straightforward ("title" and "description"), apply validation to specific sorts of input, requests, or responses, or have protocol-specific behavior.  Examples demonstrating HTTP usage are available in <a href="#HTTP">an Appendix</a> <cite title="NONE">[HTTP]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.1"><a href="#rfc.section.9.1">9.1.</a> <a href="#entryPoint" id="entryPoint">Entry Point Links, No Templates</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.1">For this example, we will assume an example API with a documented entry point URI of https://example.com, which is an empty JSON object with a link to a schema.  Here, the entry point has no data of its own and exists only to provide an initial set of links: </p>
+<pre>
+
+GET https://api.example.com HTTP/1.1
+
+200 OK
+Content-Type: application/json
+Link: &lt;https://schema.example.com/entry&gt; rel=describedBy
+{}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.2">The linked hyper-schema defines the API's base URI and provides two links:  an "about" link to API documentation, and a "self" link indicating that this is a schema for the base URI.  In this case the base URI is also the entry point URI.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/entry",
+    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07-wip/hyper-schema#",
+    "base": "https://api.example.com",
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": ""
+        }, {
+            "rel": "about",
+            "href": "/docs"
+        }
+    ]
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.3">These are the simplest possible links, with only a relation type and an "href" with no template variables.  They resolve as follows: </p>
+<pre>
+[
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "self",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com",
+        "attachmentPointer": ""
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "about",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/docs",
+        "attachmentPointer": ""
+    }
+]
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.4">The attachment pointer is the root pointer (the only possibility with an empty object for the instance).  The context URI is the default, which is the requested document.  Since application/json does not allow for fragments, the context pointer is necessary to fully describe the context.  Its default behavior is to be the same as the attachment pointer.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2"><a href="#rfc.section.9.2">9.2.</a> Individually Identified Resources</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.1">Let's add "things" to our system, starting with an individual thing: </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/thing",
+    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07-wip/hyper-schema#",
+    "base": "https://api.example.com",
+    "type": "object",
+    "required": ["data"],
+    "properties": {
+        "id": {"$ref": "#/definitions/id"},
+        "data": true
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "things/{id}",
+            "templateRequired": ["id"],
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }
+    ],
+    "definitions": {
+        "id": {
+            "type": "integer",
+            "minimum": 1,
+            "readOnly": true
+        }
+    }
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.2">Our "thing" has a server-assigned id, which is required in order to construct the "self" link.  It also has a "data" field which can be of any type.  The reason for the "definitions" section will be clear in the next example.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.3">Note that "id" is not required by the validation schema, but is required by the self link.  This makes sense: a "thing" only has a URI if it has been created, and the server has assigned an id.  However, you can use this schema with an instance containing only the data field, which allows you to validate "thing" instances that you are about to create.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.4">Let's add a link to our entry point schema that lets you jump directly to a particular thing if you can supply it's id as input.  To save space, only the new LDO is shown.  Unlike "self" and "about", there is no IANA-registered relationship about hypothetical things, so an extension relationship is defined using the <a href="#RFC4151">"tag:" URI scheme</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC4151]</cite>: </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "rel": "tag:rel.example.com,2017:thing",
+    "href": "things/{id}",
+    "hrefSchema": {
+        "required": ["id"],
+        "properties": {
+            "id": {"$ref": "thing#/definitions/id"}
+        }
+    },
+    "targetSchema": {"$ref": "thing#"}
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.5">The "href" value here is the same, but everything else is different.  Recall that the instance is an empty object, so "id" cannot be resolved from instance data.  Instead it is required as client input.  This LDO could also have used "templateRequired" but with "required" in "hrefSchema" it is not strictly necessary.  Providing "templateRequired" without marking "id" as required in "hrefSchema" would lead to errors, as client input is the only possible source for resolving this link.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3"><a href="#rfc.section.9.3">9.3.</a> <a href="#mailto" id="mailto">Submitting a Payload and Accepting URI Input</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.1">This example covers using the "submission" fields for non-representation input, as well as using them alongside of resolving the URI Template with input.  Unlike HTML forms, which require either constructing a URI or sending a payload, but do not allow not both at once, JSON Hyper-Schema can describe both sorts of input for the same operation on the same link.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.2">The "submissionSchema" and "submissionMediaType" fields are for describing payloads that are not representations of the target resource.  When used with "http(s)://" URIs, they generally refer to a POST request payload, as seen in the <a href="#HTTP">appendix on HTTP usage</a> <cite title="NONE">[HTTP]</cite>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.3">In this case, we use a "mailto:" URI, which, per <a href="#RFC6068">RFC 6068, Section 3"</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6068]</cite>, does not provide any operation for retrieving a resource.  It can only be used to construct a message for sending.  Since there is no concept of a retrievable, replaceable, or deletable target resource, "targetSchema" and "targetMediaType" are not used.  Non-representation payloads are described by "submissionSchema" and "submissionMediaType".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.4">We use "submissionMediaType" to indicate a multipart/alternative payload format, providing two representations of the same data (HTML and plain text).  Since a multipart/alternative message is an ordered sequence (the last part is the most preferred alternative), we model the sequence as an array in "submissionSchema".  Since each part is itself a document with a media type, we model each item in the array as a string, using "contentMediaType" to indicate the format within the string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.5">Note that media types such as multipart/form-data, which associate a name with each part and are not ordered, should be modeled as JSON objects rather than arrays.  </p>
+<p>Note that some lines are wrapped to fit this document's width restrictions.  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/interesting-stuff",
+    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07-wip/hyper-schema#",
+    "required": ["stuffWorthEmailingAbout", "email", "title"],
+    "properties": {
+        "title": {
+            "type": "string"
+        },
+        "stuffWorthEmailingAbout": {
+            "type": "string"
+        },
+        "email": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "format": "email"
+        },
+        "cc": false
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "author",
+            "href": "mailto:{email}?subject={title}{&amp;cc}",
+            "templateRequired": ["email"],
+            "hrefSchema": {
+                "required": ["title"],
+                "properties": {
+                    "title": {
+                        "type": "string"
+                    },
+                    "cc": {
+                        "type": "string",
+                        "format": "email"
+                    },
+                    "email": false
+                }
+            },
+            "submissionMediaType":
+                    "multipart/alternative; boundary=ab2",
+            "submissionSchema": {
+                "type": "array",
+                "items": [
+                    {
+                        "type": "string",
+                        "contentMediaType":
+                                "text/plain; charset=utf8"
+                    },
+                    {
+                        "type": "string",
+                        "contentMediaType": "text/html"
+                    }
+                ],
+                "minItems": 2
+            }
+        }
+    ]
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.6">For the URI parameters, each of the three demonstrates a different way of resolving the input: </p>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>email:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">This variable's presence in "templateRequired" means that it must be resolved for the template to be used.  Since the "false" schema assigned to it in "hrefSchema" excludes it from the input data set, it must be resolved from the instance.  </dd>
+  <dt>title:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The instance field matching this variable is required, and it is also allowed in the input data.  So its instance value is used to pre-populate the input data set before accepting client input.  The client application can opt to leave the instance value in place.  Since this field is required in "hrefSchema", the client application cannot delete it (although it could set it to an empty string).  </dd>
+  <dt>cc:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">The "false" schema set for this in the main schema prevents this field from having an instance value.  If it is present at all, it must come from client input.  As it is not required in "hrefSchema", it may not be used at all.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.7">So, given the following instance retrieved from "https://api.example.com/stuff": </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "title": "The Awesome Thing",
+    "stuffWorthEmailingAbout": "Lots of text here...",
+    "email": "someone@exapmle.com"
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.8">We can partially resolve the link as follows, before asking the client application for input.  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/stuff",
+    "contextPointer": "",
+    "rel": "author",
+    "hrefInputTemplates": [
+      "mailto:someone@example.com?subject={title}{&amp;cc}"
+    ],
+    "hrefPrepopulatedInput": {
+        "title": "The Really Awesome Thing"
+    },
+    "attachmentPointer": ""
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.9">Notice the "href*" keywords in place of "targetUri".  These are three possible kinds of "targetUri" values covering different sorts of input.  Here are examples of each: </p>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>No additional or changed input:</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">"mailto:someone@example.com?subject=The%20Awesome%20Thing" </dd>
+  <dt>Change "title" to "your work":</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">"mailto:someone@example.com?subject=your%20work" </dd>
+  <dt>Change title and add a "cc" of "other@elsewhere.org":</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">"mailto:someone@example.com?subject=your%20work&amp;cc=other@elsewhere.org" </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.4"><a href="#rfc.section.9.4">9.4.</a> "anchor", "base" and URI Template Resolution</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.1">A link is a typed connection from a context resource to a target resource.  Older link serializations support a "rev" keyword that takes a link relation type as "rel" does, but reverses the semantics.  This has long been deprecated, so JSON Hyper-Schema does not support it.  Instead, "anchor"'s ability to change the context URI can be used to reverse the direction of a link.  It can also be used to describe a link between two resources, neither of which is the current resource.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.2">As an example, there is an IANA-registered "up" relation, but there is no "down".  In an HTTP Link header, you could implement "down" as <samp>"rev": "up"</samp>.  </p>
+<p>First let's look at how this could be done in HTTP, showing a "self" link and two semantically identical links, one with "rev": "up" and the other using "anchor" with "rel": "up" (line wrapped due to formatting limitations).  </p>
+<pre>
+
+GET https://api.example.com/trees/1/nodes/123 HTTP/1.1
+
+200 OK
+Content-Type: application/json
+Link: &lt;https://api.example.com/trees/1/nodes/123&gt; rel=self
+Link: &lt;https://api.example.com/trees/1/nodes/123&gt; rel=up
+        anchor=&lt;https://api.example.com/trees/1/nodes/456&gt;
+Link: &lt;https://api.example.com/trees/1/nodes/456&gt; rev=up
+{
+    "id": 123,
+    "treeId": 1,
+    "childIds": [456]
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Note that the "rel=up" link has a target URI identical to the "rel=self" link, and sets "anchor" (which identifies the link's context) to the child's URI.  This sort of reversed link is easily detectable by tools when a "self" link is also present.  </p>
+<p>The following hyper-schema, applied to the instance in the response above, would produce the same "self" link and "up" link with "anchor".  It also shows the use of a templated "base" URI, plus both absolute and relative JSON Pointers in "templatePointers".  </p>
+<pre>
+
+    "base": "trees/{treeId}",
+    "properties": {
+        "id": {"type": "integer"},
+        "treeId": {"type": "integer"},
+        "childIds": {
+            "type": "array",
+            "items": {
+                "type": "integer",
+                "links": [
+                    {
+                        "anchor": "nodes/{thisNodeId}",
+                        "rel": "up",
+                        "href": "nodes/{childId}",
+                        "templatePointers": {
+                            "thisNodeId": "/id",
+                            "childId": "0"
+                        }
+                    }
+                ]
+            }
+        }
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "nodes/{id}"
+        }
+    ]
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p>The "base" template is evaluated identically for both the target ("href") and context ("anchor") URIs.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.3">Note the two different sorts of templatePointers used.  "thisNodeId" is mapped to an absolute JSON Pointer, "/id", while "childId" is mapped to a relative pointer, "0", which indicates the value of the current item.  Absolute JSON Pointers do not support any kind of wildcarding, so there is no way to specify a concept like "current item" without a relative JSON Pointer.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.5"><a href="#rfc.section.9.5">9.5.</a> Collections</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.1">In many systems, individual resources are grouped into collections.  Those collections also often provide a way to create individual item resources with server-assigned identifiers.  </p>
+<p>For this example, we will re-use the individual thing schema as shown in an earlier section.  It is repeated here for convenience, with an added "collection" link with a "targetSchema" reference pointing to the collection schema we will introduce next.  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/thing",
+    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07-wip/hyper-schema#",
+    "base": "https://api.example.com",
+    "type": "object",
+    "required": ["data"],
+    "properties": {
+        "id": {"$ref": "#/definitions/id"},
+        "data": true
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "things/{id}",
+            "templateRequired": ["id"],
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }, {
+            "rel": "collection",
+            "href": "/things",
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "thing-collection#"},
+            "submissionSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }
+    ],
+    "definitions": {
+        "id": {
+            "type": "integer",
+            "minimum": 1,
+            "readOnly": true
+        }
+    }
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p>The "collection" link is the same for all items, so there are no URI Template variables.  The "submissionSchema" is that of the item itself.  As described in <a href="#collectionAndItem">Section 6.2.3</a>, if a "collection" link supports a submission mechanism (POST in HTTP) then it MUST implement item creation semantics.  Therefore "submissionSchema" is the schema for creating a "thing" via this link.  </p>
+<p>Now we want to describe collections of "thing"s.  This schema describes a collection where each item representation is identical to the individual "thing" representation.  While many collection representations only include subset of the item representations, this example uses the entirety to minimize the number of schemas involved.  The actual collection items appear as an array within an object, as we will add more fields to the object in the next example.  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/thing-collection",
+    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07-wip/hyper-schema#",
+    "base": "https://api.example.com",
+    "type": "object",
+    "required": ["elements"],
+    "properties": {
+        "elements": {
+            "type": "array",
+            "items": {
+                "allOf": [{"$ref": "thing#"}],
+                "links": [
+                    {
+                        "anchorPointer": "",
+                        "rel": "item",
+                        "href": "things/{id}",
+                        "templateRequired": ["id"],
+                        "targetSchema": {"$ref": "thing#"}
+                    }
+                ]
+            }
+        }
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "things",
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"},
+            "submissionSchema": {"$ref": "thing"}
+        }
+    ]
+}
+                    </pre>
+<pre>
+{
+    "elements": [
+        {"id": 12345, "data": {}},
+        {"id": 67890, "data": {}}
+    ]
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p>Here are all of the links that apply to this instance, including those that are defined in the referenced individual "thing" schema: </p>
+<pre>
+[
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "self",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "attachmentPointer": ""
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "/elements/0",
+        "rel": "self",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/things/12345",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/0"
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "/elements/1",
+        "rel": "self",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/things/67890",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/1"
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "item",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/things/12345",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/0"
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "item",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/things/67890",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/1"
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "/elements/0",
+        "rel": "collection",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/0"
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "/elements/1",
+        "rel": "collection",
+        "targetUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/1"
+    }
+]
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>In all cases, the context URI is shown for an instance of media type application/json, which does not support fragments.  If the instance media type was application/instance+json, which supports JSON Pointer fragments, then the context URIs would contain fragments identical to the context pointer field.  For application/json and other media types without fragments, it is critically important to consider the context pointer as well as the context URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.2">There are three "self" links, one for the collection, and one for each item in the "elements" array.  The item "self" links are defined in the individual "thing" schema which is referenced with "$ref".  The three links can be distinguished by their context or attachment pointers.  We will revisit the "submissionSchema" of the collection's "self" link in <a href="#firstItem">Section 9.5.2</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.3">There are two "item" links, one for each item in the "elements" array.  Unlike the "self" links, these are defined only in the collection schema.  Each of them have the same target URI as the corresponding "self" link that shares the same attachment pointer.  However, each has a different context pointer.  The context of the "self" link is the entry in "elements", while the context of the "item" link is always the entire collection regardless of the specific item.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.4">Finally, there are two "collection" links, one for each item in "elements".  In the individual item schema, these produce links with the item resource as the context.  When referenced from the collection schema, the context is the location in the "elements" array of the relevant "thing", rather than that "thing"'s own separate resource URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.5">The collection links have identical target URIs as there is only one relevant collection URI.  While calculating both links as part of a full set of constructed links may not seem useful, when constructing links on an as-needed basis, this arrangement means that there is a "collection" link definition close at hand no matter which "elements" entry you are processing.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.5.1"><a href="#rfc.section.9.5.1">9.5.1.</a> Pagination</h1>
+<p>Here we add pagination to our collection.  There is a "meta" section to hold the information about current, next, and previous pages.  Most of the schema is the same as in the previous section and has been omitted.  Only new fields and new or (in the case of the main "self" link) changed links are shown in full.  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "properties": {
+        "elements": {
+            ...
+        },
+        "meta": {
+            "type": "object",
+            "properties": {
+                "prev": {"$ref": "#/definitions/pagination"},
+                "current": {"$ref": "#/definitions/pagination"},
+                "next": {"$ref": "#/definitions/pagination"}
+            }
+        }
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "things{?offset,limit}",
+            "templateRequired": ["offset", "limit"],
+            "templatePointers": {
+                "offset": "/meta/current/offset",
+                "limit": "/meta/current/limit"
+            },
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }, {
+            "rel": "prev",
+            "href": "things{?offset,limit}",
+            "templateRequired": ["offset", "limit"],
+            "templatePointers": {
+                "offset": "/meta/prev/offset",
+                "limit": "/meta/prev/limit"
+            },
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }, {
+            "rel": "next",
+            "href": "things{?offset,limit}",
+            "templateRequired": ["offset", "limit"],
+            "templatePointers": {
+                "offset": "/meta/next/offset",
+                "limit": "/meta/next/limit"
+            },
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }
+    ],
+    "definitions": {
+        "pagination": {
+            "type": "object",
+            "properties": {
+                "offset": {
+                    "type": "integer",
+                    "minimum": 0,
+                    "default": 0
+                },
+                "limit": {
+                    "type": "integer",
+                    "minimum": 1,
+                    "maximum": 100,
+                    "default": 10
+                }
+            }
+        }
+    }
+}
+                        </pre>
+<p>Notice that the "self" link includes the pagination query that produced the exact representation, rather than being a generic link to the collection allowing selecting the page via input.  </p>
+<p>Given this instance: </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "elements": [
+        {"id": 12345, "data": {}},
+        {"id": 67890, "data": {}}
+    ],
+    "meta": {
+        "current": {
+            "offset": 0,
+            "limit": 2
+        },
+        "next": {
+            "offset": 3,
+            "limit": 2
+        }
+    }
+}
+                        </pre>
+<p>Here are all of the links that apply to this instance that either did not appear in the previous example or have been changed with pagination added.  </p>
+<pre>
+[
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "self",
+        "targetUri":
+            "https://api.example.com/things?offset=20,limit=2",
+        "attachmentPointer": ""
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://api.example.com/things",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "next",
+        "targetUri":
+            "https://api.example.com/things?offset=22,limit=2",
+        "attachmentPointer": ""
+    }
+]
+                        </pre>
+<p>Note that there is no "prev" link in the output, as we are looking at the first page.  The lack of a "prev" field under "meta", together with the "prev" link's "templateRequired" values, means that the link is not usable with this particular instance.  </p>
+<p><a id="CREF8" class="info">[CREF8]<span class="info">It's not clear how pagination should work with the link from the "collection" links in the individual "thing" schema.  Technically, a link from an item to a paginated or filtered collection should go to a page/filter that contains the item (in this case the "thing") that is the link context.  See GitHub issue #421 for more discussion.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.1.p.2">Let's add a link for this collection to the entry point schema (<a href="#entryPoint">Section 9.1</a>), including pagination input in order to allow client applications to jump directly to a specific page.  Recall that the entry point schema consists only of links, therefore we only show the newly added link: </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "rel": "tag:rel.example.com,2017:thing-collection",
+    "href": "/things{?offset,limit}",
+    "hrefSchema": {
+        "$ref": "thing-collection#/definitions/pagination"
+    },
+    "submissionSchema": {
+        "$ref": "thing#"
+    },
+    "targetSchema": {
+        "$ref": "thing-collection#"
+    }
+}
+                        </pre>
+<p>Now we see the pagination parameters being accepted as input, so we can jump to any page within the collection.  The link relation type is a custom one as the generic "collection" link can only be used with an item as its context, not an entry point or other resource.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.5.2"><a href="#rfc.section.9.5.2">9.5.2.</a> <a href="#firstItem" id="firstItem">Creating the First Item</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.2.p.1">When we do not have any "thing"s, we do not have any resources with a relevant "collection" link.  Therefore we cannot use a "collection" link's submission keywords to create the first "thing"; hyper-schemas must be evaluated with respect to an instance.  Since the "elements" array in the collection instance would be empty, it cannot provide us with a collection link either.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.2.p.2">However, our entry point link can take us to the empty collection, and we can use the presence of "item" links in the hyper-schema to recognize that it is a collection.  Since the context of the "item" link is the collection, we simply look for a "self" link with the same context, which we can then treat as collection for the purposes of a creation operation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.2.p.3">Presumably, our custom link relation type in the entry point schema was sufficient to ensure that we have found the right collection.  A client application that recognizes that custom link relation type may know that it can immediately assume that the target is a collection, but a generic user agent cannot do so.  Despite the presence of a "-collection" suffix in our example, a generic user agent would have no way of knowing whether that substring indicates a hypermedia resource collection, or some other sort of collection.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.2.p.4">Once we have recognized the "self" link as being for the correct collection, we can use its "submissionSchema" and/or "submissionMediaType" keywords to perform an item creation operation.  <a id="CREF9" class="info">[CREF9]<span class="info">This works perfectly if the collection is unfiltered and unpaginated.  However, one should generally POST to a collection that will contain the created resource, and a "self" link MUST include any filters, pagination, or other query parameters.  Is it still valid to POST to such a "self" link even if the resulting item would not match the filter or appear within that page?  See GitHub issue #421 for further discussion.  </span></a> <a id="CREF10" class="info">[CREF10]<span class="info">Draft-04 of Hyper-Schema defined a "create" link relation that had the schema, rather than the instance, as its context.  This did not fit into the instance-based link model, and incorrectly used an operation name for a link relation type.  However, defining a more correctly designed link from the schema to the collection instance may be one possible approach to solving this.  Again, see GitHub issue #421 for more details.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10"><a href="#rfc.section.10">10.</a> <a href="#security" id="security">Security Considerations</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema defines a vocabulary for JSON Schema core and concerns all the security considerations listed there.  As a link serialization format, the security considerations of <a href="#RFC8288">RFC 8288 Web Linking</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC8288]</cite> also apply, with appropriate adjustments (e.g. "anchor" as an LDO keyword rather than an HTTP Link header attribute).  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.1"><a href="#rfc.section.10.1">10.1.</a> Target Attributes</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.1">As stated in <a href="#targetAttributes">Section 6.5</a>, all LDO keywords describing the target resource are advisory and MUST NOT be used in place of the authoritative information supplied by the target resource in response to an operation.  Target resource responses SHOULD indicate their own hyper-schema, which is authoritative.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.2">If the hyper-schema in the target response matches (by "$id") the hyper-schema in which the current LDO was found, then the target attributes MAY be considered authoritative.  <a id="CREF11" class="info">[CREF11]<span class="info">Need to add something about the risks of spoofing by "$id", but given that other parts of the specification discourage always re-downloading the linked schema, the risk mitigation options are unclear.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.3">User agents or client applications MUST NOT use the value of "targetSchema" to aid in the interpretation of the data received in response to following the link, as this leaves "safe" data open to re-interpretation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.4">When choosing how to interpret data, the type information provided by the server (or inferred from the filename, or any other usual method) MUST be the only consideration, and the "targetMediaType" property of the link MUST NOT be used.  User agents MAY use this information to determine how they represent the link or where to display it (for example hover-text, opening in a new tab).  If user agents decide to pass the link to an external program, they SHOULD first verify that the data is of a type that would normally be passed to that external program.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.5">This is to guard against re-interpretation of "safe" data, similar to the precautions for "targetSchema".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.6">Protocol meta-data values conveyed in "targetHints" MUST NOT be considered authoritative.  Any security considerations defined by the protocol that may apply based on incorrect assumptions about meta-data values apply.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.7">Even when no protocol security considerations are directly applicable, implementations MUST be prepared to handle responses that do not match the link's "targetHints" values.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2"><a href="#rfc.section.10.2">10.2.</a> "self" Links</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.p.1">When link relation of "self" is used to denote a full representation of an object, the user agent SHOULD NOT consider the representation to be the authoritative representation of the resource denoted by the target URI if the target URI is not equivalent to or a sub-path of the URI used to request the resource representation which contains the target URI with the "self" link.  <a id="CREF12" class="info">[CREF12]<span class="info">It is no longer entirely clear what was intended by the "sub-path" option in this paragraph.  It may have been intended to allow "self" links for embedded item representations in a collection, which usually have target URIs that are sub-paths of that collection's URI, to be considered authoritative.  However, this is simply a common design convention and does not appear to be based in RFC 3986 or any other guidance on URI usage.  See GitHub issue #485 for further discussion.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.11"><a href="#rfc.section.11">11.</a> Acknowledgments</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.1">Thanks to Gary Court, Francis Galiegue, Kris Zyp, and Geraint Luff for their work on the initial drafts of JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.2">Thanks to Jason Desrosiers, Daniel Perrett, Erik Wilde, Ben Hutton, Evgeny Poberezkin, Brad Bowman, Gowry Sankar, Donald Pipowitch, Dave Finlay, and Denis Laxalde for their submissions and patches to the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.references"><a href="#rfc.references">12.</a> References</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.1"><a href="#rfc.references.1">12.1.</a> Normative References</h1>
+<table>
+  <tbody>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Bradner, S.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</a>", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC3986">[RFC3986]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Berners-Lee, T.</a>, <a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>L. Masinter</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986">Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax</a>", STD 66, RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC4287">[RFC4287]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Nottingham, M.</a> and <a>R. Sayre</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287">The Atom Syndication Format</a>", RFC 4287, DOI 10.17487/RFC4287, December 2005.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC6570">[RFC6570]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Gregorio, J.</a>, <a>Fielding, R.</a>, <a>Hadley, M.</a>, <a>Nottingham, M.</a> and <a>D. Orchard</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6570">URI Template</a>", RFC 6570, DOI 10.17487/RFC6570, March 2012.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC6573">[RFC6573]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Amundsen, M.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6573">The Item and Collection Link Relations</a>", RFC 6573, DOI 10.17487/RFC6573, April 2012.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC6901">[RFC6901]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Bryan, P.</a>, <a>Zyp, K.</a> and <a>M. Nottingham</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6901">JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Pointer</a>", RFC 6901, DOI 10.17487/RFC6901, April 2013.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC8288">[RFC8288]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Nottingham, M.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8288">Web Linking</a>", RFC 8288, DOI 10.17487/RFC8288, October 2017.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="relative-json-pointer">[relative-json-pointer]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Luff, G.</a> and <a title="Cloudflare, Inc.">H. Andrews</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-00">Relative JSON Pointers</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-00, November 2017.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="json-schema">[json-schema]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Wright, A.</a> and <a title="Cloudflare, Inc.">H. Andrews</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-00">JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-json-schema-00, November 2017.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="json-schema-validation">[json-schema-validation]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Wright, A.</a>, <a title="Cloudflare, Inc.">Andrews, H.</a> and <a>G. Luff</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-00">JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-00, November 2017.</td>
+    </tr>
+  </tbody>
+</table>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.2"><a href="#rfc.references.2">12.2.</a> Informative References</h1>
+<table>
+  <tbody>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC2046">[RFC2046]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Freed, N.</a> and <a>N. Borenstein</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2046">Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types</a>", RFC 2046, DOI 10.17487/RFC2046, November 1996.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC4151">[RFC4151]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Kindberg, T.</a> and <a>S. Hawke</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4151">The 'tag' URI Scheme</a>", RFC 4151, DOI 10.17487/RFC4151, October 2005.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC5789">[RFC5789]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Dusseault, L.</a> and <a>J. Snell</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5789">PATCH Method for HTTP</a>", RFC 5789, DOI 10.17487/RFC5789, March 2010.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC6068">[RFC6068]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Duerst, M.</a>, <a>Masinter, L.</a> and <a>J. Zawinski</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6068">The 'mailto' URI Scheme</a>", RFC 6068, DOI 10.17487/RFC6068, October 2010.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC7230">[RFC7230]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>J. Reschke</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230">Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing</a>", RFC 7230, DOI 10.17487/RFC7230, June 2014.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC7231">[RFC7231]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>J. Reschke</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231">Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content</a>", RFC 7231, DOI 10.17487/RFC7231, June 2014.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC7807">[RFC7807]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Nottingham, M.</a> and <a>E. Wilde</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7807">Problem Details for HTTP APIs</a>", RFC 7807, DOI 10.17487/RFC7807, March 2016.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="I-D.reschke-http-jfv">[I-D.reschke-http-jfv]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Reschke, J.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-reschke-http-jfv-06">A JSON Encoding for HTTP Header Field Values</a>", Internet-Draft draft-reschke-http-jfv-06, June 2017.</td>
+    </tr>
+  </tbody>
+</table>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A"><a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Appendix A.</a> <a href="#apis" id="apis">Using JSON Hyper-Schema in APIs</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.1">Hypermedia APIs, which follow the constraints of the REST architectural style, enable the creation of generic user agents.  Such a user agent has no application-specific knowledge.  Rather, it understands pre-defined media types, URI schemes, protocols, and link relations, often by recognizing these and coordinating the use of existing software that implements support for them.  Client applications can then be built on top of such a user agent, focusing on their own semantics and logic rather than the mechanics of the interactions.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.2">Hyper-schema is only concerned with one resource and set of associated links at a time.  Just as a web browser works with only one HTML page at a time, with no concept of whether or how that page functions as part of a "site", a hyper-schema-aware user agent works with one resource at a time, without any concept of whether or how that resource fits into an API.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.3">Therefore, hyper-schema is suitable for use within an API, but is not suitable for the description of APIs as complete entities in their own right.  There is no way to describe concepts at the API scope, rather than the resource and link scope, and such descriptions are outside of the boundaries of JSON Hyper-Schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A.1"><a href="#rfc.appendix.A.1">A.1.</a> Resource Evolution With Hyper-Schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.1.p.1">Since a given JSON Hyper-Schema is used with a single resource at a single point in time, it has no inherent notion of versioning.  However, a given resource can change which schema or schemas it uses over time, and the URIs of these schemas can be used to indicate versioning information.  When used with a media type that supports indicating a schema with a media type parameter, these versioned schema URIs can be used in content negotiation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.1.p.2">A resource can indicate that it is an instance of multiple schemas, which allows supporting multiple compatible versions simultaneously.  A client application can then make use of the hyper-schema that it recognizes, and ignore newer or older versions.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A.2"><a href="#rfc.appendix.A.2">A.2.</a> <a href="#responses" id="responses">Responses and Errors</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.2.p.1">Because a hyper-schema represents a single resource at a time, it does not provide for an enumeration of all possible responses to protocol operations performed with links.  Each response, including errors, is considered its own (possibly anonymous) resource, and should identify its own hyper-schema, and optionally use an appropriate media type such as <a href="#RFC7807">RFC 7807's "application/problem+json"</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC7807]</cite>, to allow the user agent or client application to interpret any information that is provided beyond the protocol's own status reporting.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A.3"><a href="#rfc.appendix.A.3">A.3.</a> <a href="#staticAnalysis" id="staticAnalysis">Static Analysis of an API's Hyper-Schemas</a></h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.3.p.1">It is possible to statically analyze a set of hyper-schemas without instance data in order to generate output such as documentation or code.  However, the full feature set of both validation and hyper-schema cannot be accessed without runtime instance data.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.3.p.2">This is an intentional design choice to provide the maximum runtime flexibility for hypermedia systems.  JSON Schema as a media type allows for establishing additional vocabularies for static analysis and content generation, which are not addressed in this specification.  Additionally, individual systems may restrict their usage to subsets that can be analyzed statically if full design-time description is a goal.  <a id="CREF13" class="info">[CREF13]<span class="info">Vocabularies for API documentation and other purposes have been proposed, and contributions are welcome at https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-vocabularies </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.B"><a href="#rfc.appendix.B">Appendix B.</a> ChangeLog</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF14" class="info">[CREF14]<span class="info">This section to be removed before leaving Internet-Draft status.</span></a> </p>
+<p/>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-00</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Top to bottom reorganization and rewrite</li>
+      <li>Group keywords per RFC 8288 context/relation/target/target attributes</li>
+      <li>Additional keyword groups for template resolution and describing input</li>
+      <li>Clarify implementation requirements with a suggested output format</li>
+      <li>Expanded overview to provide context</li>
+      <li>Consolidated examples into their own section, illustrate real-world patterns</li>
+      <li>Consolidated HTTP guidance in its own section</li>
+      <li>Added a subsection on static analysis of hyper-schemas</li>
+      <li>Consolidated security concerns in their own section</li>
+      <li>Added an appendix on usage in APIs</li>
+      <li>Moved "readOnly" to the validation specification</li>
+      <li>Moved "media" to validation as "contentMediaType"/"contentEncoding"</li>
+      <li>Renamed "submissionEncType" to "submissionMediaType"</li>
+      <li>Renamed "mediaType" to "targetMediaType"</li>
+      <li>Added "anchor" and "anchorPointer"</li>
+      <li>Added "templatePointers" and "templateRequired"</li>
+      <li>Clarified how "hrefSchema" is used</li>
+      <li>Added "targetHints" and "headerSchema"</li>
+      <li>Added guidance on "self", "collection" and "item" link usage</li>
+      <li>Added "description" as an LDO keyword</li>
+      <li>Added "$comment" in LDOs to match the schema keyword</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-01</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Fixed examples</li>
+      <li>Added "hrefSchema" for user input to "href" URI Templates</li>
+      <li>Removed URI Template pre-processing</li>
+      <li>Clarified how links and data submission work</li>
+      <li>Clarified how validation keywords apply hyper-schema keywords and links</li>
+      <li>Clarified HTTP use with "targetSchema"</li>
+      <li>Renamed "schema" to "submissionSchema"</li>
+      <li>Renamed "encType" to "submissionEncType"</li>
+      <li>Removed "method"</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-00</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>"rel" is now optional</li>
+      <li>rel="self" no longer changes URI base</li>
+      <li>Added "base" keyword to change instance URI base</li>
+      <li>Removed "root" link relation</li>
+      <li>Removed "create" link relation</li>
+      <li>Removed "full" link relation</li>
+      <li>Removed "instances" link relation</li>
+      <li>Removed special behavior for "describedBy" link relation</li>
+      <li>Removed "pathStart" keyword</li>
+      <li>Removed "fragmentResolution" keyword</li>
+      <li>Updated references to JSON Pointer, HTML</li>
+      <li>Changed behavior of "method" property to align with hypermedia best current practices</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-luff-json-hyper-schema-01</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Split from main specification.</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.authors">
+  <a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a>
+</h1>
+<div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Henry Andrews</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Andrews</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline">Cloudflare, Inc.</span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality">San Francisco</span>,  
+		<span class="region">CA</span> 
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline">USA</span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:henry@cloudflare.com">henry@cloudflare.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Austin Wright</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Wright</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:aaa@bzfx.net">aaa@bzfx.net</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/draft-07/obsolete/relative-json-pointer.html b/draft-07/obsolete/relative-json-pointer.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..24295df7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-07/obsolete/relative-json-pointer.html
@@ -0,0 +1,669 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
+  "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
+<head profile="http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/">
+  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" />
+
+  <title>Relative JSON Pointers</title>
+
+  <style type="text/css" title="Xml2Rfc (sans serif)">
+  /*<![CDATA[*/
+	  a {
+	  text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+      /* info code from SantaKlauss at http://www.madaboutstyle.com/tooltip2.html */
+      a.info {
+          /* This is the key. */
+          position: relative;
+          z-index: 24;
+          text-decoration: none;
+      }
+      a.info:hover {
+          z-index: 25;
+          color: #FFF; background-color: #900;
+      }
+      a.info span { display: none; }
+      a.info:hover span.info {
+          /* The span will display just on :hover state. */
+          display: block;
+          position: absolute;
+          font-size: smaller;
+          top: 2em; left: -5em; width: 15em;
+          padding: 2px; border: 1px solid #333;
+          color: #900; background-color: #EEE;
+          text-align: left;
+      }
+	  a.smpl {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  a:hover {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  a:active {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  address {
+	  margin-top: 1em;
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  body {
+	  color: black;
+	  font-family: verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  max-width: 55em;
+	  
+	  }
+	  cite {
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  dd {
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  dl {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.empty {
+	  list-style-type: none;
+	  }
+	  ul.empty li {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  dl p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  dt {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  h1 {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h1.np {
+	  page-break-before: always;
+	  }
+	  h1 a {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  }
+	  h2 {
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 15pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h2 a, h3 a, h4 a, h5 a, h6 a {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  img {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  }
+	  li {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  p {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  pre {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  background-color: lightyellow;
+	  padding: .25em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text2 {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f0f0f0;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.inline {
+	  background-color: white;
+	  padding: 0em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.drawing {
+	  border-style: solid;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  padding: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table.tt {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt td {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full td {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt th {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full th {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers th {
+	  border-style: none none inset none;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.left {
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.right {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.center {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  caption {
+	  caption-side: bottom;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+	  border-spacing: 1px;
+	  width: 95%;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.top {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  td.topnowrap {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap; 
+	  }
+	  table.header td {
+	  background-color: gray;
+	  width: 50%;
+	  }
+	  table.header a {
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.reference {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap;
+	  padding-right: 1em;
+	  }
+	  thead {
+	  display:table-header-group;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc, ul.toc ul {
+	  list-style: none;
+	  margin-left: 1.5em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  padding-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li {
+	  line-height: 150%;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li li {
+	  line-height: normal;
+	  font-weight: normal;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  li.excluded {
+	  font-size: 0pt;
+	  }
+	  ul p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	
+	  .comment {
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	  .center {
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .error {
+	  color: red;
+	  font-style: italic;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .figure {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  }
+	  .filename {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .fn {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .hidden {
+	  display: none;
+	  }
+	  .left {
+	  text-align: left;
+	  }
+	  .right {
+	  text-align: right;
+	  }
+	  .title {
+	  color: #990000;
+	  font-size: 18pt;
+	  line-height: 18pt;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  margin-top: 36pt;
+	  }
+	  .vcardline {
+	  display: block;
+	  }
+	  .warning {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	
+	
+	  @media print {
+	  .noprint {
+		display: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  a {
+		color: black;
+		text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+		width: 90%;
+	  }
+	
+	  td.header {
+		width: 50%;
+		color: black;
+		background-color: white;
+		vertical-align: top;
+		font-size: 12pt;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.toc a::after {
+		content: leader('.') target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.ind li li a {
+		content: target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  .print2col {
+		column-count: 2;
+		-moz-column-count: 2;
+		column-fill: auto;
+	  }
+	  }
+	
+	  @page {
+	  @top-left {
+		   content: "Internet-Draft"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-right {
+		   content: "December 2010"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-center {
+		   content: "Abbreviated Title";
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-left {
+		   content: "Doe"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-center {
+		   content: "Expires June 2011"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-right {
+		   content: "[Page " counter(page) "]"; 
+	  } 
+	  }
+	
+	  @page:first { 
+		@top-left {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-right {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-center {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+	  }
+  /*]]>*/
+  </style>
+
+  <link href="#rfc.toc" rel="Contents"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.1" rel="Chapter" title="1 Introduction"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.2" rel="Chapter" title="2 Conventions and Terminology"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3" rel="Chapter" title="3 Syntax"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4" rel="Chapter" title="4 Evaluation"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.5" rel="Chapter" title="5 JSON String Representation"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="5.1 Examples"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6" rel="Chapter" title="6 Non-use in URI Fragment Identifiers"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7" rel="Chapter" title="7 Error Handling"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8" rel="Chapter" title="8 Relationship to JSON Pointer"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9" rel="Chapter" title="9 Acknowledgements"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10" rel="Chapter" title="10 Security Considerations"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references" rel="Chapter" title="11 References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references.1" rel="Chapter" title="11.1 Normative References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references.2" rel="Chapter" title="11.2 Informative References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A" rel="Chapter" title="A ChangeLog"/>
+<link href="#rfc.authors" rel="Chapter"/>
+
+
+  <meta name="generator" content="xml2rfc version 2.5.2 - http://tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc" />
+  <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" />
+
+  <meta name="dct.creator" content="Luff, G. and H. Andrews, Ed." />
+  <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-00" />
+  <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2017-11-20" />
+  <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Pointer is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines an extension to the JSON Pointer syntax, allowing relative locations from within the document.  " />
+  <meta name="description" content="JSON Pointer is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines an extension to the JSON Pointer syntax, allowing relative locations from within the document.  " />
+
+</head>
+
+<body>
+
+  <table class="header">
+    <tbody>
+    
+    	<tr>
+  <td class="left">Internet Engineering Task Force</td>
+  <td class="right">G. Luff</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
+  <td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Intended status: Informational</td>
+  <td class="right">H. Andrews, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Expires: May 24, 2018</td>
+  <td class="right">Cloudflare, Inc.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left"></td>
+  <td class="right">November 20, 2017</td>
+</tr>
+
+    	
+    </tbody>
+  </table>
+
+  <p class="title">Relative JSON Pointers<br />
+  <span class="filename">draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-00</span></p>
+  
+  <h1 id="rfc.abstract">
+  <a href="#rfc.abstract">Abstract</a>
+</h1>
+<p>JSON Pointer is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines an extension to the JSON Pointer syntax, allowing relative locations from within the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.status">
+  <a href="#rfc.status">Status of This Memo</a>
+</h1>
+<p>This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.</p>
+<p>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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.</p>
+<p>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."</p>
+<p>This Internet-Draft will expire on May 24, 2018.</p>
+<h1 id="rfc.copyrightnotice">
+  <a href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a>
+</h1>
+<p>Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors.  All rights reserved.</p>
+<p>This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://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.</p>
+
+  
+  <hr class="noprint" />
+  <h1 class="np" id="rfc.toc"><a href="#rfc.toc">Table of Contents</a></h1>
+  <ul class="toc">
+
+  	<li>1.   <a href="#rfc.section.1">Introduction</a></li>
+<li>2.   <a href="#rfc.section.2">Conventions and Terminology</a></li>
+<li>3.   <a href="#rfc.section.3">Syntax</a></li>
+<li>4.   <a href="#rfc.section.4">Evaluation</a></li>
+<li>5.   <a href="#rfc.section.5">JSON String Representation</a></li>
+<ul><li>5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.5.1">Examples</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6">Non-use in URI Fragment Identifiers</a></li>
+<li>7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7">Error Handling</a></li>
+<li>8.   <a href="#rfc.section.8">Relationship to JSON Pointer</a></li>
+<li>9.   <a href="#rfc.section.9">Acknowledgements</a></li>
+<li>10.   <a href="#rfc.section.10">Security Considerations</a></li>
+<li>11.   <a href="#rfc.references">References</a></li>
+<ul><li>11.1.   <a href="#rfc.references.1">Normative References</a></li>
+<li>11.2.   <a href="#rfc.references.2">Informative References</a></li>
+</ul><li>Appendix A.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A">ChangeLog</a></li>
+<li><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a></li>
+
+
+  </ul>
+
+  <h1 id="rfc.section.1"><a href="#rfc.section.1">1.</a> Introduction</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.1">JSON Pointer (<a href="#RFC6901">RFC 6901</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite>) is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines a related syntax allowing identification of relative locations from within the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.2"><a href="#rfc.section.2">2.</a> Conventions and Terminology</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.1">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 <a href="#RFC2119">RFC 2119</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC2119]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3"><a href="#rfc.section.3">3.</a> Syntax</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.1">A Relative JSON Pointer is a Unicode string (see RFC 4627, <a href="#RFC4627">Section 3</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC4627]</cite>), comprising a positive integer, followed by either a '#' (%x23) character or a JSON Pointer (<a href="#RFC6901">RFC 6901</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite>).  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.2">The separation between the integer prefix and the JSON Pointer will always be unambiguous, because a JSON Pointer must be either zero- length or start with a '/' (%x2F).  Similarly, a JSON Pointer will never be ambiguous with the '#'.  </p>
+<p>The ABNF syntax of a Relative JSON Pointer is: </p>
+<pre>
+
+      relative-json-pointer =  positive-integer &amp;lt;json-pointer&amp;gt;
+      relative-json-pointer =/ positive-integer "#"
+      positive-integer      =  %x30 / %x31-39 *( %x30-39 )
+              ; "0", or digits without a leading "0"
+
+                </pre>
+<p>where &lt;json-pointer&gt; follows the production defined in <a href="#RFC6901">RFC 6901, Section&#160;3</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite> ("Syntax").  </p>
+<p/>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4"><a href="#rfc.section.4">4.</a> Evaluation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.1">Evaluation of a Relative JSON Pointer begins with a reference to a value within a JSON document, and completes with either a value within that document, a string corresponding to an object member, or integer value representing an array index.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.2">Evaluation begins by processing the positive-integer prefix.  This can be found by taking the longest continuous sequence of decimal digits available, starting from the beginning of the string, taking the decimal numerical value.  If this value is more than zero, then the following steps are repeated that number of times: <a href="#RFC6901">RFC 6901, Section 4</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite> ("Evaluation"), with the modification that the initial reference being used is the reference currently being held (which may not be root of the document).  </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+  <li>If the current referenced value is the root of the document, then evaluation fails (see below).  </li>
+  <li>If the referenced value is an item within an array, then the new referenced value is that array.  </li>
+  <li>If the referenced value is an object member within an object, then the new referenced value is that object.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> If the remainder of the Relative JSON Pointer is a JSON Pointer, then evaluation proceeds as per </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.3">Otherwise (when the remainder of the Relative JSON Pointer is the character '#'), the final result is determined as follows: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+  <li>If the current referenced value is the root of the document, then evaluation fails (see below).  </li>
+  <li>If the referenced value is an item within an array, then the final evaluation result is the value's index position within the array.  </li>
+  <li>If the referenced value is an object member within an object, then the new referenced value is the corresponding member name.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5"><a href="#rfc.section.5">5.</a> JSON String Representation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.1">The concerns surrounding JSON String representation of a Relative JSON Pointer are identical to those laid out in <a href="#RFC6901">RFC 6901, Section 5</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5.1"><a href="#rfc.section.5.1">5.1.</a> Examples</h1>
+<p>For example, given the JSON document: </p>
+<pre>
+
+                      {
+                         "foo": ["bar", "baz"],
+                         "highly": {
+                            "nested": {
+                               "objects": true
+                            }
+                         }
+                      }
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Starting from the value "baz" (inside "foo"), the following JSON strings evaluate to the accompanying values: </p>
+<pre>
+
+                  "0"                         "baz"
+                  "1/0"                       "bar"
+                  "2/highly/nested/objects"   true
+                  "0#"                        1
+                  "1#"                        "foo"
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Starting from the value {"objects":true} (corresponding to the member key "nested"), the following JSON strings evaluate to the accompanying values: </p>
+<pre>
+
+                "0/objects"                 true
+                "1/nested/objects"          true
+                "2/foo/0"                   "bar"
+                "0#"                        "nested"
+                "1#"                        "highly"
+
+                    </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6"><a href="#rfc.section.6">6.</a> Non-use in URI Fragment Identifiers</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.1">Unlike a JSON Pointer, a Relative JSON Pointer can not be used in a URI fragment identifier.  Such fragments specify exact positions within a document, and therefore Relative JSON Pointers are not suitable.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7"><a href="#rfc.section.7">7.</a> Error Handling</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.1">In the event of an error condition, evaluation of the JSON Pointer fails to complete.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.2">Evaluation may fail due to invalid syntax, or referencing a non- existent value.  This specification does not define how errors are handled.  An application of JSON Relative Pointer SHOULD specify the impact and handling of each type of error.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8"><a href="#rfc.section.8">8.</a> Relationship to JSON Pointer</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.1">Relative JSON Pointers are intended as a companion to JSON Pointers.  Applications MUST specify the use of each syntax separately.  Defining either JSON Pointer or Relative JSON Pointer as an acceptable syntax does not imply that the other syntax is also acceptable.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9"><a href="#rfc.section.9">9.</a> Acknowledgements</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.1">The language and structure of this specification are based heavily on <a href="#RFC6901">[RFC6901]</a>, sometimes quoting it outright.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.2">This draft remains primarily as written and published by Geraint Luff, with only minor subsequent alterations under new editorship.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10"><a href="#rfc.section.10">10.</a> Security Considerations</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.1">Evaluation of a given Relative JSON Pointer is not guaranteed to reference an actual JSON value.  Applications using Relative JSON Pointer should anticipate this situation by defining how a pointer that does not resolve ought to be handled.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.2">As part of processing, a composite data structure may be assembled from multiple JSON documents (in part or in full).  In such cases, applications SHOULD ensure that a Relative JSON Pointer does not evaluate to a value outside the document for which is was written.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.3">Note that JSON pointers can contain the NUL (Unicode U+0000) character.  Care is needed not to misinterpret this character in programming languages that use NUL to mark the end of a string.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.references"><a href="#rfc.references">11.</a> References</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.1"><a href="#rfc.references.1">11.1.</a> Normative References</h1>
+<table>
+  <tbody>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Bradner, S.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</a>", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC6901">[RFC6901]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Bryan, P.</a>, <a>Zyp, K.</a> and <a>M. Nottingham</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6901">JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Pointer</a>", RFC 6901, DOI 10.17487/RFC6901, April 2013.</td>
+    </tr>
+  </tbody>
+</table>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.2"><a href="#rfc.references.2">11.2.</a> Informative References</h1>
+<table>
+  <tbody>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC4627">[RFC4627]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Crockford, D.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4627">The application/json Media Type for JavaScript Object Notation (JSON)</a>", RFC 4627, DOI 10.17487/RFC4627, July 2006.</td>
+    </tr>
+  </tbody>
+</table>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A"><a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Appendix A.</a> ChangeLog</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF1" class="info">[CREF1]<span class="info">This section to be removed before leaving Internet-Draft status.</span></a> </p>
+<p/>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-00</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Revived draft with identical wording and structure.</li>
+      <li>Clarified how to use alongside JSON Pointer.</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-luff-relative-json-pointer-00</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Initial draft.</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.authors">
+  <a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a>
+</h1>
+<div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Geraint Luff</span> 
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Luff</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality">Cambridge</span>,  
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline">UK</span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:luffgd@gmail.com">luffgd@gmail.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Henry Andrews</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Andrews</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline">Cloudflare, Inc.</span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality">San Francisco</span>,  
+		<span class="region">CA</span> 
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline">USA</span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:henry@cloudflare.com">henry@cloudflare.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/draft-07/relative-json-pointer.html b/draft-07/relative-json-pointer.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..7df25f77
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-07/relative-json-pointer.html
@@ -0,0 +1,676 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
+  "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
+<head profile="http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/">
+  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" />
+
+  <title>Relative JSON Pointers</title>
+
+  <style type="text/css" title="Xml2Rfc (sans serif)">
+  /*<![CDATA[*/
+	  a {
+	  text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+      /* info code from SantaKlauss at http://www.madaboutstyle.com/tooltip2.html */
+      a.info {
+          /* This is the key. */
+          position: relative;
+          z-index: 24;
+          text-decoration: none;
+      }
+      a.info:hover {
+          z-index: 25;
+          color: #FFF; background-color: #900;
+      }
+      a.info span { display: none; }
+      a.info:hover span.info {
+          /* The span will display just on :hover state. */
+          display: block;
+          position: absolute;
+          font-size: smaller;
+          top: 2em; left: -5em; width: 15em;
+          padding: 2px; border: 1px solid #333;
+          color: #900; background-color: #EEE;
+          text-align: left;
+      }
+	  a.smpl {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  a:hover {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  a:active {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  address {
+	  margin-top: 1em;
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  body {
+	  color: black;
+	  font-family: verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  max-width: 55em;
+	  
+	  }
+	  cite {
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  dd {
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  dl {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.empty {
+	  list-style-type: none;
+	  }
+	  ul.empty li {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  dl p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  dt {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  h1 {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h1.np {
+	  page-break-before: always;
+	  }
+	  h1 a {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  }
+	  h2 {
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 15pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h2 a, h3 a, h4 a, h5 a, h6 a {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  img {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  }
+	  li {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  p {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  pre {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  background-color: lightyellow;
+	  padding: .25em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text2 {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f0f0f0;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.inline {
+	  background-color: white;
+	  padding: 0em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.drawing {
+	  border-style: solid;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  padding: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table.tt {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt td {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full td {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt th {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full th {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers th {
+	  border-style: none none inset none;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.left {
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.right {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.center {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  caption {
+	  caption-side: bottom;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+	  border-spacing: 1px;
+	  width: 95%;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.top {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  td.topnowrap {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap; 
+	  }
+	  table.header td {
+	  background-color: gray;
+	  width: 50%;
+	  }
+	  table.header a {
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.reference {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap;
+	  padding-right: 1em;
+	  }
+	  thead {
+	  display:table-header-group;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc, ul.toc ul {
+	  list-style: none;
+	  margin-left: 1.5em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  padding-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li {
+	  line-height: 150%;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li li {
+	  line-height: normal;
+	  font-weight: normal;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  li.excluded {
+	  font-size: 0pt;
+	  }
+	  ul p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	
+	  .comment {
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	  .center {
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .error {
+	  color: red;
+	  font-style: italic;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .figure {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  }
+	  .filename {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .fn {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .hidden {
+	  display: none;
+	  }
+	  .left {
+	  text-align: left;
+	  }
+	  .right {
+	  text-align: right;
+	  }
+	  .title {
+	  color: #990000;
+	  font-size: 18pt;
+	  line-height: 18pt;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  margin-top: 36pt;
+	  }
+	  .vcardline {
+	  display: block;
+	  }
+	  .warning {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	
+	
+	  @media print {
+	  .noprint {
+		display: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  a {
+		color: black;
+		text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+		width: 90%;
+	  }
+	
+	  td.header {
+		width: 50%;
+		color: black;
+		background-color: white;
+		vertical-align: top;
+		font-size: 12pt;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.toc a::after {
+		content: leader('.') target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.ind li li a {
+		content: target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  .print2col {
+		column-count: 2;
+		-moz-column-count: 2;
+		column-fill: auto;
+	  }
+	  }
+	
+	  @page {
+	  @top-left {
+		   content: "Internet-Draft"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-right {
+		   content: "December 2010"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-center {
+		   content: "Abbreviated Title";
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-left {
+		   content: "Doe"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-center {
+		   content: "Expires June 2011"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-right {
+		   content: "[Page " counter(page) "]"; 
+	  } 
+	  }
+	
+	  @page:first { 
+		@top-left {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-right {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-center {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+	  }
+  /*]]>*/
+  </style>
+
+  <link href="#rfc.toc" rel="Contents"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.1" rel="Chapter" title="1 Introduction"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.2" rel="Chapter" title="2 Conventions and Terminology"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.3" rel="Chapter" title="3 Syntax"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.4" rel="Chapter" title="4 Evaluation"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.5" rel="Chapter" title="5 JSON String Representation"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="5.1 Examples"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6" rel="Chapter" title="6 Non-use in URI Fragment Identifiers"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7" rel="Chapter" title="7 Error Handling"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8" rel="Chapter" title="8 Relationship to JSON Pointer"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9" rel="Chapter" title="9 Acknowledgements"/>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10" rel="Chapter" title="10 Security Considerations"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references" rel="Chapter" title="11 References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references.1" rel="Chapter" title="11.1 Normative References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.references.2" rel="Chapter" title="11.2 Informative References"/>
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A" rel="Chapter" title="A ChangeLog"/>
+<link href="#rfc.authors" rel="Chapter"/>
+
+
+  <meta name="generator" content="xml2rfc version 2.5.2 - http://tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc" />
+  <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" />
+
+  <meta name="dct.creator" content="Luff, G. and H. Andrews, Ed." />
+  <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01" />
+  <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2018-1-19" />
+  <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Pointer is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines an extension to the JSON Pointer syntax, allowing relative locations from within the document.  " />
+  <meta name="description" content="JSON Pointer is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines an extension to the JSON Pointer syntax, allowing relative locations from within the document.  " />
+
+</head>
+
+<body>
+
+  <table class="header">
+    <tbody>
+    
+    	<tr>
+  <td class="left">Internet Engineering Task Force</td>
+  <td class="right">G. Luff</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
+  <td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Intended status: Informational</td>
+  <td class="right">H. Andrews, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left">Expires: July 23, 2018</td>
+  <td class="right">Cloudflare, Inc.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="left"></td>
+  <td class="right">January 19, 2018</td>
+</tr>
+
+    	
+    </tbody>
+  </table>
+
+  <p class="title">Relative JSON Pointers<br />
+  <span class="filename">draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01</span></p>
+  
+  <h1 id="rfc.abstract">
+  <a href="#rfc.abstract">Abstract</a>
+</h1>
+<p>JSON Pointer is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines an extension to the JSON Pointer syntax, allowing relative locations from within the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.status">
+  <a href="#rfc.status">Status of This Memo</a>
+</h1>
+<p>This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.</p>
+<p>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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.</p>
+<p>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."</p>
+<p>This Internet-Draft will expire on July 23, 2018.</p>
+<h1 id="rfc.copyrightnotice">
+  <a href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a>
+</h1>
+<p>Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors.  All rights reserved.</p>
+<p>This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://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.</p>
+
+  
+  <hr class="noprint" />
+  <h1 class="np" id="rfc.toc"><a href="#rfc.toc">Table of Contents</a></h1>
+  <ul class="toc">
+
+  	<li>1.   <a href="#rfc.section.1">Introduction</a></li>
+<li>2.   <a href="#rfc.section.2">Conventions and Terminology</a></li>
+<li>3.   <a href="#rfc.section.3">Syntax</a></li>
+<li>4.   <a href="#rfc.section.4">Evaluation</a></li>
+<li>5.   <a href="#rfc.section.5">JSON String Representation</a></li>
+<ul><li>5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.5.1">Examples</a></li>
+</ul><li>6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6">Non-use in URI Fragment Identifiers</a></li>
+<li>7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7">Error Handling</a></li>
+<li>8.   <a href="#rfc.section.8">Relationship to JSON Pointer</a></li>
+<li>9.   <a href="#rfc.section.9">Acknowledgements</a></li>
+<li>10.   <a href="#rfc.section.10">Security Considerations</a></li>
+<li>11.   <a href="#rfc.references">References</a></li>
+<ul><li>11.1.   <a href="#rfc.references.1">Normative References</a></li>
+<li>11.2.   <a href="#rfc.references.2">Informative References</a></li>
+</ul><li>Appendix A.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A">ChangeLog</a></li>
+<li><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a></li>
+
+
+  </ul>
+
+  <h1 id="rfc.section.1"><a href="#rfc.section.1">1.</a> Introduction</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.1">JSON Pointer (<a href="#RFC6901">RFC 6901</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite>) is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines a related syntax allowing identification of relative locations from within the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.2"><a href="#rfc.section.2">2.</a> Conventions and Terminology</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.1">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 <a href="#RFC2119">RFC 2119</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC2119]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3"><a href="#rfc.section.3">3.</a> Syntax</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.1">A Relative JSON Pointer is a Unicode string (see RFC 4627, <a href="#RFC4627">Section 3</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC4627]</cite>), comprising a non-negative integer, followed by either a '#' (%x23) character or a JSON Pointer (<a href="#RFC6901">RFC 6901</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite>).  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.2">The separation between the integer prefix and the JSON Pointer will always be unambiguous, because a JSON Pointer must be either zero- length or start with a '/' (%x2F).  Similarly, a JSON Pointer will never be ambiguous with the '#'.  </p>
+<p>The ABNF syntax of a Relative JSON Pointer is: </p>
+<pre>
+
+   relative-json-pointer =  non-negative-integer &amp;lt;json-pointer&amp;gt;
+   relative-json-pointer =/ non-negative-integer "#"
+   non-negative-integer      =  %x30 / %x31-39 *( %x30-39 )
+           ; "0", or digits without a leading "0"
+
+                </pre>
+<p>where &lt;json-pointer&gt; follows the production defined in <a href="#RFC6901">RFC 6901, Section&#160;3</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite> ("Syntax").  </p>
+<p/>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4"><a href="#rfc.section.4">4.</a> Evaluation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.1">Evaluation of a Relative JSON Pointer begins with a reference to a value within a JSON document, and completes with either a value within that document, a string corresponding to an object member, or integer value representing an array index.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.2">Evaluation begins by processing the non-negative-integer prefix.  This can be found by taking the longest continuous sequence of decimal digits available, starting from the beginning of the string, taking the decimal numerical value.  If this value is more than zero, then the following steps are repeated that number of times: <a href="#RFC6901">RFC 6901, Section 4</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite> ("Evaluation"), with the modification that the initial reference being used is the reference currently being held (which may not be root of the document).  </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+  <li>If the current referenced value is the root of the document, then evaluation fails (see below).  </li>
+  <li>If the referenced value is an item within an array, then the new referenced value is that array.  </li>
+  <li>If the referenced value is an object member within an object, then the new referenced value is that object.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> If the remainder of the Relative JSON Pointer is a JSON Pointer, then evaluation proceeds as per </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.3">Otherwise (when the remainder of the Relative JSON Pointer is the character '#'), the final result is determined as follows: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+  <li>If the current referenced value is the root of the document, then evaluation fails (see below).  </li>
+  <li>If the referenced value is an item within an array, then the final evaluation result is the value's index position within the array.  </li>
+  <li>If the referenced value is an object member within an object, then the new referenced value is the corresponding member name.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5"><a href="#rfc.section.5">5.</a> JSON String Representation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.1">The concerns surrounding JSON String representation of a Relative JSON Pointer are identical to those laid out in <a href="#RFC6901">RFC 6901, Section 5</a> <cite title="NONE">[RFC6901]</cite>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5.1"><a href="#rfc.section.5.1">5.1.</a> Examples</h1>
+<p>For example, given the JSON document: </p>
+<pre>
+
+                      {
+                         "foo": ["bar", "baz"],
+                         "highly": {
+                            "nested": {
+                               "objects": true
+                            }
+                         }
+                      }
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Starting from the value "baz" (inside "foo"), the following JSON strings evaluate to the accompanying values: </p>
+<pre>
+
+                  "0"                         "baz"
+                  "1/0"                       "bar"
+                  "2/highly/nested/objects"   true
+                  "0#"                        1
+                  "1#"                        "foo"
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Starting from the value {"objects":true} (corresponding to the member key "nested"), the following JSON strings evaluate to the accompanying values: </p>
+<pre>
+
+                "0/objects"                 true
+                "1/nested/objects"          true
+                "2/foo/0"                   "bar"
+                "0#"                        "nested"
+                "1#"                        "highly"
+
+                    </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6"><a href="#rfc.section.6">6.</a> Non-use in URI Fragment Identifiers</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.1">Unlike a JSON Pointer, a Relative JSON Pointer can not be used in a URI fragment identifier.  Such fragments specify exact positions within a document, and therefore Relative JSON Pointers are not suitable.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7"><a href="#rfc.section.7">7.</a> Error Handling</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.1">In the event of an error condition, evaluation of the JSON Pointer fails to complete.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.2">Evaluation may fail due to invalid syntax, or referencing a non- existent value.  This specification does not define how errors are handled.  An application of JSON Relative Pointer SHOULD specify the impact and handling of each type of error.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8"><a href="#rfc.section.8">8.</a> Relationship to JSON Pointer</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.1">Relative JSON Pointers are intended as a companion to JSON Pointers.  Applications MUST specify the use of each syntax separately.  Defining either JSON Pointer or Relative JSON Pointer as an acceptable syntax does not imply that the other syntax is also acceptable.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9"><a href="#rfc.section.9">9.</a> Acknowledgements</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.1">The language and structure of this specification are based heavily on <a href="#RFC6901">[RFC6901]</a>, sometimes quoting it outright.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.2">This draft remains primarily as written and published by Geraint Luff, with only minor subsequent alterations under new editorship.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10"><a href="#rfc.section.10">10.</a> Security Considerations</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.1">Evaluation of a given Relative JSON Pointer is not guaranteed to reference an actual JSON value.  Applications using Relative JSON Pointer should anticipate this situation by defining how a pointer that does not resolve ought to be handled.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.2">As part of processing, a composite data structure may be assembled from multiple JSON documents (in part or in full).  In such cases, applications SHOULD ensure that a Relative JSON Pointer does not evaluate to a value outside the document for which is was written.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.3">Note that JSON pointers can contain the NUL (Unicode U+0000) character.  Care is needed not to misinterpret this character in programming languages that use NUL to mark the end of a string.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.references"><a href="#rfc.references">11.</a> References</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.1"><a href="#rfc.references.1">11.1.</a> Normative References</h1>
+<table>
+  <tbody>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Bradner, S.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</a>", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997.</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC6901">[RFC6901]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Bryan, P.</a>, <a>Zyp, K.</a> and <a>M. Nottingham</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6901">JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Pointer</a>", RFC 6901, DOI 10.17487/RFC6901, April 2013.</td>
+    </tr>
+  </tbody>
+</table>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.2"><a href="#rfc.references.2">11.2.</a> Informative References</h1>
+<table>
+  <tbody>
+    <tr>
+      <td class="reference">
+        <b id="RFC4627">[RFC4627]</b>
+      </td>
+      <td class="top"><a>Crockford, D.</a>, "<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4627">The application/json Media Type for JavaScript Object Notation (JSON)</a>", RFC 4627, DOI 10.17487/RFC4627, July 2006.</td>
+    </tr>
+  </tbody>
+</table>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A"><a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Appendix A.</a> ChangeLog</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF1" class="info">[CREF1]<span class="info">This section to be removed before leaving Internet-Draft status.</span></a> </p>
+<p/>
+
+<dl>
+  <dt>draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>The initial number is "non-negative", not "positive"</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-00</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Revived draft with identical wording and structure.</li>
+      <li>Clarified how to use alongside JSON Pointer.</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+  <dt>draft-luff-relative-json-pointer-00</dt>
+  <dd style="margin-left: 8">
+    <ul>
+      <li>Initial draft.</li>
+    </ul>
+    <p> </p>
+  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.authors">
+  <a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a>
+</h1>
+<div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Geraint Luff</span> 
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Luff</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality">Cambridge</span>,  
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline">UK</span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:luffgd@gmail.com">luffgd@gmail.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Henry Andrews</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Andrews</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline">Cloudflare, Inc.</span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality">San Francisco</span>,  
+		<span class="region">CA</span> 
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline">USA</span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:henry@cloudflare.com">henry@cloudflare.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/draft-07/schema b/draft-07/schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..0aebf398
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-07/schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../_includes/draft-07/schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-zyp-json-schema-00.xml b/draft-zyp-json-schema-00.xml
deleted file mode 100644
index 9f722c91..00000000
--- a/draft-zyp-json-schema-00.xml
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,897 +0,0 @@
-<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
-<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
-<!ENTITY rfc4627 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4627.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc3986 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3986.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2119 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc4287 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4287.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2616 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2616.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc3339 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3339.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2045 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2045.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc5226 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5226.xml">
-<!ENTITY iddiscovery SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.hammer-discovery.xml">
-<!ENTITY uritemplate SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.gregorio-uritemplate.xml">
-<!ENTITY linkheader SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.nottingham-http-link-header.xml">
-<!ENTITY html401 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml4/reference.W3C.REC-html401-19991224.xml">
-]>
-<?rfc toc="yes"?>
-<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
-<?rfc compact="yes"?>
-<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
-<?rfc strict="no"?>
-<?rfc rfcedstyle="yes"?>
-<rfc category="info" docName="draft-zyp-json-schema-00" ipr="trust200811">
-
-  <front>
-    <!--
-[TODO] Enter the full document title and an abbreviated version
-  to use in the page header.
--->
-
-    <title abbrev="JSON Schema Media Type">A JSON Media Type for Describing the Structure and Meaning of JSON Documents</title>
-
-
-    <author fullname="Kris Zyp" initials="K" role="editor"
-            surname="Zyp">
-      <organization>SitePen (USA)</organization>
-
-      <address>
-        <postal>
-          <street>530 Lytton Avenue</street>
-
-          <city>Palo Alto, CA 94301</city>
-
-          <country>USA</country>
-        </postal>
-
-        <phone>+1 650 968 8787</phone>
-
-        <email>kris@sitepen.com</email>
-      </address>
-    </author>
-
-    <date year="2009" />
-
-    <workgroup>Internet Engineering Task Force</workgroup>
-
-    <keyword>JSON</keyword>
-
-    <keyword>Schema</keyword>
-
-    <keyword>Hyper Schema</keyword>
-
-    <keyword>Hypermedia</keyword>
-
-    <!--[TODO] add additional keywords here for IETF website search engine -->
-
-    <abstract>
-      <t>JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) Schema defines the media type application/schema+json, 
-      a JSON based format for defining 
-      the structure of JSON data. JSON Schema provides a contract for what JSON 
-      data is required for a given application and how to interact with it. JSON 
-      Schema is intended to define validation, documentation, hyperlink 
-      navigation, and interaction control of JSON data. </t>
-
-    </abstract>
-
-  </front>
-
-  <middle>
-    <section title="Introduction">
-      <t>JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) Schema is a JSON media type for defining 
-      the structure of JSON data. JSON Schema provides a contract for what JSON 
-      data is required for a given application and how to interact with it. JSON 
-      Schema is intended to define validation, documentation, hyperlink 
-      navigation, and interaction control of JSON data. </t>
-    </section>
-
-
-    <section title="Conventions">
-      <t><!-- The text in this section has been copied from the official boilerplate, 
-                  and should not be modified.-->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.</t>
-    </section>
-
-    <!-- ********************************************* -->
-
-    <section title="Overview">
-      <t>JSON Schema defines the media type application/schema+json for 
-      describing the structure of other
-      JSON documents. JSON Schema is JSON-based and includes facilities 
-      for describing the structure of JSON documents in terms of
-      allowable values, descriptions, and interpreting relations with other resources.</t>
-      
-      <t>JSON Schema format is organized into several separate definitions. The first 
-      definition is the core schema specification. This definition is primary 
-      concerned with describing a JSON structure and specifying valid elements
-      in the structure. The second definition is the Hyper Schema specification
-      which is intended define elements in a structure that can be interpreted as
-      hyperlinks.
-      Hyper Schema builds on JSON Schema to describe the hyperlink structure of 
-      other JSON documents. This allows user agents to be able to successfully navigate
-      JSON documents based on their schemas.</t>
-      
-      <t>
-      Cumulatively JSON Schema acts as a meta-document that can be used to define the required type and constraints on
-      property values, as well as define the meaning of the property values
-      for the purpose of describing a resource and determining hyperlinks
-      within the representation. </t>
-
-	<t>
-	An example JSON Schema that describes products might look like:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[	
-{
-  "name":"Product",
-  "properties":{
-    "id":{
-      "type":"number",
-      "description":"Product identifier"
-    },
-    "name":{
-      "description":"Name of the product",
-      "type":"string"
-    },
-    "price":{
-      "type": "number",
-      "minimum":0
-    },
-    "tags":{
-      "optional":true,
-      "type":"array",
-      "items":{
-         "type":"string"
-      }
-    }
-  },
-  "links":[
-    {
-      "rel":"full",
-      "href":"{id}"
-    },
-    {
-      "rel":"comments",
-      "href":"comments/?id={id}"
-    }
-  ]
-}
-]]></artwork></figure>
-This schema defines the properties of the instance JSON documents and 
-their required properties (id, name, and price) as well as an optional
-property (tags). This also defines the link relations of the instance
-JSON documents.
-	</t>
-    <section title="Terminology">
-      <t>For this specification, a schema will be used to denote a JSON Schema 
-      definition, and an instance refers to the JSON object or array that the schema 
-      will be describing and validating</t>
-
-      </section>
-	<section title="Design Considerations">
-	<t>
-	The JSON Schema media type does not attempt to dictate the structure of JSON
-	representations that contain data, but rather provides a separate format
-	for flexibly communicating how a JSON representation should be
-	interpreted and validated, such that user agents can properly understand
-	acceptable structures and extrapolate hyperlink information
-	with the JSON document. This specification does not define a protocol.
-	The underlying protocol (such as HTTP) should sufficiently define the
-	semantics of the client-server interface, the retrieval of resource
-	representations linked to by JSON representations, and modification of 
-	those resources. The goal of this
-	format is to sufficiently describe JSON structures such that one can
-	utilize existing information available in existing JSON
-	representations from a large variety of services that leverage a REST
-	architecture using existing protocols.
-</t>
-	</section>
-    </section>
-    
-	<section title="Schema/Instance Association">
-	<t>
-	JSON Schema instances are correlated to their schema by the "describedby"
-	relation, where the schema is defined to be the target of the relation.
-	Instance representations may be of the application/json media type or
-	any other subtype. Consequently, dictating how an instance
-	representation should specify the relation to the schema is beyond the normative scope
-	of this document (since this document specifically defines the JSON
-	Schema media type, and no other), but it is recommended that instances
-	specify their schema so that user agents can interpret the instance
-	representation and messages may retain the self-descriptive
-	characteristic, avoiding the need for out-of-band information about
-	instance data. Two approaches are recommended for declaring the
-	relation to the schema that describes the meaning of a JSON instance's (or collection 
-	of instances) structure. A MIME type parameter named
-	"describedby" or a Link header with a relation of "describedby" SHOULD be used:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[	
-Content-Type: application/json; 
-              describedby=http://json.com/my-hyper-schema
-]]></artwork></figure>	
-	or if the content is being transferred by a protocol (such as HTTP) that
-	provides headers, a Link header can be used:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-Link: <http://json.com/my-hyper-schema>; rel="describedby"
-]]></artwork></figure>
-	Instances MAY specify multiple schemas, to indicate all the schemas that 
-	are applicable to the data. The instance data may have multiple schemas 
-	that it is defined by (the instance data should be valid for those schemas). 
-	Or if the document is a collection of instances, the collection may contain 
-	instances from different schemas. When collections contain heterogeneous 
-	instances, the pathStart attribute MAY be specified in the 
-	schema to disambiguate which schema should be applied for each item in the 
-collection.
-	</t>
-	<section title="Self-Descriptive Schema">
-	<t>
-	JSON Schemas are themselves instances for the schema 
-	schemas. A self-describing JSON Schema for the core JSON Schema can
-	be found at http://json-schema.org/schema and the hyper schema 
-	self-description can be found at: http://json-schema.org/hyper-schema. All schemas
-	used within a protocol with media type definitions
-	SHOULD include a MIME parameter that refers to the self-descriptive
-	hyper schema or another schema that extends this hyper schema:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[	
-Content-Type: application/json; 
-              describedby=http://www.json-schema.org/hyper-schema
-]]></artwork></figure>
-	</t>
-	</section>
-	</section>
-	
-      <section title="Core Schema Definition">
-        <t>A JSON Schema is a JSON Object that defines various attributes 
-        of the instance and defines it's usage and valid values. A JSON 
-        Schema is a JSON Object with schema attribute properties. 
-        The following is the grammar of a JSON Schema:
-	</t>
-
-
-	<t>And an example JSON Schema definition could look like:</t>
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{"description":"A person",
- "type":"object",
-
- "properties":
-  {"name": {"type":"string"},
-   "age" : {"type":"integer",
-     "maximum":125}}
-}     
-	]]></artwork>
-	</figure>
-	
-	<t>A JSON Schema object may have any of the following properties, called schema
-	attributes (all attributes are optional):
-      </t>
-
-<section title="type">
-<t>
-<list><t>Union type definition - An array with two or more items which indicates a union of type definitions. Each item in the array may be a simple type definition or a schema. The instance value is valid if it is of the same type as one the type definitions in the array or if it is valid by one of the schemas in the array. For example to indicate that a string or number is a valid:
-{"type":["string","number"]}</t>
-<t>Simple type definition - A string indicating a primitive or simple type. The following are acceptable strings:
-
- 
-<list> 
-<t>string - Value must be a string.
-</t> 
-<t>number - Value must be a number, floating point numbers are allowed. </t> 
-<t>integer - Value must be an integer, no floating point numbers are allowed. This is a subset of the number type.</t> 
-<t>boolean - Value must be a boolean. </t> 
-<t>object - Value must be an object.</t> 
-<t>array - Value must be an array.
-</t> 
-<t>null - Value must be null. Note this is mainly for purpose of being able use union types to define nullability. </t> 
-<t>any - Value may be of any type including null.
-If the property is not defined or is not in this list, than any type of value is acceptable. Other type values may be used for custom purposes, but minimal validators of the specification implementation can allow any instance value on unknown type values.</t> 
-</list>
-</t>
-</list>
-</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="properties">
-<t>This should be an object type definition, which is an object with property definitions that correspond to instance object properties. When the instance value is an object, the property values of the instance object must conform to the property definitions in this object. In this object, each property definition's value should be a schema, and the property's name should be the name of the instance property that it defines.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="items">
-<t>This should be a schema or an array of schemas. When this is an object/schema and the instance value is an array, all the items in the array must conform to this schema. When this is an array of schemas and the instance value is an array, each position in the instance array must conform to the schema in the corresponding position for this array. This called tuple typing. When tuple typing is used, additional items are allowed, disallowed, or constrained by the additionalProperties attribute using the same rules as extra properties for objects..</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="optional">
-<t>This indicates that the instance property in the instance object is optional. This is false by default.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="additionalProperties">
-<t>This provides a default property definition for all properties that are not explicitly defined in an object type definition. The value must be a schema. If false is provided, no additional properties are allowed, and the schema can not be extended. The default value is an empty schema which allows any value for additional properties.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="requires">
-<t>This indicates that if this property is present in the containing instance object, the property given by requires attribute must also be present in the containing instance object. The value
-of this property may be a string, indicating the require property name. Or the value may be a schema, in which case the containing instance must be valid by the schema if the property is present. For example if a object type definition is defined:</t>
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{ 
-  "state":
-  {
-    "optional":true
-  },
-  "town":
-  {
-    "requires":"state",
-    "optional":true
-  }
-}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-<t>An instance must include a state property if a town property is included. If a town property is not included, the state property is optional.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="minimum">
-<t>This indicates the minimum value for the instance property when the type of the instance value is a number.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="maximum">
-<t>This indicates the minimum value for the instance property when the type of the instance value is a number.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="minimumCanEqual">
-<t>If the minimum is defined, this indicates whether or not the instance property value can equal the minimum.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="maximumCanEqual">
-<t>If the maximum is defined, this indicates whether or not the instance property value can equal the maximum.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="minItems">
-<t>This indicates the minimum number of values in an array when an array is the instance value.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="maxItems">
-<t>This indicates the maximum number of values in an array when an array is the instance value.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="pattern">
-<t>When the instance value is a string, this provides a regular expression that a instance string value should match in order to be valid. Regular expressions should follow the regular expression specification from ECMA 262/Perl 5</t></section>
-<section title="maxLength">
-<t>When the instance value is a string, this indicates maximum length of the string.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="minLength">
-<t>When the instance value is a string, this indicates minimum length of the string.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="enum">
-<t>This provides an enumeration of possible values that are valid for the instance property. This should be an array, and each item in the array represents a possible value for the instance value. If "enum" is included, the instance value must be one of the values in enum array in order for the schema to be valid.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="title">
-<t>This provides a short description of the instance property. The value must be a string.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="description">
-<t>This provides a full description of the of purpose the instance property. The value must be a string.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="format"><t>This property indicates the type of data, content type, or microformat to be expected in the instance property values. A format attribute may be one of the values listed below, and if so, should adhere to the semantics describing for the format. A format should only be used give meaning to primitive types (string, integer, number, or boolean). Validators are not required to validate that the instance values conform to a format. The following formats are defined:</t>
-<list>
-<t>Any valid MIME media type may be used as a format value, in which case the instance property value must be a string, representing the contents of the MIME file. 
-</t><t>date-time - This should be a date in ISO 8601 format of YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ssZ in UTC time. This is the recommended form of date/timestamp.
-</t><t>date - This should be a date in the format of YYYY-MM-DD. It is recommended that you use the "date-time" format instead of "date" unless you need to transfer only the date part.
-</t><t>time - This should be a time in the format of hh:mm:ss. It is recommended that you use the "date-time" format instead of "time" unless you need to transfer only the time part.
-</t><t>utc-millisec - This should be the difference, measured in milliseconds, between the specified time and midnight, January 1, 1970 UTC. The value should be a number (integer or float).
-</t><t>regex - A regular expression.
-</t><t>color - This is a CSS color (like "#FF0000" or "red").
-</t><t>style - This is a CSS style definition (like "color: red; background-color:#FFF").
-</t><t>phone - This should be a phone number (format may follow E.123).
-</t><t>uri - This value should be a URI..
-</t><t>email - This should be an email address.
-</t><t>ip-address - This should be an ip version 4 address.
-</t><t>ipv6 - This should be an ip version 6 address.</t>
-<t>street-address - This should be a street address.</t> 
-<t>locality - This should be a city or town.</t> 
-<t>region - This should be a region (a state in the US, province in Canada, etc.)</t> 
-<t>postal-code - This should be a postal code (AKA zip code).</t> 
-<t>country - This should be the name of a country.</t> 
-<t>Additional custom formats may be defined with a URL to a definition of the format.</t>
-</list>
-</section> 
-<section title="contentEncoding"><t>
-If the instance property value is a string, this indicates that the string should be interpreted as binary data and decoded using the encoding named by this schema property. RFC 2045, Sec 6.1 lists possible values.
-</t>
-</section>
-<section title="default">
-<t>This indicates the default for the instance property.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="maxDecimal">
-<t>This indicates the maximum number of decimal places in a floating point number. By default there is no maximum.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="disallow">
-<t>This attribute may take the same values as the "type" attribute, however if the instance matches the type or if this value is an array and the instance matches any type or schema in the array, than this instance is not valid.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="extends">
-<t>The value of this property should be another schema which will provide a base schema which the current schema will inherit from. The inheritance rules are such that any instance that is valid according to the current schema must be valid according to the referenced schema. This may also be an array, in which case, the instance must be valid for all the schemas in the array.</t>
-</section> 
-    </section>
-<section title="Hyper Schema">
-      <t>This section defines hypermedia definitions of JSON schema. 
-      The following attributes are specified in addition to those
-attributes that already provided by JSON schema with the specific
-purpose of informing user agents of relations between resources based
-on JSON data. Just as with JSON
-schema attributes, all the attributes in hyper-schema are optional.
-Therefore an empty object is a valid (non-informative) schema, and
-essentially describes plain JSON (no constraints on the structures).
-Addition of attributes provides additive information for user agents.</t>
-<section title="links">
-<t>
-The value of the links property should be an array, where each item 
-in the array is a link description object which describes the link
-relations of the instances.
-</t>
-<section title="Link Description Object">
-<t>
-A link description object is used to describe the link relations 
-of instances of a schema.
-</t>
-<section title="href">
-    <t>
-    The value of the "href" link description property
-indicates the target URI of the related resource. The value
-of the instance property should be resolved as a URI-Reference per [RFC3986]
-and may be a relative URI. The base URI to be used for relative resolution
-should be the URI used to retrieve the instance object (not the schema). 
-Also, the URI may be parametrized by the property values of the instance 
-object.
-</t>
-<t>
-Instance property values should be substituted into the URIs where
-matching braces ('{', '}') are found surrounding zero or more characters,
-creating an expanded URI. Instance property value substitutions are resolved
-by using the text between the braces to denote the property name
-from the instance to get the value to substitute. For example,
-if an href value is defined:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-http://somesite.com/{id}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-Then it would be resolved by replace the value of the "id" property value from
-the instance object. If the value of the "id" property was "45", the expanded
-URI would be:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-http://somesite.com/45
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-If matching braces are found with the string "-this" (no quotes) between the braces, than the 
-actual instance value should be used to replace the braces, rather than a property value.
-This should only be used in situations where the instance is a scalar (string, 
-boolean, or number), and not for objects or arrays.
-</t>
-</section>
-<section title="rel">
-<t>
-The value of the "rel" property indicates the name of the 
-relation to the target resource. The relation to the target should be interpreted as specifically from the instance object that the schema (or sub-schema) applies to, not just the top level resource that contains the object within its hierarchy. If a resource JSON representation contains a sub object with a property interpreted as a link, that sub-object holds the relation with the target. A relation to target from the top level resource must be indicated with the schema describing the top level JSON representation.
-</t>
-<t>
-Relationship definitions SHOULD NOT be media type dependent, and users are encouraged to utilize existing accepted relation definitions, including those in existing relation registries (see &rfc4287). However, we define these relation here for clarity of normative interpretation within the context of JSON hyper schema defined relations:
-<list>
-<t>
-self - If the relation value is "self", when this property is encountered in
-the instance object, the object represents a resource and the instance object is
-treated as a full representation of the target resource identified by
-the specified URI.
-</t>
-<t>
-full - This indicates that the target of the link is the full representation for the instance object. The object that contains this link may not be the full representation.
-</t>
-<t>
-describedby - This indicates the target of the link is the schema for the instance object. This may be used to specifically denote the schemas of objects within a JSON object hierarchy, facilitating polymorphic type data structures.
-</t>
-<t>
-The following relations are applicable for schemas (the schema as the "from" resource in the relation).
-</t>
-<t>
-instances - This indicates the target resource that represents collection of instances of a schema. 
-</t>
-<t>
-create - This indicates a target to use for creating new instances of a schema. This link definition SHOULD be a submission link with a non-safe method (like POST).
-</t>
-</list>
-For example, if a schema is defined:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{
-    "links": [
-    	{
-    		"rel": "self"
-    		"href": "{id}"
-    	},
-    	{
-    		"rel": "up"
-    		"href": "{upId}"
-    	},
-    	{
-    		"rel": "children"
-    		"href": "?upId={id}"
-    	}
-    ]
-}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-And if a collection of instance resource's JSON representation was
-retrieved:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-GET /Resource/
-
-[
-    {
-        "id": "thing",
-        "upId": "parent"
-    },
-    {
-        "id": "thing2",
-        "upId": "parent"
-    }
-]
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-
-This would indicate that for the first item in the collection, it's own
-(self) URI would resolve to "/Resource/thing" and the first item's "up"
-relation should be resolved to the resource at "/Resource/parent".
-The "children" collection would be located at "/Resource/?upId=thing".
-</t>
-</section>
-<section title="Submission Link Properties">
-<t>
-The following properties also apply to link definition objects, and 
-provide functionality analogous to HTML forms, in providing a 
-means for submitting extra (often user supplied) information to send to a server.
-</t>
-<section title="method">
-<t>
-
-This indicates which method should be used to access the target resource. 
-In an HTTP environment, this would be "GET" or "POST" (other HTTP methods 
-such as "PUT" and "DELETE" have semantics that are clearly implied by 
-accessed resources, and do not need to be defined here). 
-This defaults to "GET".
-</t>
-</section>
-
-<section title="enctype">
-<t>
-If present, this property indicates a query media type format that the server
-supports for querying or posting to the collection of instances at the target 
-resource. The query can be 
-suffixed to the target URI to query the collection with
-property-based constraints on the resources that SHOULD be returned from
-the server or used to post data to the resource (depending on the method). 
-For example, with the following schema:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{
- "links":[
-    {
-      "enctype": "application/x-www-form-urlencoded",
-      "method": "GET",
-      "href": "/Product/",
-      "properties":{
-         "name":{"description":"name of the product"}
-      }
-    }
-  ]
-}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-This indicates that the client can query the server for instances that
-have a specific name:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-/Product/?name=Slinky
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-
-If no enctype or method is specified, only the single URI specified by 
-the href property is defined. If the method is POST, application/json is 
-the default media type.
-</t>
-</section>
-<section title="properties">
-<t>
-This is inherited from the base JSON schema definition, and can follow the 
-same structure, but its meaning should be used to define the acceptable 
-property names and values for the action (whether it be for the GET query 
-or POST body). If properties are omitted, and this form is the child of a 
-schema, the properties from the parent schema should be used as the basis 
-for the form action.
-</t>
-</section>
-</section>
-</section>
-</section>
-    <section title="fragmentResolution">
-    <t>This property indicates the fragment resolution protocol to use for
-resolving fragment identifiers in URIs within the instance
-representations. This applies to the instance object URIs and all
-children of the instance object's URIs. The default fragment resolution
-protocol is "dot-delimited", which is defined below. Other fragment
-resolution protocols may be used, but are not defined in this
-document.
-
-</t>
-<t>
-The fragment identifier is based on RFC 2396 Sec 5, and defines the
-mechanism for resolving references to entities within a document.
-</t>
-<section title="dot-delimited fragment resolution">
-<t>With the dot-delimited fragment resolution protocol, the fragment
-identifier is interpreted as a series of property reference tokens that
-are delimited by the "." character (\x2E). Each property reference token
-is a series of any legal URI component characters except the "." character. Each property
-reference token should be interpreted, starting from the beginning of
-the fragment identifier, as a path reference in the target JSON
-structure. The final target value of the fragment can be determined by
-starting with the root of the JSON structure from the representation of
-the resource identified by the pre-fragment URI. If the target is a JSON
-object, than the new target is the value of the property with the name
-identified by the next property reference token in the fragment. If the
-target is a JSON array, than the target is determined by finding the
-item in array the array with the index defined by the next property
-reference token (which MUST be a number). The target is successively
-updated for each property reference token, until the entire fragment has
-been traversed. 
-</t>
-<t>
-Property names SHOULD be URI-encoded. In particular, any "." in a 
-property name MUST be encoded to avoid being interpreted as a property 
-delimiter.
-</t>
-<t>
-For example, for the following JSON representation:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{
-   "foo":{
-      "anArray":[
-        {"prop":44}
-      ],
-      "another prop":{
-          "baz":"A string"
-      }
-   }
-}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-The following fragment identifiers would be resolved:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-fragment identifier    resolution
--------------------    ----------
-#                      self, the root of the resource itself
-#foo                   the object referred to by the foo property
-#foo.another prop      the object referred to by the "another prop"
-                       property of the object referred to by the 
-                       "foo" property
-#foo.another prop.baz  the string referred to by the value of "baz"
-                       property of the "another prop" property of 
-                       the object referred to by the "foo" property
-#foo.anArray.0         the first object in the "anArray" array
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-</t>
-</section>
-
-
-</section>
-
-    <section title="root">
-    <t>This attribute indicates that the value of the instance property value
-SHOULD be treated as the root or the body of the representation for the
-purposes of user agent interaction and fragment resolution (all other
-properties of the instance objects are can be regarded as meta-data
-descriptions for the data).
-
-</t>
-
-</section>
-<section title="readonly">
-<t>This indicates that the instance property should not be changed. Attempts by a user agent to modify the value of this property are expected to be rejected by a server.</t>
-</section> 
-
-    <section title="pathStart">
-    <t>This property value is a URI-Reference that indicates the URI that all 
-the URIs for the instances of the schema should start with. When 
-multiple schemas have been referenced for an instance, the user agent 
-can determine if this schema is applicable for a particular instance by 
-determining if URI of the instance begins with the pathStart's referenced 
-URI. pathStart MUST be resolved as per [RFC3986] section 5. If the URI of 
-the instance does not start with URI indicated by pathStart, or if another 
-schema specifies a starting URI that is longer and also matches the 
-instance, this schema should not be applied to the instance. Any schema 
-that does not have a pathStart attribute should be considered applicable 
-to all the instances for which it is referenced.
-
-
-</t>
-
-
-</section>
-    <section title="mediaType">
-    <t>This indicates the media type of the instance representations that this schema is defining.
-</t>
-
-</section>
-
-    <section title="alternate">
-    <t>This is an array of JSON schema definitions that define any 
-    other schemas for alternate JSON-based representations
-    of the instance resources.
-</t>
-
-</section>
-
-
-</section>
-
-<section title="Security Considerations">
-<t>
-This specification is a sub-type of the JSON format, and 
-consequently the security considerations are generally the same as RFC
-4627. However, an additional issue is that when link relation of "self"
-is used to denote a full representation of an object, the user agent 
-SHOULD NOT consider the representation to be the authoritative representation
-of the resource denoted by the target URI if the target URI is not
-equivalent to or a sub-path of the the URI used to request the resource 
-representation which contains the target URI with the "self" link.
-For example, if a hyper schema was defined:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{
-  "links":[
-  	{
-  		"rel":"self",
-  		"href":"{id}"
-  	}
-  ]
-}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-And a resource was requested from somesite.com:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-GET /foo/
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-
-With a response of:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-Content-Type: application/json; describedby=/schema-for-this-data
-[
-  {"id":"bar", "name":"This representation can be safely treated \
-        as authoritative "},
-  {"id":"/baz", "name":"This representation should not be treated as \
-        authoritative the user agent should make request the resource\
-        from "/baz" to ensure it has the authoritative representation"},
-  {"id":"http://othersite.com/something", "name":"This representation\
-        should also not be treated as authoritative and the target\
-        resource representation should be retrieved for the\
-        authoritative representation"}
-]
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-</t>
-</section>
-<section title="IANA Considerations">
-<t>
-   The proposed MIME media type for JSON Schema is application/schema+json
-</t>
-<t>
-   Type name: application
-</t>
-<t>
-   Subtype name: schema+json
-</t>
-<t>
-   Required parameters: describedby
-   </t>
-   <t>
-   	The value of the describedby parameter should be a URI (relative or absolute) that 
-   	refers to the schema used to define the structure of this structure (the 
-   	meta-schema). Normally the value would be http://json-schema.org/hyper-schema,
-   	but it is allowable to use other schemas that extend the hyper schema's meta-
-   	schema.
-</t>
-<t>
-   Optional parameters: pretty
-   </t>
-   <t>
-   	The value of the pretty parameter may be true or false to indicate if additional
-   	whitespace has been included to make the JSON representation easier to read.
-</t>
-
-<section title="Registry of Link Relations">
-<t>
-This registry is maintained by IANA per RFC 4287 and this specification adds
-three values: "full", "create", "instances".  New
-   assignments are subject to IESG Approval, as outlined in [RFC5226].
-   Requests should be made by email to IANA, which will then forward the
-   request to the IESG, requesting approval.
-
-</t>
-</section>
-
-</section>
-  </middle>
-
-  <back>
-    <!-- References Section -->
-
-
-    <references title="Normative References">
-      &rfc3986;
-      &rfc2119;
-      &rfc4287;
-      &rfc3339;
-      &rfc2045;
-    </references>
-
-    <references title="Informative References">
-      &rfc4627;
-      &rfc2616;
-      &rfc5226;
-      &iddiscovery;
-      &uritemplate;
-      &linkheader;
-      &html401;
-    </references>
-
-    <!--
-<section anchor="appendix" title="Appendix A">
-	<t>You can add appendices just as regular sections, the only
-difference is that they go under "back" element, and get letters 
-instead of numbers</t>
-</section>
--->
-
-    <section title="Change Log ">
-          <t>-01</t>
-          <t>
-            <list style="symbols">
-              <t>Fixed category and updates from template</t>
-            </list>
-          </t>
-          <t>-00</t>
-          <t>
-            <list style="symbols">
-              <t>Initial draft</t>
-            </list>
-          </t>
-
-    </section>
-
-    <section title="Open Issues">
-      <t>Should we give a preference to MIME headers over Link headers (or only use one)?</t>
-      <t>Should we use "profile" as the media type parameter instead?</t>
-      <t>Should "root" be a MIME parameter instead of a schema attribute?</t>
-      <t>Should "format" be renamed to "mediaType" or "contentType" to reflect the usage MIME media types that are allowed.</t>
-      <t>I still do not like how dates are handled.</t>
-
-    </section>
-
-    <!--
-$Log: draft-zyp-json-schema.xml,v $
-Revision 0.1  2009/09/25 02:46:57  H73653
-*** empty log message ***
-	place for source control log here
-  -->
-  </back>
-</rfc>
diff --git a/draft-zyp-json-schema-00.xml b/draft-zyp-json-schema-00.xml
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..e51722e3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-zyp-json-schema-00.xml
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+_includes/draft-00/jsonschema.xml
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-zyp-json-schema-01.xml b/draft-zyp-json-schema-01.xml
deleted file mode 100644
index 215d9278..00000000
--- a/draft-zyp-json-schema-01.xml
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,897 +0,0 @@
-<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
-<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
-<!ENTITY rfc4627 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4627.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc3986 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3986.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2119 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc4287 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4287.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2616 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2616.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc3339 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3339.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2045 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2045.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc5226 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5226.xml">
-<!ENTITY iddiscovery SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.hammer-discovery.xml">
-<!ENTITY uritemplate SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.gregorio-uritemplate.xml">
-<!ENTITY linkheader SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.nottingham-http-link-header.xml">
-<!ENTITY html401 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml4/reference.W3C.REC-html401-19991224.xml">
-]>
-<?rfc toc="yes"?>
-<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
-<?rfc compact="yes"?>
-<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
-<?rfc strict="no"?>
-<?rfc rfcedstyle="yes"?>
-<rfc category="info" docName="draft-zyp-json-schema-01" ipr="trust200811">
-
-  <front>
-    <!--
-[TODO] Enter the full document title and an abbreviated version
-  to use in the page header.
--->
-
-    <title abbrev="JSON Schema Media Type">A JSON Media Type for Describing the Structure and Meaning of JSON Documents</title>
-
-
-    <author fullname="Kris Zyp" initials="K" role="editor"
-            surname="Zyp">
-      <organization>SitePen (USA)</organization>
-
-      <address>
-        <postal>
-          <street>530 Lytton Avenue</street>
-
-          <city>Palo Alto, CA 94301</city>
-
-          <country>USA</country>
-        </postal>
-
-        <phone>+1 650 968 8787</phone>
-
-        <email>kris@sitepen.com</email>
-      </address>
-    </author>
-
-    <date year="2009" />
-
-    <workgroup>Internet Engineering Task Force</workgroup>
-
-    <keyword>JSON</keyword>
-
-    <keyword>Schema</keyword>
-
-    <keyword>Hyper Schema</keyword>
-
-    <keyword>Hypermedia</keyword>
-
-    <!--[TODO] add additional keywords here for IETF website search engine -->
-
-    <abstract>
-      <t>JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) Schema defines the media type application/schema+json, 
-      a JSON based format for defining 
-      the structure of JSON data. JSON Schema provides a contract for what JSON 
-      data is required for a given application and how to interact with it. JSON 
-      Schema is intended to define validation, documentation, hyperlink 
-      navigation, and interaction control of JSON data. </t>
-
-    </abstract>
-
-  </front>
-
-  <middle>
-    <section title="Introduction">
-      <t>JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) Schema is a JSON media type for defining 
-      the structure of JSON data. JSON Schema provides a contract for what JSON 
-      data is required for a given application and how to interact with it. JSON 
-      Schema is intended to define validation, documentation, hyperlink 
-      navigation, and interaction control of JSON data. </t>
-    </section>
-
-
-    <section title="Conventions">
-      <t><!-- The text in this section has been copied from the official boilerplate, 
-                  and should not be modified.-->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.</t>
-    </section>
-
-    <!-- ********************************************* -->
-
-    <section title="Overview">
-      <t>JSON Schema defines the media type application/schema+json for 
-      describing the structure of other
-      JSON documents. JSON Schema is JSON-based and includes facilities 
-      for describing the structure of JSON documents in terms of
-      allowable values, descriptions, and interpreting relations with other resources.</t>
-      
-      <t>JSON Schema format is organized into several separate definitions. The first 
-      definition is the core schema specification. This definition is primary 
-      concerned with describing a JSON structure and specifying valid elements
-      in the structure. The second definition is the Hyper Schema specification
-      which is intended define elements in a structure that can be interpreted as
-      hyperlinks.
-      Hyper Schema builds on JSON Schema to describe the hyperlink structure of 
-      other JSON documents. This allows user agents to be able to successfully navigate
-      JSON documents based on their schemas.</t>
-      
-      <t>
-      Cumulatively JSON Schema acts as a meta-document that can be used to define the required type and constraints on
-      property values, as well as define the meaning of the property values
-      for the purpose of describing a resource and determining hyperlinks
-      within the representation. </t>
-
-	<t>
-	An example JSON Schema that describes products might look like:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[	
-{
-  "name":"Product",
-  "properties":{
-    "id":{
-      "type":"number",
-      "description":"Product identifier"
-    },
-    "name":{
-      "description":"Name of the product",
-      "type":"string"
-    },
-    "price":{
-      "type": "number",
-      "minimum":0
-    },
-    "tags":{
-      "optional":true,
-      "type":"array",
-      "items":{
-         "type":"string"
-      }
-    }
-  },
-  "links":[
-    {
-      "rel":"full",
-      "href":"{id}"
-    },
-    {
-      "rel":"comments",
-      "href":"comments/?id={id}"
-    }
-  ]
-}
-]]></artwork></figure>
-This schema defines the properties of the instance JSON documents and 
-their required properties (id, name, and price) as well as an optional
-property (tags). This also defines the link relations of the instance
-JSON documents.
-	</t>
-    <section title="Terminology">
-      <t>For this specification, a schema will be used to denote a JSON Schema 
-      definition, and an instance refers to the JSON object or array that the schema 
-      will be describing and validating</t>
-
-      </section>
-	<section title="Design Considerations">
-	<t>
-	The JSON Schema media type does not attempt to dictate the structure of JSON
-	representations that contain data, but rather provides a separate format
-	for flexibly communicating how a JSON representation should be
-	interpreted and validated, such that user agents can properly understand
-	acceptable structures and extrapolate hyperlink information
-	with the JSON document. This specification does not define a protocol.
-	The underlying protocol (such as HTTP) should sufficiently define the
-	semantics of the client-server interface, the retrieval of resource
-	representations linked to by JSON representations, and modification of 
-	those resources. The goal of this
-	format is to sufficiently describe JSON structures such that one can
-	utilize existing information available in existing JSON
-	representations from a large variety of services that leverage a REST
-	architecture using existing protocols.
-</t>
-	</section>
-    </section>
-    
-	<section title="Schema/Instance Association">
-	<t>
-	JSON Schema instances are correlated to their schema by the "describedby"
-	relation, where the schema is defined to be the target of the relation.
-	Instance representations may be of the application/json media type or
-	any other subtype. Consequently, dictating how an instance
-	representation should specify the relation to the schema is beyond the normative scope
-	of this document (since this document specifically defines the JSON
-	Schema media type, and no other), but it is recommended that instances
-	specify their schema so that user agents can interpret the instance
-	representation and messages may retain the self-descriptive
-	characteristic, avoiding the need for out-of-band information about
-	instance data. Two approaches are recommended for declaring the
-	relation to the schema that describes the meaning of a JSON instance's (or collection 
-	of instances) structure. A MIME type parameter named
-	"describedby" or a Link header with a relation of "describedby" SHOULD be used:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[	
-Content-Type: application/json; 
-              describedby=http://json.com/my-hyper-schema
-]]></artwork></figure>	
-	or if the content is being transferred by a protocol (such as HTTP) that
-	provides headers, a Link header can be used:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-Link: <http://json.com/my-hyper-schema>; rel="describedby"
-]]></artwork></figure>
-	Instances MAY specify multiple schemas, to indicate all the schemas that 
-	are applicable to the data. The instance data may have multiple schemas 
-	that it is defined by (the instance data should be valid for those schemas). 
-	Or if the document is a collection of instances, the collection may contain 
-	instances from different schemas. When collections contain heterogeneous 
-	instances, the pathStart attribute MAY be specified in the 
-	schema to disambiguate which schema should be applied for each item in the 
-collection.
-	</t>
-	<section title="Self-Descriptive Schema">
-	<t>
-	JSON Schemas are themselves instances for the schema 
-	schemas. A self-describing JSON Schema for the core JSON Schema can
-	be found at http://json-schema.org/schema and the hyper schema 
-	self-description can be found at: http://json-schema.org/hyper-schema. All schemas
-	used within a protocol with media type definitions
-	SHOULD include a MIME parameter that refers to the self-descriptive
-	hyper schema or another schema that extends this hyper schema:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[	
-Content-Type: application/json; 
-              describedby=http://www.json-schema.org/hyper-schema
-]]></artwork></figure>
-	</t>
-	</section>
-	</section>
-	
-      <section title="Core Schema Definition">
-        <t>A JSON Schema is a JSON Object that defines various attributes 
-        of the instance and defines it's usage and valid values. A JSON 
-        Schema is a JSON Object with schema attribute properties. 
-        The following is the grammar of a JSON Schema:
-	</t>
-
-
-	<t>And an example JSON Schema definition could look like:</t>
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{"description":"A person",
- "type":"object",
-
- "properties":
-  {"name": {"type":"string"},
-   "age" : {"type":"integer",
-     "maximum":125}}
-}     
-	]]></artwork>
-	</figure>
-	
-	<t>A JSON Schema object may have any of the following properties, called schema
-	attributes (all attributes are optional):
-      </t>
-
-<section title="type">
-<t>
-<list><t>Union type definition - An array with two or more items which indicates a union of type definitions. Each item in the array may be a simple type definition or a schema. The instance value is valid if it is of the same type as one the type definitions in the array or if it is valid by one of the schemas in the array. For example to indicate that a string or number is a valid:
-{"type":["string","number"]}</t>
-<t>Simple type definition - A string indicating a primitive or simple type. The following are acceptable strings:
-
- 
-<list> 
-<t>string - Value must be a string.
-</t> 
-<t>number - Value must be a number, floating point numbers are allowed. </t> 
-<t>integer - Value must be an integer, no floating point numbers are allowed. This is a subset of the number type.</t> 
-<t>boolean - Value must be a boolean. </t> 
-<t>object - Value must be an object.</t> 
-<t>array - Value must be an array.
-</t> 
-<t>null - Value must be null. Note this is mainly for purpose of being able use union types to define nullability. </t> 
-<t>any - Value may be of any type including null.
-If the property is not defined or is not in this list, than any type of value is acceptable. Other type values may be used for custom purposes, but minimal validators of the specification implementation can allow any instance value on unknown type values.</t> 
-</list>
-</t>
-</list>
-</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="properties">
-<t>This should be an object type definition, which is an object with property definitions that correspond to instance object properties. When the instance value is an object, the property values of the instance object must conform to the property definitions in this object. In this object, each property definition's value should be a schema, and the property's name should be the name of the instance property that it defines.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="items">
-<t>This should be a schema or an array of schemas. When this is an object/schema and the instance value is an array, all the items in the array must conform to this schema. When this is an array of schemas and the instance value is an array, each position in the instance array must conform to the schema in the corresponding position for this array. This called tuple typing. When tuple typing is used, additional items are allowed, disallowed, or constrained by the additionalProperties attribute using the same rules as extra properties for objects..</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="optional">
-<t>This indicates that the instance property in the instance object is optional. This is false by default.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="additionalProperties">
-<t>This provides a default property definition for all properties that are not explicitly defined in an object type definition. The value must be a schema. If false is provided, no additional properties are allowed, and the schema can not be extended. The default value is an empty schema which allows any value for additional properties.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="requires">
-<t>This indicates that if this property is present in the containing instance object, the property given by requires attribute must also be present in the containing instance object. The value
-of this property may be a string, indicating the require property name. Or the value may be a schema, in which case the containing instance must be valid by the schema if the property is present. For example if a object type definition is defined:</t>
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{ 
-  "state":
-  {
-    "optional":true
-  },
-  "town":
-  {
-    "requires":"state",
-    "optional":true
-  }
-}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-<t>An instance must include a state property if a town property is included. If a town property is not included, the state property is optional.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="minimum">
-<t>This indicates the minimum value for the instance property when the type of the instance value is a number.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="maximum">
-<t>This indicates the minimum value for the instance property when the type of the instance value is a number.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="minimumCanEqual">
-<t>If the minimum is defined, this indicates whether or not the instance property value can equal the minimum.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="maximumCanEqual">
-<t>If the maximum is defined, this indicates whether or not the instance property value can equal the maximum.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="minItems">
-<t>This indicates the minimum number of values in an array when an array is the instance value.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="maxItems">
-<t>This indicates the maximum number of values in an array when an array is the instance value.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="pattern">
-<t>When the instance value is a string, this provides a regular expression that a instance string value should match in order to be valid. Regular expressions should follow the regular expression specification from ECMA 262/Perl 5</t></section>
-<section title="maxLength">
-<t>When the instance value is a string, this indicates maximum length of the string.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="minLength">
-<t>When the instance value is a string, this indicates minimum length of the string.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="enum">
-<t>This provides an enumeration of possible values that are valid for the instance property. This should be an array, and each item in the array represents a possible value for the instance value. If "enum" is included, the instance value must be one of the values in enum array in order for the schema to be valid.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="title">
-<t>This provides a short description of the instance property. The value must be a string.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="description">
-<t>This provides a full description of the of purpose the instance property. The value must be a string.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="format"><t>This property indicates the type of data, content type, or microformat to be expected in the instance property values. A format attribute may be one of the values listed below, and if so, should adhere to the semantics describing for the format. A format should only be used give meaning to primitive types (string, integer, number, or boolean). Validators are not required to validate that the instance values conform to a format. The following formats are defined:</t>
-<list>
-<t>Any valid MIME media type may be used as a format value, in which case the instance property value must be a string, representing the contents of the MIME file. 
-</t><t>date-time - This should be a date in ISO 8601 format of YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ssZ in UTC time. This is the recommended form of date/timestamp.
-</t><t>date - This should be a date in the format of YYYY-MM-DD. It is recommended that you use the "date-time" format instead of "date" unless you need to transfer only the date part.
-</t><t>time - This should be a time in the format of hh:mm:ss. It is recommended that you use the "date-time" format instead of "time" unless you need to transfer only the time part.
-</t><t>utc-millisec - This should be the difference, measured in milliseconds, between the specified time and midnight, January 1, 1970 UTC. The value should be a number (integer or float).
-</t><t>regex - A regular expression.
-</t><t>color - This is a CSS color (like "#FF0000" or "red").
-</t><t>style - This is a CSS style definition (like "color: red; background-color:#FFF").
-</t><t>phone - This should be a phone number (format may follow E.123).
-</t><t>uri - This value should be a URI..
-</t><t>email - This should be an email address.
-</t><t>ip-address - This should be an ip version 4 address.
-</t><t>ipv6 - This should be an ip version 6 address.</t>
-<t>street-address - This should be a street address.</t> 
-<t>locality - This should be a city or town.</t> 
-<t>region - This should be a region (a state in the US, province in Canada, etc.)</t> 
-<t>postal-code - This should be a postal code (AKA zip code).</t> 
-<t>country - This should be the name of a country.</t> 
-<t>Additional custom formats may be defined with a URL to a definition of the format.</t>
-</list>
-</section> 
-<section title="contentEncoding"><t>
-If the instance property value is a string, this indicates that the string should be interpreted as binary data and decoded using the encoding named by this schema property. RFC 2045, Sec 6.1 lists possible values.
-</t>
-</section>
-<section title="default">
-<t>This indicates the default for the instance property.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="maxDecimal">
-<t>This indicates the maximum number of decimal places in a floating point number. By default there is no maximum.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="disallow">
-<t>This attribute may take the same values as the "type" attribute, however if the instance matches the type or if this value is an array and the instance matches any type or schema in the array, than this instance is not valid.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="extends">
-<t>The value of this property should be another schema which will provide a base schema which the current schema will inherit from. The inheritance rules are such that any instance that is valid according to the current schema must be valid according to the referenced schema. This may also be an array, in which case, the instance must be valid for all the schemas in the array.</t>
-</section> 
-    </section>
-<section title="Hyper Schema">
-      <t>This section defines hypermedia definitions of JSON schema. 
-      The following attributes are specified in addition to those
-attributes that already provided by JSON schema with the specific
-purpose of informing user agents of relations between resources based
-on JSON data. Just as with JSON
-schema attributes, all the attributes in hyper-schema are optional.
-Therefore an empty object is a valid (non-informative) schema, and
-essentially describes plain JSON (no constraints on the structures).
-Addition of attributes provides additive information for user agents.</t>
-<section title="links">
-<t>
-The value of the links property should be an array, where each item 
-in the array is a link description object which describes the link
-relations of the instances.
-</t>
-<section title="Link Description Object">
-<t>
-A link description object is used to describe the link relations 
-of instances of a schema.
-</t>
-<section title="href">
-    <t>
-    The value of the "href" link description property
-indicates the target URI of the related resource. The value
-of the instance property should be resolved as a URI-Reference per [RFC3986]
-and may be a relative URI. The base URI to be used for relative resolution
-should be the URI used to retrieve the instance object (not the schema). 
-Also, the URI may be parametrized by the property values of the instance 
-object.
-</t>
-<t>
-Instance property values should be substituted into the URIs where
-matching braces ('{', '}') are found surrounding zero or more characters,
-creating an expanded URI. Instance property value substitutions are resolved
-by using the text between the braces to denote the property name
-from the instance to get the value to substitute. For example,
-if an href value is defined:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-http://somesite.com/{id}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-Then it would be resolved by replace the value of the "id" property value from
-the instance object. If the value of the "id" property was "45", the expanded
-URI would be:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-http://somesite.com/45
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-If matching braces are found with the string "-this" (no quotes) between the braces, than the 
-actual instance value should be used to replace the braces, rather than a property value.
-This should only be used in situations where the instance is a scalar (string, 
-boolean, or number), and not for objects or arrays.
-</t>
-</section>
-<section title="rel">
-<t>
-The value of the "rel" property indicates the name of the 
-relation to the target resource. The relation to the target should be interpreted as specifically from the instance object that the schema (or sub-schema) applies to, not just the top level resource that contains the object within its hierarchy. If a resource JSON representation contains a sub object with a property interpreted as a link, that sub-object holds the relation with the target. A relation to target from the top level resource must be indicated with the schema describing the top level JSON representation.
-</t>
-<t>
-Relationship definitions SHOULD NOT be media type dependent, and users are encouraged to utilize existing accepted relation definitions, including those in existing relation registries (see &rfc4287). However, we define these relation here for clarity of normative interpretation within the context of JSON hyper schema defined relations:
-<list>
-<t>
-self - If the relation value is "self", when this property is encountered in
-the instance object, the object represents a resource and the instance object is
-treated as a full representation of the target resource identified by
-the specified URI.
-</t>
-<t>
-full - This indicates that the target of the link is the full representation for the instance object. The object that contains this link may not be the full representation.
-</t>
-<t>
-describedby - This indicates the target of the link is the schema for the instance object. This may be used to specifically denote the schemas of objects within a JSON object hierarchy, facilitating polymorphic type data structures.
-</t>
-<t>
-The following relations are applicable for schemas (the schema as the "from" resource in the relation).
-</t>
-<t>
-instances - This indicates the target resource that represents collection of instances of a schema. 
-</t>
-<t>
-create - This indicates a target to use for creating new instances of a schema. This link definition SHOULD be a submission link with a non-safe method (like POST).
-</t>
-</list>
-For example, if a schema is defined:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{
-    "links": [
-    	{
-    		"rel": "self"
-    		"href": "{id}"
-    	},
-    	{
-    		"rel": "up"
-    		"href": "{upId}"
-    	},
-    	{
-    		"rel": "children"
-    		"href": "?upId={id}"
-    	}
-    ]
-}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-And if a collection of instance resource's JSON representation was
-retrieved:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-GET /Resource/
-
-[
-    {
-        "id": "thing",
-        "upId": "parent"
-    },
-    {
-        "id": "thing2",
-        "upId": "parent"
-    }
-]
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-
-This would indicate that for the first item in the collection, it's own
-(self) URI would resolve to "/Resource/thing" and the first item's "up"
-relation should be resolved to the resource at "/Resource/parent".
-The "children" collection would be located at "/Resource/?upId=thing".
-</t>
-</section>
-<section title="Submission Link Properties">
-<t>
-The following properties also apply to link definition objects, and 
-provide functionality analogous to HTML forms, in providing a 
-means for submitting extra (often user supplied) information to send to a server.
-</t>
-<section title="method">
-<t>
-
-This indicates which method should be used to access the target resource. 
-In an HTTP environment, this would be "GET" or "POST" (other HTTP methods 
-such as "PUT" and "DELETE" have semantics that are clearly implied by 
-accessed resources, and do not need to be defined here). 
-This defaults to "GET".
-</t>
-</section>
-
-<section title="enctype">
-<t>
-If present, this property indicates a query media type format that the server
-supports for querying or posting to the collection of instances at the target 
-resource. The query can be 
-suffixed to the target URI to query the collection with
-property-based constraints on the resources that SHOULD be returned from
-the server or used to post data to the resource (depending on the method). 
-For example, with the following schema:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{
- "links":[
-    {
-      "enctype": "application/x-www-form-urlencoded",
-      "method": "GET",
-      "href": "/Product/",
-      "properties":{
-         "name":{"description":"name of the product"}
-      }
-    }
-  ]
-}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-This indicates that the client can query the server for instances that
-have a specific name:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-/Product/?name=Slinky
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-
-If no enctype or method is specified, only the single URI specified by 
-the href property is defined. If the method is POST, application/json is 
-the default media type.
-</t>
-</section>
-<section title="properties">
-<t>
-This is inherited from the base JSON schema definition, and can follow the 
-same structure, but its meaning should be used to define the acceptable 
-property names and values for the action (whether it be for the GET query 
-or POST body). If properties are omitted, and this form is the child of a 
-schema, the properties from the parent schema should be used as the basis 
-for the form action.
-</t>
-</section>
-</section>
-</section>
-</section>
-    <section title="fragmentResolution">
-    <t>This property indicates the fragment resolution protocol to use for
-resolving fragment identifiers in URIs within the instance
-representations. This applies to the instance object URIs and all
-children of the instance object's URIs. The default fragment resolution
-protocol is "dot-delimited", which is defined below. Other fragment
-resolution protocols may be used, but are not defined in this
-document.
-
-</t>
-<t>
-The fragment identifier is based on RFC 2396 Sec 5, and defines the
-mechanism for resolving references to entities within a document.
-</t>
-<section title="dot-delimited fragment resolution">
-<t>With the dot-delimited fragment resolution protocol, the fragment
-identifier is interpreted as a series of property reference tokens that
-are delimited by the "." character (\x2E). Each property reference token
-is a series of any legal URI component characters except the "." character. Each property
-reference token should be interpreted, starting from the beginning of
-the fragment identifier, as a path reference in the target JSON
-structure. The final target value of the fragment can be determined by
-starting with the root of the JSON structure from the representation of
-the resource identified by the pre-fragment URI. If the target is a JSON
-object, than the new target is the value of the property with the name
-identified by the next property reference token in the fragment. If the
-target is a JSON array, than the target is determined by finding the
-item in array the array with the index defined by the next property
-reference token (which MUST be a number). The target is successively
-updated for each property reference token, until the entire fragment has
-been traversed. 
-</t>
-<t>
-Property names SHOULD be URI-encoded. In particular, any "." in a 
-property name MUST be encoded to avoid being interpreted as a property 
-delimiter.
-</t>
-<t>
-For example, for the following JSON representation:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{
-   "foo":{
-      "anArray":[
-        {"prop":44}
-      ],
-      "another prop":{
-          "baz":"A string"
-      }
-   }
-}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-The following fragment identifiers would be resolved:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-fragment identifier    resolution
--------------------    ----------
-#                      self, the root of the resource itself
-#foo                   the object referred to by the foo property
-#foo.another prop      the object referred to by the "another prop"
-                       property of the object referred to by the 
-                       "foo" property
-#foo.another prop.baz  the string referred to by the value of "baz"
-                       property of the "another prop" property of 
-                       the object referred to by the "foo" property
-#foo.anArray.0         the first object in the "anArray" array
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-</t>
-</section>
-
-
-</section>
-
-    <section title="root">
-    <t>This attribute indicates that the value of the instance property value
-SHOULD be treated as the root or the body of the representation for the
-purposes of user agent interaction and fragment resolution (all other
-properties of the instance objects are can be regarded as meta-data
-descriptions for the data).
-
-</t>
-
-</section>
-<section title="readonly">
-<t>This indicates that the instance property should not be changed. Attempts by a user agent to modify the value of this property are expected to be rejected by a server.</t>
-</section> 
-
-    <section title="pathStart">
-    <t>This property value is a URI-Reference that indicates the URI that all 
-the URIs for the instances of the schema should start with. When 
-multiple schemas have been referenced for an instance, the user agent 
-can determine if this schema is applicable for a particular instance by 
-determining if URI of the instance begins with the pathStart's referenced 
-URI. pathStart MUST be resolved as per [RFC3986] section 5. If the URI of 
-the instance does not start with URI indicated by pathStart, or if another 
-schema specifies a starting URI that is longer and also matches the 
-instance, this schema should not be applied to the instance. Any schema 
-that does not have a pathStart attribute should be considered applicable 
-to all the instances for which it is referenced.
-
-
-</t>
-
-
-</section>
-    <section title="mediaType">
-    <t>This indicates the media type of the instance representations that this schema is defining.
-</t>
-
-</section>
-
-    <section title="alternate">
-    <t>This is an array of JSON schema definitions that define any 
-    other schemas for alternate JSON-based representations
-    of the instance resources.
-</t>
-
-</section>
-
-
-</section>
-
-<section title="Security Considerations">
-<t>
-This specification is a sub-type of the JSON format, and 
-consequently the security considerations are generally the same as RFC
-4627. However, an additional issue is that when link relation of "self"
-is used to denote a full representation of an object, the user agent 
-SHOULD NOT consider the representation to be the authoritative representation
-of the resource denoted by the target URI if the target URI is not
-equivalent to or a sub-path of the the URI used to request the resource 
-representation which contains the target URI with the "self" link.
-For example, if a hyper schema was defined:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{
-  "links":[
-  	{
-  		"rel":"self",
-  		"href":"{id}"
-  	}
-  ]
-}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-And a resource was requested from somesite.com:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-GET /foo/
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-
-With a response of:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-Content-Type: application/json; describedby=/schema-for-this-data
-[
-  {"id":"bar", "name":"This representation can be safely treated \
-        as authoritative "},
-  {"id":"/baz", "name":"This representation should not be treated as \
-        authoritative the user agent should make request the resource\
-        from "/baz" to ensure it has the authoritative representation"},
-  {"id":"http://othersite.com/something", "name":"This representation\
-        should also not be treated as authoritative and the target\
-        resource representation should be retrieved for the\
-        authoritative representation"}
-]
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-</t>
-</section>
-<section title="IANA Considerations">
-<t>
-   The proposed MIME media type for JSON Schema is application/schema+json
-</t>
-<t>
-   Type name: application
-</t>
-<t>
-   Subtype name: schema+json
-</t>
-<t>
-   Required parameters: describedby
-   </t>
-   <t>
-   	The value of the describedby parameter should be a URI (relative or absolute) that 
-   	refers to the schema used to define the structure of this structure (the 
-   	meta-schema). Normally the value would be http://json-schema.org/hyper-schema,
-   	but it is allowable to use other schemas that extend the hyper schema's meta-
-   	schema.
-</t>
-<t>
-   Optional parameters: pretty
-   </t>
-   <t>
-   	The value of the pretty parameter may be true or false to indicate if additional
-   	whitespace has been included to make the JSON representation easier to read.
-</t>
-
-<section title="Registry of Link Relations">
-<t>
-This registry is maintained by IANA per RFC 4287 and this specification adds
-three values: "full", "create", "instances".  New
-   assignments are subject to IESG Approval, as outlined in [RFC5226].
-   Requests should be made by email to IANA, which will then forward the
-   request to the IESG, requesting approval.
-
-</t>
-</section>
-
-</section>
-  </middle>
-
-  <back>
-    <!-- References Section -->
-
-
-    <references title="Normative References">
-      &rfc3986;
-      &rfc2119;
-      &rfc4287;
-      &rfc3339;
-      &rfc2045;
-    </references>
-
-    <references title="Informative References">
-      &rfc4627;
-      &rfc2616;
-      &rfc5226;
-      &iddiscovery;
-      &uritemplate;
-      &linkheader;
-      &html401;
-    </references>
-
-    <!--
-<section anchor="appendix" title="Appendix A">
-	<t>You can add appendices just as regular sections, the only
-difference is that they go under "back" element, and get letters 
-instead of numbers</t>
-</section>
--->
-
-    <section title="Change Log ">
-          <t>-01</t>
-          <t>
-            <list style="symbols">
-              <t>Fixed category and updates from template</t>
-            </list>
-          </t>
-          <t>-00</t>
-          <t>
-            <list style="symbols">
-              <t>Initial draft</t>
-            </list>
-          </t>
-
-    </section>
-
-    <section title="Open Issues">
-      <t>Should we give a preference to MIME headers over Link headers (or only use one)?</t>
-      <t>Should we use "profile" as the media type parameter instead?</t>
-      <t>Should "root" be a MIME parameter instead of a schema attribute?</t>
-      <t>Should "format" be renamed to "mediaType" or "contentType" to reflect the usage MIME media types that are allowed.</t>
-      <t>I still do not like how dates are handled.</t>
-
-    </section>
-
-    <!--
-$Log: draft-zyp-json-schema.xml,v $
-Revision 0.1  2009/09/25 02:46:57  H73653
-*** empty log message ***
-	place for source control log here
-  -->
-  </back>
-</rfc>
diff --git a/draft-zyp-json-schema-01.xml b/draft-zyp-json-schema-01.xml
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..88e8d605
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-zyp-json-schema-01.xml
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+_includes/draft-01/jsonschema.xml
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-zyp-json-schema-02.xml b/draft-zyp-json-schema-02.xml
deleted file mode 100644
index 0e36d7b4..00000000
--- a/draft-zyp-json-schema-02.xml
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,931 +0,0 @@
-<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
-<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
-<!ENTITY rfc4627 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4627.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc3986 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3986.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2119 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc4287 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4287.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2616 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2616.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc3339 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3339.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2045 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2045.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc5226 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5226.xml">
-<!ENTITY iddiscovery SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.hammer-discovery.xml">
-<!ENTITY uritemplate SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.gregorio-uritemplate.xml">
-<!ENTITY linkheader SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.nottingham-http-link-header.xml">
-<!ENTITY html401 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml4/reference.W3C.REC-html401-19991224.xml">
-]>
-<?rfc toc="yes"?>
-<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
-<?rfc compact="yes"?>
-<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
-<?rfc strict="no"?>
-<?rfc rfcedstyle="yes"?>
-<rfc category="info" docName="draft-zyp-json-schema-02" year="2010" ipr="trust200902">
-  <front>
-    
-
-    <title abbrev="JSON Schema Media Type">A JSON Media Type for Describing the Structure and Meaning of JSON Documents</title>
-
-
-    <author fullname="Kris Zyp" initials="K" role="editor"
-            surname="Zyp">
-      <organization>SitePen (USA)</organization>
-
-      <address>
-        <postal>
-          <street>530 Lytton Avenue</street>
-
-          <city>Palo Alto, CA 94301</city>
-
-          <country>USA</country>
-        </postal>
-
-        <phone>+1 650 968 8787</phone>
-
-        <email>kris@sitepen.com</email>
-      </address>
-    </author>
-
-    <date year="2010" />
-
-    <workgroup>Internet Engineering Task Force</workgroup>
-
-    <keyword>JSON</keyword>
-
-    <keyword>Schema</keyword>
-
-    <keyword>Hyper Schema</keyword>
-
-    <keyword>Hypermedia</keyword>
-
-    <!--[TODO] add additional keywords here for IETF website search engine -->
-
-    <abstract>
-      <t>JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) Schema defines the media type application/schema+json, 
-      a JSON based format for defining 
-      the structure of JSON data. JSON Schema provides a contract for what JSON 
-      data is required for a given application and how to interact with it. JSON 
-      Schema is intended to define validation, documentation, hyperlink 
-      navigation, and interaction control of JSON data. </t>
-
-    </abstract>
-
-  </front>
-
-  <middle>
-    <section title="Introduction">
-      <t>JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) Schema is a JSON media type for defining 
-      the structure of JSON data. JSON Schema provides a contract for what JSON 
-      data is required for a given application and how to interact with it. JSON 
-      Schema is intended to define validation, documentation, hyperlink 
-      navigation, and interaction control of JSON data. </t>
-    </section>
-
-
-    <section title="Conventions">
-      <t><!-- The text in this section has been copied from the official boilerplate, 
-                  and should not be modified.-->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.</t>
-    </section>
-
-    <!-- ********************************************* -->
-
-    <section title="Overview">
-      <t>JSON Schema defines the media type application/schema+json for 
-      describing the structure of other
-      JSON documents. JSON Schema is JSON-based and includes facilities 
-      for describing the structure of JSON documents in terms of
-      allowable values, descriptions, and interpreting relations with other resources.</t>
-      
-      <t>JSON Schema format is organized into several separate definitions. The first 
-      definition is the core schema specification. This definition is primary 
-      concerned with describing a JSON structure and specifying valid elements
-      in the structure. The second definition is the Hyper Schema specification
-      which is intended define elements in a structure that can be interpreted as
-      hyperlinks.
-      Hyper Schema builds on JSON Schema to describe the hyperlink structure of 
-      other JSON documents. This allows user agents to be able to successfully navigate
-      JSON documents based on their schemas.</t>
-      
-      <t>
-      Cumulatively JSON Schema acts as a meta-document that can be used to define the required type and constraints on
-      property values, as well as define the meaning of the property values
-      for the purpose of describing a resource and determining hyperlinks
-      within the representation. </t>
-
-	<t>
-	An example JSON Schema that describes products might look like:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[	
-{
-  "name":"Product",
-  "properties":{
-    "id":{
-      "type":"number",
-      "description":"Product identifier"
-    },
-    "name":{
-      "description":"Name of the product",
-      "type":"string"
-    },
-    "price":{
-      "type": "number",
-      "minimum":0
-    },
-    "tags":{
-      "optional":true,
-      "type":"array",
-      "items":{
-         "type":"string"
-      }
-    }
-  },
-  "links":[
-    {
-      "rel":"full",
-      "href":"{id}"
-    },
-    {
-      "rel":"comments",
-      "href":"comments/?id={id}"
-    }
-  ]
-}
-]]></artwork></figure>
-This schema defines the properties of the instance JSON documents and 
-their required properties (id, name, and price) as well as an optional
-property (tags). This also defines the link relations of the instance
-JSON documents.
-	</t>
-    <section title="Terminology">
-      <t>For this specification, a schema will be used to denote a JSON Schema 
-      definition, and an instance refers to the JSON object or array that the schema 
-      will be describing and validating</t>
-
-      </section>
-	<section title="Design Considerations">
-	<t>
-	The JSON Schema media type does not attempt to dictate the structure of JSON
-	representations that contain data, but rather provides a separate format
-	for flexibly communicating how a JSON representation should be
-	interpreted and validated, such that user agents can properly understand
-	acceptable structures and extrapolate hyperlink information
-	with the JSON document. It is acknowledged that JSON documents come
-	in a variety of structures, and JSON is unique in that the structure
-	of stored data structures often prescribes a non-ambiguous definite
-	JSON representation. Attempting to force a specific structure is generally
-	not viable, and therefore JSON Schema allows for great flexibility
-	in the structure of JSON data that it describes.
-	</t>
-	<t>This specification is protocol agnostic.
-	The underlying protocol (such as HTTP) should sufficiently define the
-	semantics of the client-server interface, the retrieval of resource
-	representations linked to by JSON representations, and modification of 
-	those resources. The goal of this
-	format is to sufficiently describe JSON structures such that one can
-	utilize existing information available in existing JSON
-	representations from a large variety of services that leverage a representational state transfer
-	architecture using existing protocols.
-</t>
-	</section>
-    </section>
-    
-	<section title="Schema/Instance Association">
-	<t>
-	JSON Schema instances are correlated to their schema by the "describedby"
-	relation, where the schema is defined to be the target of the relation.
-	Instance representations may be of the application/json media type or
-	any other subtype. Consequently, dictating how an instance
-	representation should specify the relation to the schema is beyond the normative scope
-	of this document (since this document specifically defines the JSON
-	Schema media type, and no other), but it is recommended that instances
-	specify their schema so that user agents can interpret the instance
-	representation and messages may retain the self-descriptive
-	characteristic, avoiding the need for out-of-band information about
-	instance data. Two approaches are recommended for declaring the
-	relation to the schema that describes the meaning of a JSON instance's (or collection 
-	of instances) structure. A MIME type parameter named
-	"profile" or a Link header with a relation of "describedby" SHOULD be used:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[	
-Content-Type: application/json; 
-              profile=http://json.com/my-hyper-schema
-]]></artwork></figure>	
-	or if the content is being transferred by a protocol (such as HTTP) that
-	provides headers, a Link header can be used:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-Link: <http://json.com/my-hyper-schema>; rel="describedby"
-]]></artwork></figure>
-	Instances MAY specify multiple schemas, to indicate all the schemas that 
-	are applicable to the data. The instance data may have multiple schemas 
-	that it is defined by (the instance data should be valid for those schemas). 
-	Or if the document is a collection of instances, the collection may contain 
-	instances from different schemas. When collections contain heterogeneous 
-	instances, the pathStart attribute MAY be specified in the 
-	schema to disambiguate which schema should be applied for each item in the 
-collection.
-	</t>
-	<section title="Self-Descriptive Schema">
-	<t>
-	JSON Schemas are themselves instances for the schema 
-	schemas. A self-describing JSON Schema for the core JSON Schema can
-	be found at http://json-schema.org/schema and the hyper schema 
-	self-description can be found at: http://json-schema.org/hyper-schema. All schemas
-	used within a protocol with media type definitions
-	SHOULD include a MIME parameter that refers to the self-descriptive
-	hyper schema or another schema that extends this hyper schema:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[	
-Content-Type: application/json; 
-              profile=http://www.json-schema.org/hyper-schema
-]]></artwork></figure>
-	</t>
-	</section>
-	</section>
-	
-      <section title="Core Schema Definition">
-        <t>A JSON Schema is a JSON Object that defines various attributes 
-        of the instance and defines it's usage and valid values. A JSON 
-        Schema is a JSON Object with schema attribute properties. 
-        The following is the grammar of a JSON Schema:
-	</t>
-
-
-	<t>And an example JSON Schema definition could look like:</t>
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{"description":"A person",
- "type":"object",
-
- "properties":
-  {"name": {"type":"string"},
-   "age" : {"type":"integer",
-     "maximum":125}}
-}     
-	]]></artwork>
-	</figure>
-	
-	<t>A JSON Schema object may have any of the following properties, called schema
-	attributes (all attributes are optional):
-      </t>
-
-<section title="type">
-<t>
-<list><t>Union type definition - An array with two or more items which indicates a union of type definitions. Each item in the array may be a simple type definition or a schema. The instance value is valid if it is of the same type as one the type definitions in the array or if it is valid by one of the schemas in the array. For example to indicate that a string or number is a valid:
-{"type":["string","number"]}</t>
-<t>Simple type definition - A string indicating a primitive or simple type. The following are acceptable strings:
-
- 
-<list> 
-<t>string - Value must be a string.
-</t> 
-<t>number - Value must be a number, floating point numbers are allowed. </t> 
-<t>integer - Value must be an integer, no floating point numbers are allowed. This is a subset of the number type.</t> 
-<t>boolean - Value must be a boolean. </t> 
-<t>object - Value must be an object.</t> 
-<t>array - Value must be an array.
-</t> 
-<t>null - Value must be null. Note this is mainly for purpose of being able use union types to define nullability. </t> 
-<t>any - Value may be of any type including null.
-If the property is not defined or is not in this list, than any type of value is acceptable. Other type values may be used for custom purposes, but minimal validators of the specification implementation can allow any instance value on unknown type values.</t> 
-</list>
-</t>
-</list>
-</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="properties">
-<t>This should be an object type definition, which is an object with property definitions that correspond to instance object properties. When the instance value is an object, the property values of the instance object must conform to the property definitions in this object. In this object, each property definition's value should be a schema, and the property's name should be the name of the instance property that it defines.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="items">
-<t>This should be a schema or an array of schemas. When this is an object/schema and the instance value is an array, all the items in the array must conform to this schema. When this is an array of schemas and the instance value is an array, each position in the instance array must conform to the schema in the corresponding position for this array. This called tuple typing. When tuple typing is used, additional items are allowed, disallowed, or constrained by the additionalProperties attribute using the same rules as extra properties for objects. The default value is an empty schema which allows any value for items in the instance array.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="optional">
-<t>This indicates that the instance property in the instance object is optional. This is false by default.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="additionalProperties">
-<t>This provides a default property definition for all properties that are not explicitly defined in an object type definition. The value must be a schema. If false is provided, no additional properties are allowed, and the schema can not be extended. The default value is an empty schema which allows any value for additional properties.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="requires">
-<t>This indicates that if this property is present in the containing instance object, the property given by requires attribute must also be present in the containing instance object. The value
-of this property may be a string, indicating the require property name. Or the value may be a schema, in which case the containing instance must be valid by the schema if the property is present. For example if a object type definition is defined:</t>
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{ 
-  "state":
-  {
-    "optional":true
-  },
-  "town":
-  {
-    "requires":"state",
-    "optional":true
-  }
-}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-<t>An instance must include a state property if a town property is included. If a town property is not included, the state property is optional.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="minimum">
-<t>This indicates the minimum value for the instance property when the type of the instance value is a number.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="maximum">
-<t>This indicates the minimum value for the instance property when the type of the instance value is a number.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="minimumCanEqual">
-<t>If the minimum is defined, this indicates whether or not the instance property value can equal the minimum.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="maximumCanEqual">
-<t>If the maximum is defined, this indicates whether or not the instance property value can equal the maximum.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="minItems">
-<t>This indicates the minimum number of values in an array when an array is the instance value.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="maxItems">
-<t>This indicates the maximum number of values in an array when an array is the instance value.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="uniqueItems">
-<t>This indicates that all the items in an array must be unique (no two identical values) within that array when an array is the instance value.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="pattern">
-<t>When the instance value is a string, this provides a regular expression that a instance string value should match in order to be valid. Regular expressions should follow the regular expression specification from ECMA 262/Perl 5</t></section>
-<section title="maxLength">
-<t>When the instance value is a string, this indicates maximum length of the string.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="minLength">
-<t>When the instance value is a string, this indicates minimum length of the string.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="enum">
-<t>This provides an enumeration of possible values that are valid for the instance property. This should be an array, and each item in the array represents a possible value for the instance value. If "enum" is included, the instance value must be one of the values in enum array in order for the schema to be valid.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="title">
-<t>This provides a short description of the instance property. The value must be a string.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="description">
-<t>This provides a full description of the of purpose the instance property. The value must be a string.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="format"><t>This property indicates the type of data, content type, or microformat to be expected in the instance property values. A format attribute may be one of the values listed below, and if so, should adhere to the semantics describing for the format. A format should only be used give meaning to primitive types (string, integer, number, or boolean). Validators are not required to validate that the instance values conform to a format. The following formats are defined:</t>
-<list>
-<t>Any valid MIME media type may be used as a format value, in which case the instance property value must be a string, representing the contents of the MIME file. 
-</t><t>date-time - This should be a date in ISO 8601 format of YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ssZ in UTC time. This is the recommended form of date/timestamp.
-</t><t>date - This should be a date in the format of YYYY-MM-DD. It is recommended that you use the "date-time" format instead of "date" unless you need to transfer only the date part.
-</t><t>time - This should be a time in the format of hh:mm:ss. It is recommended that you use the "date-time" format instead of "time" unless you need to transfer only the time part.
-</t><t>utc-millisec - This should be the difference, measured in milliseconds, between the specified time and midnight, January 1, 1970 UTC. The value should be a number (integer or float).
-</t><t>regex - A regular expression.
-</t><t>color - This is a CSS color (like "#FF0000" or "red").
-</t><t>style - This is a CSS style definition (like "color: red; background-color:#FFF").
-</t><t>phone - This should be a phone number (format may follow E.123).
-</t><t>uri - This value should be a URI..
-</t><t>email - This should be an email address.
-</t><t>ip-address - This should be an ip version 4 address.
-</t><t>ipv6 - This should be an ip version 6 address.</t>
-<t>street-address - This should be a street address.</t> 
-<t>locality - This should be a city or town.</t> 
-<t>region - This should be a region (a state in the US, province in Canada, etc.)</t> 
-<t>postal-code - This should be a postal code (AKA zip code).</t> 
-<t>country - This should be the name of a country.</t> 
-<t>Additional custom formats may be defined with a URL to a definition of the format.</t>
-</list>
-</section> 
-<section title="contentEncoding"><t>
-If the instance property value is a string, this indicates that the string should be interpreted as binary data and decoded using the encoding named by this schema property. RFC 2045, Sec 6.1 lists possible values.
-</t>
-</section>
-<section title="default">
-<t>This indicates the default for the instance property.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="divisibleBy">
-<t>This indicates that the instance property value must be divisible by the given schema value when the instance property value is a number.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="disallow">
-<t>This attribute may take the same values as the "type" attribute, however if the instance matches the type or if this value is an array and the instance matches any type or schema in the array, than this instance is not valid.</t>
-</section> 
-<section title="extends">
-<t>The value of this property should be another schema which will provide a base schema which the current schema will inherit from. The inheritance rules are such that any instance that is valid according to the current schema must be valid according to the referenced schema. This may also be an array, in which case, the instance must be valid for all the schemas in the array.</t>
-</section> 
-    </section>
-<section title="Hyper Schema">
-      <t>This section defines hypermedia definitions of JSON schema. 
-      The following attributes are specified in addition to those
-attributes that already provided by JSON schema with the specific
-purpose of informing user agents of relations between resources based
-on JSON data. Just as with JSON
-schema attributes, all the attributes in hyper-schema are optional.
-Therefore an empty object is a valid (non-informative) schema, and
-essentially describes plain JSON (no constraints on the structures).
-Addition of attributes provides additive information for user agents.</t>
-<section title="links">
-<t>
-The value of the links property should be an array, where each item 
-in the array is a link description object which describes the link
-relations of the instances.
-</t>
-<section title="Link Description Object">
-<t>
-A link description object is used to describe the link relations. In 
-the context of a schema, it defines the link relations of the 
-instances of the schema, and can be parameterized by the instance
-values. The link description format can be used on its own in
-regular (non-schema documents), and use of this format can
-be declared by referencing the normative link description
-schema as the the schema for the data structure that uses the 
-links. The URI of the normative link description schema is: http://json-schema.org/links.
-</t>
-<section title="href">
-    <t>
-    The value of the "href" link description property
-indicates the target URI of the related resource. The value
-of the instance property should be resolved as a URI-Reference per [RFC3986]
-and may be a relative URI. The base URI to be used for relative resolution
-should be the URI used to retrieve the instance object (not the schema)
-when used in the context of a schema. 
-Also, the URI may be parametrized by the property values of the instance 
-object.
-</t>
-<t>
-Instance property values should be substituted into the URIs where
-matching braces ('{', '}') are found surrounding zero or more characters,
-creating an expanded URI. Instance property value substitutions are resolved
-by using the text between the braces to denote the property name
-from the instance to get the value to substitute. For example,
-if an href value is defined:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-http://somesite.com/{id}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-Then it would be resolved by replace the value of the "id" property value from
-the instance object. If the value of the "id" property was "45", the expanded
-URI would be:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-http://somesite.com/45
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-If matching braces are found with the string "-this" (no quotes) between the braces, than the 
-actual instance value should be used to replace the braces, rather than a property value.
-This should only be used in situations where the instance is a scalar (string, 
-boolean, or number), and not for objects or arrays.
-</t>
-</section>
-<section title="rel">
-<t>
-The value of the "rel" property indicates the name of the 
-relation to the target resource. The relation to the target should be interpreted as specifically from the instance object that the schema (or sub-schema) applies to, not just the top level resource that contains the object within its hierarchy. If a resource JSON representation contains a sub object with a property interpreted as a link, that sub-object holds the relation with the target. A relation to target from the top level resource must be indicated with the schema describing the top level JSON representation.
-</t>
-<t>
-Relationship definitions SHOULD NOT be media type dependent, and users are encouraged to utilize existing accepted relation definitions, including those in existing relation registries (see &rfc4287). However, we define these relation here for clarity of normative interpretation within the context of JSON hyper schema defined relations:
-<list>
-<t>
-self - If the relation value is "self", when this property is encountered in
-the instance object, the object represents a resource and the instance object is
-treated as a full representation of the target resource identified by
-the specified URI.
-</t>
-<t>
-full - This indicates that the target of the link is the full representation for the instance object. The object that contains this link may not be the full representation.
-</t>
-<t>
-describedby - This indicates the target of the link is the schema for the instance object. This may be used to specifically denote the schemas of objects within a JSON object hierarchy, facilitating polymorphic type data structures.
-</t>
-<t>
-The following relations are applicable for schemas (the schema as the "from" resource in the relation).
-</t>
-<t>
-instances - This indicates the target resource that represents collection of instances of a schema. 
-</t>
-<t>
-create - This indicates a target to use for creating new instances of a schema. This link definition SHOULD be a submission link with a non-safe method (like POST).
-</t>
-</list>
-For example, if a schema is defined:
-      <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{
-    "links": [
-    	{
-    		"rel": "self"
-    		"href": "{id}"
-    	},
-    	{
-    		"rel": "up"
-    		"href": "{upId}"
-    	},
-    	{
-    		"rel": "children"
-    		"href": "?upId={id}"
-    	}
-    ]
-}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-And if a collection of instance resource's JSON representation was
-retrieved:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-GET /Resource/
-
-[
-    {
-        "id": "thing",
-        "upId": "parent"
-    },
-    {
-        "id": "thing2",
-        "upId": "parent"
-    }
-]
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-
-This would indicate that for the first item in the collection, it's own
-(self) URI would resolve to "/Resource/thing" and the first item's "up"
-relation should be resolved to the resource at "/Resource/parent".
-The "children" collection would be located at "/Resource/?upId=thing".
-</t>
-<section title="targetSchema">
-<t>This property value can be a schema that defines the expected 
-structure of the JSON representation of the target of the link.</t>
-</section>
-</section>
-<section title="Submission Link Properties">
-<t>
-The following properties also apply to link definition objects, and 
-provide functionality analogous to HTML forms, in providing a 
-means for submitting extra (often user supplied) information to send to a server.
-</t>
-<section title="method">
-<t>
-
-This indicates which method should be used to access the target resource. 
-In an HTTP environment, this would be "GET" or "POST" (other HTTP methods 
-such as "PUT" and "DELETE" have semantics that are clearly implied by 
-accessed resources, and do not need to be defined here). 
-This defaults to "GET".
-</t>
-</section>
-
-<section title="enctype">
-<t>
-If present, this property indicates a query media type format that the server
-supports for querying or posting to the collection of instances at the target 
-resource. The query can be 
-suffixed to the target URI to query the collection with
-property-based constraints on the resources that SHOULD be returned from
-the server or used to post data to the resource (depending on the method). 
-For example, with the following schema:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{
- "links":[
-    {
-      "enctype": "application/x-www-form-urlencoded",
-      "method": "GET",
-      "href": "/Product/",
-      "properties":{
-         "name":{"description":"name of the product"}
-      }
-    }
-  ]
-}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-This indicates that the client can query the server for instances that
-have a specific name:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-/Product/?name=Slinky
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-
-If no enctype or method is specified, only the single URI specified by 
-the href property is defined. If the method is POST, application/json is 
-the default media type.
-</t>
-</section>
-<section title="properties">
-<t>
-This is inherited from the base JSON schema definition, and can follow the 
-same structure, but its meaning should be used to define the acceptable 
-property names and values for the action (whether it be for the GET query 
-or POST body). If properties are omitted, and this form is the child of a 
-schema, the properties from the parent schema should be used as the basis 
-for the form action.
-</t>
-</section>
-</section>
-</section>
-</section>
-    <section title="fragmentResolution">
-    <t>This property indicates the fragment resolution protocol to use for
-resolving fragment identifiers in URIs within the instance
-representations. This applies to the instance object URIs and all
-children of the instance object's URIs. The default fragment resolution
-protocol is "slash-delimited", which is defined below. Other fragment
-resolution protocols may be used, but are not defined in this
-document.
-
-</t>
-<t>
-The fragment identifier is based on RFC 2396 Sec 5, and defines the
-mechanism for resolving references to entities within a document.
-</t>
-<section title="dot-delimited fragment resolution">
-<t>With the dot-delimited fragment resolution protocol, the fragment
-identifier is interpreted as a series of property reference tokens that
-are delimited by the "." character (\x2E). Each property reference token
-is a series of any legal URI component characters except the "." character. Each property
-reference token should be interpreted, starting from the beginning of
-the fragment identifier, as a path reference in the target JSON
-structure. The final target value of the fragment can be determined by
-starting with the root of the JSON structure from the representation of
-the resource identified by the pre-fragment URI. If the target is a JSON
-object, than the new target is the value of the property with the name
-identified by the next property reference token in the fragment. If the
-target is a JSON array, than the target is determined by finding the
-item in array the array with the index defined by the next property
-reference token (which MUST be a number). The target is successively
-updated for each property reference token, until the entire fragment has
-been traversed. 
-</t>
-<t>
-Property names SHOULD be URI-encoded. In particular, any "." in a 
-property name MUST be encoded to avoid being interpreted as a property 
-delimiter.
-</t>
-<t>
-For example, for the following JSON representation:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{
-   "foo":{
-      "anArray":[
-        {"prop":44}
-      ],
-      "another prop":{
-          "baz":"A string"
-      }
-   }
-}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-The following fragment identifiers would be resolved:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-fragment identifier    resolution
--------------------    ----------
-#                      self, the root of the resource itself
-#foo                   the object referred to by the foo property
-#foo.another prop      the object referred to by the "another prop"
-                       property of the object referred to by the 
-                       "foo" property
-#foo.another prop.baz  the string referred to by the value of "baz"
-                       property of the "another prop" property of 
-                       the object referred to by the "foo" property
-#foo.anArray.0         the first object in the "anArray" array
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-</t>
-</section>
-<section title="slash-delimited fragment resolution">
-<t>The slash-delimited fragment resolution protocol is exactly the same as 
-dot-delimited fragment resolution protocol except that the "/" character 
-(\x2F) is used as the delimiter between property names (instead of ".").</t>
-</section>
-
-
-</section>
-
-    <section title="root">
-    <t>This attribute indicates that the value of the instance property value
-SHOULD be treated as the root or the body of the representation for the
-purposes of user agent interaction and fragment resolution (all other
-properties of the instance objects are can be regarded as meta-data
-descriptions for the data).
-
-</t>
-
-</section>
-<section title="readonly">
-<t>This indicates that the instance property should not be changed. Attempts by a user agent to modify the value of this property are expected to be rejected by a server.</t>
-</section> 
-
-    <section title="pathStart">
-    <t>This property value is a URI-Reference that indicates the URI that all 
-the URIs for the instances of the schema should start with. When 
-multiple schemas have been referenced for an instance, the user agent 
-can determine if this schema is applicable for a particular instance by 
-determining if URI of the instance begins with the pathStart's referenced 
-URI. pathStart MUST be resolved as per [RFC3986] section 5. If the URI of 
-the instance does not start with URI indicated by pathStart, or if another 
-schema specifies a starting URI that is longer and also matches the 
-instance, this schema should not be applied to the instance. Any schema 
-that does not have a pathStart attribute should be considered applicable 
-to all the instances for which it is referenced.
-
-
-</t>
-
-
-</section>
-    <section title="mediaType">
-    <t>This indicates the media type of the instance representations that this schema is defining.
-</t>
-
-</section>
-
-    <section title="alternate">
-    <t>This is an array of JSON schema definitions that define any 
-    other schemas for alternate JSON-based representations
-    of the instance resources.
-</t>
-
-</section>
-
-
-</section>
-
-<section title="Security Considerations">
-<t>
-This specification is a sub-type of the JSON format, and 
-consequently the security considerations are generally the same as RFC
-4627. However, an additional issue is that when link relation of "self"
-is used to denote a full representation of an object, the user agent 
-SHOULD NOT consider the representation to be the authoritative representation
-of the resource denoted by the target URI if the target URI is not
-equivalent to or a sub-path of the the URI used to request the resource 
-representation which contains the target URI with the "self" link.
-For example, if a hyper schema was defined:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-{
-  "links":[
-  	{
-  		"rel":"self",
-  		"href":"{id}"
-  	}
-  ]
-}
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-And a resource was requested from somesite.com:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-GET /foo/
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-
-With a response of:
-    <figure>
-        <artwork>
-        <![CDATA[
-Content-Type: application/json; profile=/schema-for-this-data
-[
-  {"id":"bar", "name":"This representation can be safely treated \
-        as authoritative "},
-  {"id":"/baz", "name":"This representation should not be treated as \
-        authoritative the user agent should make request the resource\
-        from "/baz" to ensure it has the authoritative representation"},
-  {"id":"http://othersite.com/something", "name":"This representation\
-        should also not be treated as authoritative and the target\
-        resource representation should be retrieved for the\
-        authoritative representation"}
-]
-]]></artwork>
-</figure>
-</t>
-</section>
-<section title="IANA Considerations">
-<t>
-   The proposed MIME media type for JSON Schema is application/schema+json
-</t>
-<t>
-   Type name: application
-</t>
-<t>
-   Subtype name: schema+json
-</t>
-<t>
-   Required parameters: profile
-   </t>
-   <t>
-   	The value of the profile parameter should be a URI (relative or absolute) that 
-   	refers to the schema used to define the structure of this structure (the 
-   	meta-schema). Normally the value would be http://json-schema.org/hyper-schema,
-   	but it is allowable to use other schemas that extend the hyper schema's meta-
-   	schema.
-</t>
-<t>
-   Optional parameters: pretty
-   </t>
-   <t>
-   	The value of the pretty parameter may be true or false to indicate if additional
-   	whitespace has been included to make the JSON representation easier to read.
-</t>
-
-<section title="Registry of Link Relations">
-<t>
-This registry is maintained by IANA per RFC 4287 and this specification adds
-three values: "full", "create", "instances".  New
-   assignments are subject to IESG Approval, as outlined in [RFC5226].
-   Requests should be made by email to IANA, which will then forward the
-   request to the IESG, requesting approval.
-
-</t>
-</section>
-
-</section>
-  </middle>
-
-  <back>
-    <!-- References Section -->
-
-
-    <references title="Normative References">
-      &rfc3986;
-      &rfc2119;
-      &rfc4287;
-      &rfc3339;
-      &rfc2045;
-    </references>
-
-    <references title="Informative References">
-      &rfc4627;
-      &rfc2616;
-      &rfc5226;
-      &iddiscovery;
-      &uritemplate;
-      &linkheader;
-      &html401;
-    </references>
-
-    <!--
-<section anchor="appendix" title="Appendix A">
-	<t>You can add appendices just as regular sections, the only
-difference is that they go under "back" element, and get letters 
-instead of numbers</t>
-</section>
--->
-
-    <section title="Change Log ">
-          <t>-02</t>
-          <t>
-            <list style="symbols">
-              <t>Replaced maxDecimal attribute with divisibleBy attribute</t>
-              <t>Added slash-delimited fragment resolution protocol and made it the default.</t>
-              <t>Added language about using links outside of schemas by referencing it's normative URI.</t>
-              <t>Added uniqueItems attribute</t>
-              <t>Added targetSchema attribute to link description object</t>
-              
-            </list>
-          </t>
-          <t>-01</t>
-          <t>
-            <list style="symbols">
-              <t>Fixed category and updates from template</t>
-            </list>
-          </t>
-          <t>-00</t>
-          <t>
-            <list style="symbols">
-              <t>Initial draft</t>
-            </list>
-          </t>
-
-    </section>
-
-    <section title="Open Issues">
-      <t>Should we give a preference to MIME headers over Link headers (or only use one)?</t>
-      <t>Should we use "profile" as the media type parameter instead?</t>
-      <t>Should "root" be a MIME parameter instead of a schema attribute?</t>
-      <t>Should "format" be renamed to "mediaType" or "contentType" to reflect the usage MIME media types that are allowed.</t>
-      <t>I still do not like how dates are handled.</t>
-      <t>Should "slash-delimited" or "dot-delimited" be the default fragment resolution protocol?</t>
-
-    </section>
-
-    <!--
-$Log: draft-zyp-json-schema.xml,v $
-Revision 0.1  2009/09/25 02:46:57  H73653
-*** empty log message ***
-	place for source control log here
-  -->
-  </back>
-</rfc>
diff --git a/draft-zyp-json-schema-02.xml b/draft-zyp-json-schema-02.xml
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..749e6e1a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-zyp-json-schema-02.xml
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+_includes/draft-02/jsonschema.xml
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-zyp-json-schema-03.xml b/draft-zyp-json-schema-03.xml
deleted file mode 100644
index c28f40dc..00000000
--- a/draft-zyp-json-schema-03.xml
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,1120 +0,0 @@
-<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
-<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
-<!ENTITY rfc4627 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4627.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc3986 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3986.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2119 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc4287 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4287.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2616 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2616.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc3339 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3339.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2045 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2045.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc5226 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5226.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2396 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2396.xml">
-<!ENTITY iddiscovery SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.hammer-discovery.xml">
-<!ENTITY uritemplate SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.gregorio-uritemplate.xml">
-<!ENTITY linkheader SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.nottingham-http-link-header.xml">
-<!ENTITY html401 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml4/reference.W3C.REC-html401-19991224.xml">
-<!ENTITY css21 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml4/reference.W3C.CR-CSS21-20070719.xml">
-]>
-<?rfc toc="yes"?>
-<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
-<?rfc compact="yes"?>
-<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
-<?rfc strict="no"?>
-<?rfc rfcedstyle="yes"?>
-<rfc category="info" docName="draft-zyp-json-schema-03" ipr="trust200902">
-	<front>
-		<title abbrev="JSON Schema Media Type">A JSON Media Type for Describing the Structure and Meaning of JSON Documents</title>
-		
-		<author fullname="Kris Zyp" initials="K" role="editor" surname="Zyp">
-			<organization>SitePen (USA)</organization>
-			<address>
-				<postal>
-					<street>530 Lytton Avenue</street>
-					<city>Palo Alto, CA 94301</city>
-					<country>USA</country>
-				</postal>
-				<phone>+1 650 968 8787</phone>
-				<email>kris@sitepen.com</email>
-			</address>
-		</author>
-		
-		<author fullname="Gary Court" initials="G" surname="Court">
-			<address>
-				<postal>
-					<street></street>
-					<city>Calgary, AB</city>
-					<country>Canada</country>
-				</postal>
-				<email>gary.court@gmail.com</email>
-			</address>
-		</author>
-		
-		<date year="2011" />
-		<workgroup>Internet Engineering Task Force</workgroup>
-		<keyword>JSON</keyword>
-		<keyword>Schema</keyword>
-		<keyword>JavaScript</keyword>
-		<keyword>Object</keyword>
-		<keyword>Notation</keyword>
-		<keyword>Hyper Schema</keyword>
-		<keyword>Hypermedia</keyword>
-		
-		<abstract>
-			<t>
-				JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) Schema defines the media type "application/schema+json", 
-				a JSON based format for defining 
-				the structure of JSON data. JSON Schema provides a contract for what JSON 
-				data is required for a given application and how to interact with it. JSON 
-				Schema is intended to define validation, documentation, hyperlink 
-				navigation, and interaction control of JSON data. 
-			</t>
-		</abstract>
-	</front>
-	
-	<middle>
-		<section title="Introduction">
-			<t>
-				JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) Schema is a JSON media type for defining 
-				the structure of JSON data. JSON Schema provides a contract for what JSON 
-				data is required for a given application and how to interact with it. JSON 
-				Schema is intended to define validation, documentation, hyperlink 
-				navigation, and interaction control of JSON data. 
-			</t>
-		</section>
-		
-		<section title="Conventions">
-			<t>
-				<!-- The text in this section has been copied from the official boilerplate, 
-				and should not be modified.-->
-				
-				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 <xref target="RFC2119">RFC 2119</xref>.
-			</t>
-		</section>
-		
-		<!-- ********************************************* -->
-		
-		<section title="Overview">
-			<t>
-				JSON Schema defines the media type "application/schema+json" for 
-				describing the structure of other
-				JSON documents. JSON Schema is JSON-based and includes facilities 
-				for describing the structure of JSON documents in terms of
-				allowable values, descriptions, and interpreting relations with other resources.
-			</t>
-			<t>
-				JSON Schema format is organized into several separate definitions. The first 
-				definition is the core schema specification. This definition is primary 
-				concerned with describing a JSON structure and specifying valid elements
-				in the structure. The second definition is the Hyper Schema specification
-				which is intended define elements in a structure that can be interpreted as
-				hyperlinks.
-				Hyper Schema builds on JSON Schema to describe the hyperlink structure of 
-				other JSON documents and elements of interaction. This allows user agents to be able to successfully navigate
-				JSON documents based on their schemas.
-			</t>
-			<t>
-				Cumulatively JSON Schema acts as a meta-document that can be used to define the required type and constraints on
-				property values, as well as define the meaning of the property values
-				for the purpose of describing a resource and determining hyperlinks
-				within the representation. 
-			</t>
-			<figure>
-				<preamble>An example JSON Schema that describes products might look like:</preamble>
-				<artwork>
-<![CDATA[	
-{
-	"title": "Product",
-	"properties": {
-		"id": {
-			"type": "number",
-			"description": "Product identifier",
-			"required": true
-		},
-		"name": {
-			"description": "Name of the product",
-			"type": "string",
-			"required": true
-		},
-		"price": {
-			"required": true,
-			"type": "number",
-			"minimum": 0,
-			"required": true
-		},
-		"tags": {
-			"type": "array",
-			"items": {
-				"type": "string"
-			}
-		}
-	},
-	"links": [{
-		"rel": "full",
-		"href": "{id}"
-	}, {
-		"rel": "comments",
-		"href": "comments/?id={id}"
-	}]
-}
-]]>
-				</artwork>
-				<postamble>
-					This schema defines the properties of the instance JSON documents, 
-					the required properties (id, name, and price), as well as an optional
-					property (tags). This also defines the link relations of the instance
-					JSON documents.
-				</postamble>
-			</figure>
-			
-			<section title="Terminology">
-				<t>
-					For this specification, <spanx style="strong">schema</spanx> will be used to denote a JSON Schema 
-					definition, and an <spanx style="strong">instance</spanx> refers to a JSON value that the schema 
-					will be describing and validating.
-				</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="Design Considerations">
-				<t>
-					The JSON Schema media type does not attempt to dictate the structure of JSON
-					representations that contain data, but rather provides a separate format
-					for flexibly communicating how a JSON representation should be
-					interpreted and validated, such that user agents can properly understand
-					acceptable structures and extrapolate hyperlink information
-					with the JSON document. It is acknowledged that JSON documents come
-					in a variety of structures, and JSON is unique in that the structure
-					of stored data structures often prescribes a non-ambiguous definite
-					JSON representation. Attempting to force a specific structure is generally
-					not viable, and therefore JSON Schema allows for a great flexibility
-					in the structure of the JSON data that it describes.
-				</t>
-				<t>
-					This specification is protocol agnostic.
-					The underlying protocol (such as HTTP) should sufficiently define the
-					semantics of the client-server interface, the retrieval of resource
-					representations linked to by JSON representations, and modification of 
-					those resources. The goal of this
-					format is to sufficiently describe JSON structures such that one can
-					utilize existing information available in existing JSON
-					representations from a large variety of services that leverage a representational state transfer
-					architecture using existing protocols.
-				</t>
-			</section>
-		</section>
-		
-		<section title="Schema/Instance Association">
-			<t>
-				JSON Schema instances are correlated to their schema by the "describedby"
-				relation, where the schema is defined to be the target of the relation.
-				Instance representations may be of the "application/json" media type or
-				any other subtype. Consequently, dictating how an instance
-				representation should specify the relation to the schema is beyond the normative scope
-				of this document (since this document specifically defines the JSON
-				Schema media type, and no other), but it is recommended that instances
-				specify their schema so that user agents can interpret the instance
-				representation and messages may retain the self-descriptive
-				characteristic, avoiding the need for out-of-band information about
-				instance data. Two approaches are recommended for declaring the
-				relation to the schema that describes the meaning of a JSON instance's (or collection 
-				of instances) structure. A MIME type parameter named
-				"profile" or a relation of "describedby" (which could be defined by a Link header) may be used:
-				
-				<figure>
-					<artwork>
-<![CDATA[	
-Content-Type: application/my-media-type+json;
-              profile=http://json.com/my-hyper-schema
-]]>
-					</artwork>
-				</figure>
-				
-				or if the content is being transferred by a protocol (such as HTTP) that
-				provides headers, a Link header can be used:
-				
-				<figure>
-					<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-Link: <http://json.com/my-hyper-schema>; rel="describedby"
-]]>
-					</artwork>
-				</figure>
-				
-				Instances MAY specify multiple schemas, to indicate all the schemas that 
-				are applicable to the data, and the data SHOULD be valid by all the schemas. 
-				The instance data MAY have multiple schemas 
-				that it is defined by (the instance data SHOULD be valid for those schemas). 
-				Or if the document is a collection of instances, the collection MAY contain 
-				instances from different schemas. When collections contain heterogeneous 
-				instances, the "pathStart" attribute MAY be specified in the 
-				schema to disambiguate which schema should be applied for each item in the 
-				collection. However, ultimately, the mechanism for referencing a schema is up to the
-				media type of the instance documents (if they choose to specify that schemas
-				can be referenced).
-			</t>
-			
-			<section title="Self-Descriptive Schema">
-				<t>
-					JSON Schemas can themselves be described using JSON Schemas. 
-					A self-describing JSON Schema for the core JSON Schema can
-					be found at <eref target="http://json-schema.org/schema">http://json-schema.org/schema</eref> for the latest version or 
-					<eref target="http://json-schema.org/draft-03/schema">http://json-schema.org/draft-03/schema</eref> for the draft-03 version. The hyper schema 
-					self-description can be found at <eref target="http://json-schema.org/hyper-schema">http://json-schema.org/hyper-schema</eref> 
-					or <eref target="http://json-schema.org/draft-03/hyper-schema">http://json-schema.org/draft-03/hyper-schema</eref>. All schemas
-					used within a protocol with media type definitions
-					SHOULD include a MIME parameter that refers to the self-descriptive
-					hyper schema or another schema that extends this hyper schema:
-					
-					<figure>
-						<artwork>
-<![CDATA[	
-Content-Type: application/json; 
-              profile=http://json-schema.org/draft-03/hyper-schema
-]]>
-						</artwork>
-					</figure>
-				</t>
-			</section>
-		</section>
-		
-		<section title="Core Schema Definition">
-			<t>
-				A JSON Schema is a JSON Object that defines various attributes 
-				(including usage and valid values) of a JSON value. JSON
-				Schema has recursive capabilities; there are a number of elements
-				in the structure that allow for nested JSON Schemas.
-			</t>
-			
-			<figure>
-				<preamble>An example JSON Schema definition could look like:</preamble>
-				<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-	"description": "A person",
-	"type": "object",
-
-	"properties": {
-		"name": {
-			"type": "string"
-		},
-		"age": {
-			"type": "integer",
-			"maximum": 125
-		}
-	}
-}
-]]>
-				</artwork>
-			</figure>
-			
-			<t>
-				A JSON Schema object may have any of the following properties, called schema
-				attributes (all attributes are optional):
-			</t>
-			
-			<section title="type">
-				<t>
-					This attribute defines what the primitive type or the schema of the instance MUST be in order to validate. 
-					This attribute can take one of two forms:
-
-					<list style="hanging">
-						<t hangText="Simple Types">
-							A string indicating a primitive or simple type. The following are acceptable string values:
-
-							<list style="hanging">
-								<t hangText="string">Value MUST be a string.</t>
-								<t hangText="number">Value MUST be a number, floating point numbers are allowed. </t>
-								<t hangText="integer">Value MUST be an integer, no floating point numbers are allowed. This is a subset of the number type.</t>
-								<t hangText="boolean">Value MUST be a boolean. </t>
-								<t hangText="object">Value MUST be an object.</t>
-								<t hangText="array">Value MUST be an array.</t>
-								<t hangText="null">Value MUST be null. Note this is mainly for purpose of being able use union types to define nullability. If this type is not included in a union, null values are not allowed (the primitives listed above do not allow nulls on their own).</t>
-								<t hangText="any">Value MAY be of any type including null.</t>
-							</list>
-							
-							If the property is not defined or is not in this list, then any type of value is acceptable. 
-							Other type values MAY be used for custom purposes, but minimal validators of the specification 
-							implementation can allow any instance value on unknown type values.
-						</t>
-						
-						<t hangText="Union Types">
-							An array of two or more simple type definitions. Each item in the array MUST be a simple type definition or a schema.
-							The instance value is valid if it is of the same type as one of the simple type definitions, or valid by one of the schemas, in the array. 
-						</t>
-					</list>
-				</t>
-				
-				<figure>
-					<preamble>For example, a schema that defines if an instance can be a string or a number would be:</preamble>
-					<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-	"type": ["string", "number"]
-}
-]]></artwork>
-				</figure>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="properties" anchor="properties">
-				<t>This attribute is an object with property definitions that define the valid values of instance object property values. When the instance value is an object, the property values of the instance object MUST conform to the property definitions in this object. In this object, each property definition's value MUST be a schema, and the property's name MUST be the name of the instance property that it defines. The instance property value MUST be valid according to the schema from the property definition. Properties are considered unordered, the order of the instance properties MAY be in any order.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="patternProperties">
-				<t>This attribute is an object that defines the schema for a set of property names of an object instance. The name of each property of this attribute's object is a regular expression pattern in the ECMA 262/Perl 5 format, while the value is a schema. If the pattern matches the name of a property on the instance object, the value of the instance's property MUST be valid against the pattern name's schema value.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="additionalProperties" anchor="additionalProperties">
-				<t>This attribute defines a schema for all properties that are not explicitly defined in an object type definition. If specified, the value MUST be a schema or a boolean. If false is provided, no additional properties are allowed beyond the properties defined in the schema. The default value is an empty schema which allows any value for additional properties.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="items">
-				<t>This attribute defines the allowed items in an instance array, and MUST be a schema or an array of schemas. The default value is an empty schema which allows any value for items in the instance array.</t>
-				<t>When this attribute value is a schema and the instance value is an array, then all the items in the array MUST be valid according to the schema.</t>
-				<t>When this attribute value is an array of schemas and the instance value is an array, each position in the instance array MUST conform to the schema in the corresponding position for this array. This called tuple typing. When tuple typing is used, additional items are allowed, disallowed, or constrained by the <xref target="additionalItems">"additionalItems"</xref> attribute using the same rules as <xref target="additionalProperties">"additionalProperties"</xref> for objects.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="additionalItems" anchor="additionalItems">
-				<t>This provides a definition for additional items in an array instance when tuple definitions of the items is provided. This can be false to indicate additional items in the array are not allowed, or it can be a schema that defines the schema of the additional items.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="required">
-				<t>This attribute indicates if the instance must have a value, and not be undefined. This is false by default, making the instance optional.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="dependencies">
-				<t>This attribute is an object that defines the requirements of a property on an instance object. If an object instance has a property with the same name as a property in this attribute's object, then the instance must be valid against the attribute's property value (hereafter referred to as the "dependency value").</t>
-				<t>
-					The dependency value can take one of two forms:
-					
-					<list style="hanging">
-						<t hangText="Simple Dependency">
-							If the dependency value is a string, then the instance object MUST have a property with the same name as the dependency value.
-							If the dependency value is an array of strings, then the instance object MUST have a property with the same name as each string in the dependency value's array.
-						</t>
-						<t hangText="Schema Dependency">
-							If the dependency value is a schema, then the instance object MUST be valid against the schema.
-						</t>
-					</list>
-				</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="minimum">
-				<t>This attribute defines the minimum value of the instance property when the type of the instance value is a number.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="maximum">
-				<t>This attribute defines the maximum value of the instance property when the type of the instance value is a number.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="exclusiveMinimum">
-				<t>This attribute indicates if the value of the instance (if the instance is a number) can not equal the number defined by the "minimum" attribute. This is false by default, meaning the instance value can be greater then or equal to the minimum value.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="exclusiveMaximum">
-				<t>This attribute indicates if the value of the instance (if the instance is a number) can not equal the number defined by the "maximum" attribute. This is false by default, meaning the instance value can be less then or equal to the maximum value.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="minItems">
-				<t>This attribute defines the minimum number of values in an array when the array is the instance value.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="maxItems">
-				<t>This attribute defines the maximum number of values in an array when the array is the instance value.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="uniqueItems" anchor="uniqueItems">
-				<t>This attribute indicates that all items in an array instance MUST be unique (contains no two identical values).</t>
-				<t>
-					Two instance are consider equal if they are both of the same type and:
-					
-					<list>
-						<t>are null; or</t>
-						<t>are booleans/numbers/strings and have the same value; or</t>
-						<t>are arrays, contains the same number of items, and each item in the array is equal to the corresponding item in the other array; or</t>
-						<t>are objects, contains the same property names, and each property in the object is equal to the corresponding property in the other object.</t>
-					</list>
-				</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="pattern">
-				<t>When the instance value is a string, this provides a regular expression that a string instance MUST match in order to be valid. Regular expressions SHOULD follow the regular expression specification from ECMA 262/Perl 5</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="minLength">
-				<t>When the instance value is a string, this defines the minimum length of the string.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="maxLength">
-				<t>When the instance value is a string, this defines the maximum length of the string.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="enum">
-				<t>This provides an enumeration of all possible values that are valid for the instance property. This MUST be an array, and each item in the array represents a possible value for the instance value. If this attribute is defined, the instance value MUST be one of the values in the array in order for the schema to be valid. Comparison of enum values uses the same algorithm as defined in <xref target="uniqueItems">"uniqueItems"</xref>.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="default">
-				<t>This attribute defines the default value of the instance when the instance is undefined.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="title">
-				<t>This attribute is a string that provides a short description of the instance property.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="description">
-				<t>This attribute is a string that provides a full description of the of purpose the instance property.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="format">
-				<t>This property defines the type of data, content type, or microformat to be expected in the instance property values. A format attribute MAY be one of the values listed below, and if so, SHOULD adhere to the semantics describing for the format. A format SHOULD only be used to give meaning to primitive types (string, integer, number, or boolean). Validators MAY (but are not required to) validate that the instance values conform to a format.</t>
-				
-				<t>
-					The following formats are predefined:
-					
-					<list style="hanging">
-						<t hangText="date-time">This SHOULD be a date in ISO 8601 format of YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ssZ in UTC time. This is the recommended form of date/timestamp.</t>
-						<t hangText="date">This SHOULD be a date in the format of YYYY-MM-DD. It is recommended that you use the "date-time" format instead of "date" unless you need to transfer only the date part.</t>
-						<t hangText="time">This SHOULD be a time in the format of hh:mm:ss. It is recommended that you use the "date-time" format instead of "time" unless you need to transfer only the time part.</t>
-						<t hangText="utc-millisec">This SHOULD be the difference, measured in milliseconds, between the specified time and midnight, 00:00 of January 1, 1970 UTC. The value SHOULD be a number (integer or float).</t>
-						<t hangText="regex">A regular expression, following the regular expression specification from ECMA 262/Perl 5.</t>
-						<t hangText="color">This is a CSS color (like "#FF0000" or "red"), based on <xref target="W3C.CR-CSS21-20070719">CSS 2.1</xref>.</t>
-						<t hangText="style">This is a CSS style definition (like "color: red; background-color:#FFF"), based on <xref target="W3C.CR-CSS21-20070719">CSS 2.1</xref>.</t>
-						<t hangText="phone">This SHOULD be a phone number (format MAY follow E.123).</t>
-						<t hangText="uri">This value SHOULD be a URI.</t>
-						<t hangText="email">This SHOULD be an email address.</t>
-						<t hangText="ip-address">This SHOULD be an ip version 4 address.</t>
-						<t hangText="ipv6">This SHOULD be an ip version 6 address.</t>
-						<t hangText="host-name">This SHOULD be a host-name.</t>
-					</list>
-				</t>
-				
-				<t>Additional custom formats MAY be created. These custom formats MAY be expressed as an URI, and this URI MAY reference a schema of that format.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="divisibleBy">
-				<t>This attribute defines what value the number instance must be divisible by with no remainder (the result of the division must be an integer.) The value of this attribute SHOULD NOT be 0.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="disallow">
-				<t>This attribute takes the same values as the "type" attribute, however if the instance matches the type or if this value is an array and the instance matches any type or schema in the array, then this instance is not valid.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="extends">
-				<t>The value of this property MUST be another schema which will provide a base schema which the current schema will inherit from. The inheritance rules are such that any instance that is valid according to the current schema MUST be valid according to the referenced schema. This MAY also be an array, in which case, the instance MUST be valid for all the schemas in the array. A schema that extends another schema MAY define additional attributes, constrain existing attributes, or add other constraints.</t>
-				<t>
-					Conceptually, the behavior of extends can be seen as validating an
-					instance against all constraints in the extending schema as well as
-					the extended schema(s). More optimized implementations that merge
-					schemas are possible, but are not required. Some examples of using "extends":
-					
-					<figure>
-						<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-	"description": "An adult",
-	"properties": {
-		"age": {
-			"minimum": 21
-		}
-	},
-	"extends": {"$ref": "person"}
-}
-]]>
-						</artwork>
-					</figure>
-					
-					<figure>
-						<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-	"description": "Extended schema",
-	"properties": {
-		"deprecated": {
-			"type": "boolean"
-		}
-	},
-	"extends": {"$ref": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/schema"}
-}
-]]>
-						</artwork>
-					</figure>
-				</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="id">
-				<t>
-					This attribute defines the current URI of this schema (this attribute is
-					effectively a "self" link). This URI MAY be relative or absolute. If
-					the URI is relative it is resolved against the current URI of the parent
-					schema it is contained in. If this schema is not contained in any
-					parent schema, the current URI of the parent schema is held to be the
-					URI under which this schema was addressed. If id is missing, the current URI of a schema is
-					defined to be that of the parent schema. The current URI of the schema
-					is also used to construct relative references such as for $ref.
-				</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="$ref">
-				<t>
-					This attribute defines a URI of a schema that contains the full representation of this schema. 
-					When a validator encounters this attribute, it SHOULD replace the current schema with the schema referenced by the value's URI (if known and available) and re-validate the instance. 
-					This URI MAY be relative or absolute, and relative URIs SHOULD be resolved against the URI of the current schema.
-				</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="$schema">
-				<t>
-					This attribute defines a URI of a JSON Schema that is the schema of the current schema. 
-					When this attribute is defined, a validator SHOULD use the schema referenced by the value's URI (if known and available) when resolving <xref target="hyper-schema">Hyper Schema</xref><xref target="links">links</xref>.
-				</t>
-				
-				<t>
-					A validator MAY use this attribute's value to determine which version of JSON Schema the current schema is written in, and provide the appropriate validation features and behavior. 
-					Therefore, it is RECOMMENDED that all schema authors include this attribute in their schemas to prevent conflicts with future JSON Schema specification changes.
-				</t>
-			</section>
-		</section>
-		
-		<section title="Hyper Schema" anchor="hyper-schema">
-			<t>
-				The following attributes are specified in addition to those
-				attributes that already provided by the core schema with the specific
-				purpose of informing user agents of relations between resources based
-				on JSON data. Just as with JSON
-				schema attributes, all the attributes in hyper schemas are optional.
-				Therefore, an empty object is a valid (non-informative) schema, and
-				essentially describes plain JSON (no constraints on the structures).
-				Addition of attributes provides additive information for user agents.
-			</t>
-			
-			<section title="links" anchor="links">
-				<t>
-					The value of the links property MUST be an array, where each item 
-					in the array is a link description object which describes the link
-					relations of the instances.
-				</t>
-				
-				<section title="Link Description Object">
-					<t>
-						A link description object is used to describe link relations. In 
-						the context of a schema, it defines the link relations of the 
-						instances of the schema, and can be parameterized by the instance
-						values. The link description format can be used on its own in
-						regular (non-schema documents), and use of this format can
-						be declared by referencing the normative link description
-						schema as the the schema for the data structure that uses the 
-						links. The URI of the normative link description schema is: 
-						<eref target="http://json-schema.org/links">http://json-schema.org/links</eref> (latest version) or
-						<eref target="http://json-schema.org/draft-03/links">http://json-schema.org/draft-03/links</eref> (draft-03 version).
-					</t>
-					
-					<section title="href">
-						<t>
-							The value of the "href" link description property
-							indicates the target URI of the related resource. The value
-							of the instance property SHOULD be resolved as a URI-Reference per <xref target="RFC3986">RFC 3986</xref>
-							and MAY be a relative URI. The base URI to be used for relative resolution
-							SHOULD be the URI used to retrieve the instance object (not the schema)
-							when used within a schema. Also, when links are used within a schema, the URI 
-							SHOULD be parametrized by the property values of the instance 
-							object, if property values exist for the corresponding variables
-							in the template (otherwise they MAY be provided from alternate sources, like user input).
-						</t>
-						
-						<t>
-							Instance property values SHOULD be substituted into the URIs where
-							matching braces ('{', '}') are found surrounding zero or more characters,
-							creating an expanded URI. Instance property value substitutions are resolved
-							by using the text between the braces to denote the property name
-							from the instance to get the value to substitute. 
-							
-							<figure>
-								<preamble>For example, if an href value is defined:</preamble>
-								<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-http://somesite.com/{id}
-]]>
-								</artwork>
-								<postamble>Then it would be resolved by replace the value of the "id" property value from the instance object.</postamble>
-							</figure>
-							
-							<figure>
-								<preamble>If the value of the "id" property was "45", the expanded URI would be:</preamble>
-								<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-http://somesite.com/45
-]]>
-								</artwork>
-							</figure>
-							
-							If matching braces are found with the string "@" (no quotes) between the braces, then the 
-							actual instance value SHOULD be used to replace the braces, rather than a property value.
-							This should only be used in situations where the instance is a scalar (string, 
-							boolean, or number), and not for objects or arrays.
-						</t>
-					</section>
-					
-					<section title="rel">
-						<t>
-							The value of the "rel" property indicates the name of the 
-							relation to the target resource. The relation to the target SHOULD be interpreted as specifically from the instance object that the schema (or sub-schema) applies to, not just the top level resource that contains the object within its hierarchy. If a resource JSON representation contains a sub object with a property interpreted as a link, that sub-object holds the relation with the target. A relation to target from the top level resource MUST be indicated with the schema describing the top level JSON representation.
-						</t>
-						
-						<t>
-							Relationship definitions SHOULD NOT be media type dependent, and users are encouraged to utilize existing accepted relation definitions, including those in existing relation registries (see <xref target="RFC4287">RFC 4287</xref>). However, we define these relations here for clarity of normative interpretation within the context of JSON hyper schema defined relations:
-							
-							<list style="hanging">
-								<t hangText="self">
-									If the relation value is "self", when this property is encountered in
-									the instance object, the object represents a resource and the instance object is
-									treated as a full representation of the target resource identified by
-									the specified URI.
-								</t>
-								
-								<t hangText="full">
-									This indicates that the target of the link is the full representation for the instance object. The object that contains this link possibly may not be the full representation.
-								</t>
-								
-								<t hangText="describedby">
-									This indicates the target of the link is the schema for the instance object. This MAY be used to specifically denote the schemas of objects within a JSON object hierarchy, facilitating polymorphic type data structures.
-								</t>
-								
-								<t hangText="root">
-									This relation indicates that the target of the link
-									SHOULD be treated as the root or the body of the representation for the
-									purposes of user agent interaction or fragment resolution. All other
-									properties of the instance objects can be regarded as meta-data
-									descriptions for the data.
-								</t>
-							</list>
-						</t>
-						
-						<t>
-							The following relations are applicable for schemas (the schema as the "from" resource in the relation):
-
-							<list style="hanging">
-								<t hangText="instances">This indicates the target resource that represents collection of instances of a schema.</t>
-								<t hangText="create">This indicates a target to use for creating new instances of a schema. This link definition SHOULD be a submission link with a non-safe method (like POST).</t>
-							</list>
-						</t>
-						
-						<t>
-							<figure>
-								<preamble>For example, if a schema is defined:</preamble>
-								<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-	"links": [{
-		"rel": "self",
-		"href": "{id}"
-	}, {
-		"rel": "up",
-		"href": "{upId}"
-	}, {
-		"rel": "children",
-		"href": "?upId={id}"
-	}]
-}
-]]>
-								</artwork>
-							</figure>
-							
-							<figure>
-								<preamble>And if a collection of instance resource's JSON representation was retrieved:</preamble>
-								<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-GET /Resource/
-
-[{
-	"id": "thing",
-	"upId": "parent"
-}, {
-	"id": "thing2",
-	"upId": "parent"
-}]
-]]>
-								</artwork>
-							</figure>
-
-							This would indicate that for the first item in the collection, its own
-							(self) URI would resolve to "/Resource/thing" and the first item's "up"
-							relation SHOULD be resolved to the resource at "/Resource/parent".
-							The "children" collection would be located at "/Resource/?upId=thing".
-						</t>
-					</section>
-					
-					<section title="targetSchema">
-						<t>This property value is a schema that defines the expected structure of the JSON representation of the target of the link.</t>
-					</section>
-					
-					<section title="Submission Link Properties">
-						<t>
-							The following properties also apply to link definition objects, and 
-							provide functionality analogous to HTML forms, in providing a 
-							means for submitting extra (often user supplied) information to send to a server.
-						</t>
-						
-						<section title="method">
-							<t>
-								This attribute defines which method can be used to access the target resource. 
-								In an HTTP environment, this would be "GET" or "POST" (other HTTP methods 
-								such as "PUT" and "DELETE" have semantics that are clearly implied by 
-								accessed resources, and do not need to be defined here). 
-								This defaults to "GET".
-							</t>
-						</section>
-						
-						<section title="enctype">
-							<t>
-								If present, this property indicates a query media type format that the server
-								supports for querying or posting to the collection of instances at the target 
-								resource. The query can be 
-								suffixed to the target URI to query the collection with
-								property-based constraints on the resources that SHOULD be returned from
-								the server or used to post data to the resource (depending on the method).
-								
-								<figure>
-									<preamble>For example, with the following schema:</preamble>
-									<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-	"links": [{
-		"enctype": "application/x-www-form-urlencoded",
-		"method": "GET",
-		"href": "/Product/",
-		"properties": {
-			"name": {
-				"description": "name of the product"
-			}
-		}
-	}]
-}
-]]>
-									</artwork>
-									<postamble>This indicates that the client can query the server for instances that have a specific name.</postamble>
-								</figure>
-								
-								<figure>
-									<preamble>For example:</preamble>
-									<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-/Product/?name=Slinky
-]]>
-									</artwork>
-								</figure>
-
-								If no enctype or method is specified, only the single URI specified by 
-								the href property is defined. If the method is POST, "application/json" is 
-								the default media type.
-							</t>
-						</section>
-						
-						<section title="schema">
-							<t>
-								This attribute contains a schema which defines the acceptable structure of the submitted
-								request (for a GET request, this schema would define the properties for the query string 
-								and for a POST request, this would define the body).
-							</t>
-						</section>
-					</section>
-				</section>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="fragmentResolution">
-				<t>
-					This property indicates the fragment resolution protocol to use for
-					resolving fragment identifiers in URIs within the instance
-					representations. This applies to the instance object URIs and all
-					children of the instance object's URIs. The default fragment resolution
-					protocol is "slash-delimited", which is defined below. Other fragment
-					resolution protocols MAY be used, but are not defined in this document.
-				</t>
-				
-				<t>
-					The fragment identifier is based on <xref target="RFC2396">RFC 2396, Sec 5</xref>, and defines the
-					mechanism for resolving references to entities within a document.
-				</t>
-				
-				<section title="slash-delimited fragment resolution">
-					<t>
-						With the slash-delimited fragment resolution protocol, the fragment
-						identifier is interpreted as a series of property reference tokens that start with and
-						are delimited by the "/" character (\x2F). Each property reference token
-						is a series of unreserved or escaped URI characters. Each property
-						reference token SHOULD be interpreted, starting from the beginning of
-						the fragment identifier, as a path reference in the target JSON
-						structure. The final target value of the fragment can be determined by
-						starting with the root of the JSON structure from the representation of
-						the resource identified by the pre-fragment URI. If the target is a JSON
-						object, then the new target is the value of the property with the name
-						identified by the next property reference token in the fragment. If the
-						target is a JSON array, then the target is determined by finding the
-						item in array the array with the index defined by the next property
-						reference token (which MUST be a number). The target is successively
-						updated for each property reference token, until the entire fragment has
-						been traversed. 
-					</t>
-					
-					<t>
-						Property names SHOULD be URI-encoded. In particular, any "/" in a 
-						property name MUST be encoded to avoid being interpreted as a property 
-						delimiter.
-					</t>
-					
-					<t>
-						<figure>
-							<preamble>For example, for the following JSON representation:</preamble>
-							<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-	"foo": {
-		"anArray": [{
-			"prop": 44
-		}],
-		"another prop": {
-			"baz": "A string"
-		}
-	}
-}
-]]>
-							</artwork>
-						</figure>
-						
-						<figure>
-							<preamble>The following fragment identifiers would be resolved:</preamble>
-							<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-fragment identifier      resolution
--------------------      ----------
-#                        self, the root of the resource itself
-#/foo                    the object referred to by the foo property
-#/foo/another%20prop     the object referred to by the "another prop"
-                         property of the object referred to by the 
-                         "foo" property
-#/foo/another%20prop/baz the string referred to by the value of "baz"
-                         property of the "another prop" property of 
-                         the object referred to by the "foo" property
-#/foo/anArray/0          the first object in the "anArray" array
-]]>
-							</artwork>
-						</figure>
-					</t>
-				</section>
-				
-				<section title="dot-delimited fragment resolution">
-					<t>
-						The dot-delimited fragment resolution protocol is the same as 
-						slash-delimited fragment resolution protocol except that the "." character 
-						(\x2E) is used as the delimiter between property names (instead of "/") and 
-						the path does not need to start with a ".". For example, #.foo and #foo are a valid fragment
-						identifiers for referencing the value of the foo propery.
-					</t>
-				</section>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="readonly">
-				<t>This attribute indicates that the instance property SHOULD NOT be changed. Attempts by a user agent to modify the value of this property are expected to be rejected by a server.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="contentEncoding">
-				<t>If the instance property value is a string, this attribute defines that the string SHOULD be interpreted as binary data and decoded using the encoding named by this schema property. <xref target="RFC2045">RFC 2045, Sec 6.1</xref> lists the possible values for this property.</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="pathStart">
-				<t>
-					This attribute is a URI that defines what the instance's URI MUST start with in order to validate. 
-					The value of the "pathStart" attribute MUST be resolved as per <xref target="RFC3986">RFC 3986, Sec 5</xref>, 
-					and is relative to the instance's URI.
-				</t>
-				
-				<t>
-					When multiple schemas have been referenced for an instance, the user agent 
-					can determine if this schema is applicable for a particular instance by 
-					determining if the URI of the instance begins with the the value of the "pathStart"
-					attribute. If the URI of the instance does not start with this URI, 
-					or if another schema specifies a starting URI that is longer and also matches the 
-					instance, this schema SHOULD NOT be applied to the instance. Any schema 
-					that does not have a pathStart attribute SHOULD be considered applicable 
-					to all the instances for which it is referenced.
-				</t>
-			</section>
-			
-			<section title="mediaType">
-				<t>This attribute defines the media type of the instance representations that this schema is defining.</t>
-			</section>
-		</section>
-		
-		<section title="Security Considerations">
-			<t>
-				This specification is a sub-type of the JSON format, and 
-				consequently the security considerations are generally the same as <xref target="RFC4627">RFC 4627</xref>. 
-				However, an additional issue is that when link relation of "self"
-				is used to denote a full representation of an object, the user agent 
-				SHOULD NOT consider the representation to be the authoritative representation
-				of the resource denoted by the target URI if the target URI is not
-				equivalent to or a sub-path of the the URI used to request the resource 
-				representation which contains the target URI with the "self" link.
-				
-				<figure>
-					<preamble>For example, if a hyper schema was defined:</preamble>
-					<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-	"links": [{
-		"rel": "self",
-		"href": "{id}"
-	}]
-}
-]]>
-					</artwork>
-				</figure>
-				
-				<figure>
-					<preamble>And a resource was requested from somesite.com:</preamble>
-					<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-GET /foo/
-]]>
-					</artwork>
-				</figure>
-
-				<figure>
-					<preamble>With a response of:</preamble>
-					<artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-Content-Type: application/json; profile=/schema-for-this-data
-
-[{
-	"id": "bar",
-	"name": "This representation can be safely treated \
-		as authoritative "
-}, {
-	"id": "/baz",
-	"name": "This representation should not be treated as \
-		authoritative the user agent should make request the resource\
-		from '/baz' to ensure it has the authoritative representation"
-}, {
-	"id": "http://othersite.com/something",
-	"name": "This representation\
-		should also not be treated as authoritative and the target\
-		resource representation should be retrieved for the\
-		authoritative representation"
-}]
-]]>
-					</artwork>
-				</figure>
-			</t>
-		</section>
-		
-		<section title="IANA Considerations">
-			<t>The proposed MIME media type for JSON Schema is "application/schema+json".</t>
-			<t>Type name: application</t>
-			<t>Subtype name: schema+json</t>
-			<t>Required parameters: profile</t>
-			<t>
-				The value of the profile parameter SHOULD be a URI (relative or absolute) that 
-				refers to the schema used to define the structure of this structure (the 
-				meta-schema). Normally the value would be http://json-schema.org/draft-03/hyper-schema,
-				but it is allowable to use other schemas that extend the hyper schema's meta-
-				schema.
-			</t>
-			<t>Optional parameters: pretty</t>
-			<t>The value of the pretty parameter MAY be true or false to indicate if additional whitespace has been included to make the JSON representation easier to read.</t>
-			
-			<section title="Registry of Link Relations">
-				<t>
-					This registry is maintained by IANA per <xref target="RFC4287">RFC 4287</xref> and this specification adds
-					four values: "full", "create", "instances", "root".  New
-					assignments are subject to IESG Approval, as outlined in <xref target="RFC5226">RFC 5226</xref>.
-					Requests should be made by email to IANA, which will then forward the
-					request to the IESG, requesting approval.
-				</t>
-			</section>
-		</section>
-	</middle>
-	
-	<back>
-		<!-- References Section -->
-		<references title="Normative References">
-			&rfc2045;
-			&rfc2119;
-			&rfc2396;
-			&rfc3339;
-			&rfc3986;
-			&rfc4287;
-		</references>
-		<references title="Informative References">
-			&rfc2616;
-			&rfc4627;
-			&rfc5226;
-			&iddiscovery;
-			&uritemplate;
-			&linkheader;
-			&html401;
-			&css21;
-		</references>
-
-		<section title="Change Log">
-			<t>
-				<list style="hanging">
-					<t hangText="draft-03">
-						<list style="symbols">
-							<t>Added example and verbiage to "extends" attribute.</t>
-							<t>Defined slash-delimited to use a leading slash.</t>
-							<t>Made "root" a relation instead of an attribute.</t>
-							<t>Removed address values, and MIME media type from format to reduce confusion (mediaType already exists, so it can be used for MIME types).</t>
-							<t>Added more explanation of nullability.</t>
-							<t>Removed "alternate" attribute.</t>
-							<t>Upper cased many normative usages of must, may, and should.</t>
-							<t>Replaced the link submission "properties" attribute to "schema" attribute.</t>
-							<t>Replaced "optional" attribute with "required" attribute.</t>
-							<t>Replaced "maximumCanEqual" attribute with "exclusiveMaximum" attribute.</t>
-							<t>Replaced "minimumCanEqual" attribute with "exclusiveMinimum" attribute.</t>
-							<t>Replaced "requires" attribute with "dependencies" attribute.</t>
-							<t>Moved "contentEncoding" attribute to hyper schema.</t>
-							<t>Added "additionalItems" attribute.</t>
-							<t>Added "id" attribute.</t>
-							<t>Switched self-referencing variable substitution from "-this" to "@" to align with reserved characters in URI template.</t>
-							<t>Added "patternProperties" attribute.</t>
-							<t>Schema URIs are now namespace versioned.</t>
-							<t>Added "$ref" and "$schema" attributes.</t>
-						</list>
-					</t>
-					
-					<t hangText="draft-02">
-						<list style="symbols">
-							<t>Replaced "maxDecimal" attribute with "divisibleBy" attribute.</t>
-							<t>Added slash-delimited fragment resolution protocol and made it the default.</t>
-							<t>Added language about using links outside of schemas by referencing its normative URI.</t>
-							<t>Added "uniqueItems" attribute.</t>
-							<t>Added "targetSchema" attribute to link description object.</t>
-						</list>
-					</t>
-					
-					<t hangText="draft-01">
-						<list style="symbols">
-							<t>Fixed category and updates from template.</t>
-						</list>
-					</t>
-					
-					<t hangText="draft-00">
-						<list style="symbols">
-							<t>Initial draft.</t>
-						</list>
-					</t>
-				</list>
-			</t>
-		</section>
-		
-		<section title="Open Issues">
-			<t>
-				<list>
-					<t>Should we give a preference to MIME headers over Link headers (or only use one)?</t>
-					<t>Should "root" be a MIME parameter?</t>
-					<t>Should "format" be renamed to "mediaType" or "contentType" to reflect the usage MIME media types that are allowed?</t>
-					<t>How should dates be handled?</t>
-				</list>
-			</t>
-		</section>
-	</back>
-</rfc>
diff --git a/draft-zyp-json-schema-03.xml b/draft-zyp-json-schema-03.xml
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..06b1da93
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-zyp-json-schema-03.xml
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+_includes/draft-03/jsonschema.xml
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft-zyp-json-schema-04.xml b/draft-zyp-json-schema-04.xml
deleted file mode 100644
index 9e65f506..00000000
--- a/draft-zyp-json-schema-04.xml
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,1270 +0,0 @@
-<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
-<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
-<!ENTITY rfc4627 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4627.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc3986 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3986.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2119 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc4287 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4287.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2616 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2616.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc3339 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3339.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2045 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2045.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc5226 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5226.xml">
-<!ENTITY rfc2396 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2396.xml">
-<!ENTITY iddiscovery SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.hammer-discovery.xml">
-<!ENTITY uritemplate SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.gregorio-uritemplate.xml">
-<!ENTITY linkheader SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.nottingham-http-link-header.xml">
-<!ENTITY html401 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml4/reference.W3C.REC-html401-19991224.xml">
-<!ENTITY css21 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml4/reference.W3C.CR-CSS21-20070719.xml">
-]>
-<!-- vim:set ts=4 expandtab ai tw=100: -->
-<?rfc toc="yes"?>
-<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
-<?rfc compact="yes"?>
-<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
-<?rfc strict="no"?>
-<?rfc rfcedstyle="yes"?>
-<rfc category="info" docName="draft-zyp-json-schema-04" ipr="trust200902">
-    <front>
-        <title abbrev="JSON Schema Media Type">A JSON Media Type for Describing the Structure and Meaning of JSON Documents</title>
-
-        <author fullname="Kris Zyp" initials="K" role="editor" surname="Zyp">
-            <organization>SitePen (USA)</organization>
-            <address>
-                <postal>
-                    <street>530 Lytton Avenue</street>
-                    <city>Palo Alto, CA 94301</city>
-                    <country>USA</country>
-                </postal>
-                <phone>+1 650 968 8787</phone>
-                <email>kris@sitepen.com</email>
-            </address>
-        </author>
-
-        <author fullname="Gary Court" initials="G" surname="Court">
-            <address>
-                <postal>
-                    <street></street>
-                    <city>Calgary, AB</city>
-                    <country>Canada</country>
-                </postal>
-                <email>gary.court@gmail.com</email>
-            </address>
-        </author>
-
-        <date year="2011"/>
-        <workgroup>Internet Engineering Task Force</workgroup>
-        <keyword>JSON</keyword>
-        <keyword>Schema</keyword>
-        <keyword>JavaScript</keyword>
-        <keyword>Object</keyword>
-        <keyword>Notation</keyword>
-        <keyword>Hyper Schema</keyword>
-        <keyword>Hypermedia</keyword>
-
-        <abstract>
-            <t>
-                JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) Schema defines the media type
-                "application/schema+json", a JSON based format for defining the structure of JSON
-                data. JSON Schema provides a contract for what JSON data is required for a given
-                application and how to interact with it. JSON Schema is intended to define
-                validation, documentation, hyperlink navigation, and interaction control of JSON
-                data.
-            </t>
-        </abstract>
-    </front>
-
-    <middle>
-        <section title="Introduction">
-            <t>
-                JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) Schema is a JSON media type for defining the
-                structure of JSON data. JSON Schema provides a contract for what JSON data is
-                required for a given application and how to interact with it. JSON Schema is
-                intended to define validation, documentation, hyperlink navigation, and interaction
-                control of JSON data.
-            </t>
-        </section>
-
-        <section title="Conventions">
-            <t>
-                <!-- The text in this section has been copied from the official boilerplate,
-                and should not be modified.-->
-
-                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 <xref target="RFC2119">RFC 2119</xref>.
-            </t>
-        </section>
-
-        <!-- ********************************************* -->
-
-        <section title="Overview">
-            <t>
-                JSON Schema defines the media type "application/schema+json" for describing the
-                structure of other JSON documents. JSON Schema is JSON-based and includes facilities
-                for describing the structure of JSON documents in terms of allowable values,
-                descriptions, and interpreting relations with other resources.
-            </t>
-            <t>
-                JSON Schema format is organized into several separate definitions. The first
-                definition is the core schema specification. This definition is primary concerned
-                with describing a JSON structure and specifying valid elements in the structure. The
-                second definition is the Hyper Schema specification which is intended define
-                elements in a structure that can be interpreted as hyperlinks. Hyper Schema builds
-                on JSON Schema to describe the hyperlink structure of other JSON documents and
-                elements of interaction. This allows user agents to be able to successfully navigate
-                JSON documents based on their schemas.
-            </t>
-            <t>
-                Cumulatively JSON Schema acts as a meta-document that can be used to define the
-                required type and constraints on property values, as well as define the meaning of
-                the property values for the purpose of describing a resource and determining
-                hyperlinks within the representation.
-            </t>
-            <figure>
-                <preamble>An example JSON Schema that describes products might look like:</preamble>
-                <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-    "title": "Product",
-    "properties": {
-        "id": {
-            "type": "number",
-            "description": "Product identifier",
-            "required": true
-        },
-        "name": {
-            "description": "Name of the product",
-            "type": "string",
-            "required": true
-        },
-        "price": {
-            "type": "number",
-            "minimum": 0,
-            "required": true
-        },
-        "tags": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "items": {
-                "type": "string"
-            }
-        }
-    },
-    "links": [{
-        "rel": "full",
-        "href": "{id}"
-    }, {
-        "rel": "comments",
-        "href": "comments/?id={id}"
-    }]
-}
-]]>
-                </artwork>
-                <postamble>
-                    This schema defines the properties of the instance JSON documents, the required
-                    properties (id, name, and price), as well as an optional property (tags). This
-                    also defines the link relations of the instance JSON documents.
-                </postamble>
-            </figure>
-
-            <section title="Terminology">
-                <t>
-                    For this specification, <spanx style="strong">schema</spanx> will be used to
-                    denote a JSON Schema definition, and an <spanx style="strong">instance</spanx>
-                    refers to a JSON value that the schema will be describing and validating.
-                </t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="Design Considerations">
-                <t>
-                    The JSON Schema media type does not attempt to dictate the structure of JSON
-                    representations that contain data, but rather provides a separate format for
-                    flexibly communicating how a JSON representation should be interpreted and
-                    validated, such that user agents can properly understand acceptable structures
-                    and extrapolate hyperlink information with the JSON document. It is acknowledged
-                    that JSON documents come in a variety of structures, and JSON is unique in that
-                    the structure of stored data structures often prescribes a non-ambiguous
-                    definite JSON representation. Attempting to force a specific structure is
-                    generally not viable, and therefore JSON Schema allows for a great flexibility
-                    in the structure of the JSON data that it describes.
-                </t>
-                <t>
-                    This specification is protocol agnostic. The underlying protocol (such as HTTP)
-                    should sufficiently define the semantics of the client-server interface, the
-                    retrieval of resource representations linked to by JSON representations, and
-                    modification of those resources. The goal of this format is to sufficiently
-                    describe JSON structures such that one can utilize existing information
-                    available in existing JSON representations from a large variety of services that
-                    leverage a representational state transfer architecture using existing
-                    protocols.
-                </t>
-            </section>
-        </section>
-
-        <section title="Schema/Instance Association">
-            <t>
-                JSON Schema instances are correlated to their schema by the "describedby" relation,
-                where the schema is defined to be the target of the relation. Instance
-                representations may be of the "application/json" media type or any other subtype.
-                Consequently, dictating how an instance representation should specify the relation
-                to the schema is beyond the normative scope of this document (since this document
-                specifically defines the JSON Schema media type, and no other), but it is
-                recommended that instances specify their schema so that user agents can interpret
-                the instance representation and messages may retain the self-descriptive
-                characteristic, avoiding the need for out-of-band information about instance data.
-                Two approaches are recommended for declaring the relation to the schema that
-                describes the meaning of a JSON instance's (or collection of instances) structure. A
-                MIME type parameter named "profile" or a relation of "describedby" (which could be
-                defined by a Link header) may be used:
-
-                <figure>
-                    <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-Content-Type: application/my-media-type+json;
-              profile=http://json.com/my-hyper-schema
-]]>
-                    </artwork>
-                </figure>
-
-                or if the content is being transferred by a protocol (such as HTTP) that provides
-                headers, a Link header can be used:
-
-                <figure>
-                    <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-Link: <http://json.com/my-hyper-schema>; rel="describedby"
-]]>
-                    </artwork>
-                </figure>
-
-                Instances MAY specify multiple schemas, to indicate all the schemas that are
-                applicable to the data, and the data SHOULD be valid by all the schemas. The
-                instance data MAY have multiple schemas that it is defined by (the instance data
-                SHOULD be valid for those schemas). Or if the document is a collection of instances,
-                the collection MAY contain instances from different schemas. When collections
-                contain heterogeneous instances, the "pathStart" attribute MAY be specified in the
-                schema to disambiguate which schema should be applied for each item in the
-                collection. However, ultimately, the mechanism for referencing a schema is up to the
-                media type of the instance documents (if they choose to specify that schemas can be
-                referenced).
-            </t>
-
-            <section title="Self-Descriptive Schema">
-                <t>
-                    JSON Schemas can themselves be described using JSON Schemas. A self-describing
-                    JSON Schema for the core JSON Schema can be found at <eref
-                    target="http://json-schema.org/schema">http://json-schema.org/schema</eref> for
-                    the latest version or <eref
-                    target="http://json-schema.org/draft-03/schema">http://json-schema.org/draft-03/schema</eref>
-                    for the draft-03 version. The hyper schema self-description can be found at
-                    <eref
-                    target="http://json-schema.org/hyper-schema">http://json-schema.org/hyper-schema</eref>
-                    or <eref
-                    target="http://json-schema.org/draft-03/hyper-schema">http://json-schema.org/draft-03/hyper-schema</eref>.
-                    All schemas used within a protocol with media type definitions SHOULD include a
-                    MIME parameter that refers to the self-descriptive hyper schema or another
-                    schema that extends this hyper schema:
-
-                    <figure>
-                        <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-Content-Type: application/json;
-              profile=http://json-schema.org/draft-03/hyper-schema
-]]>
-                        </artwork>
-                    </figure>
-                </t>
-            </section>
-        </section>
-
-        <section title="Core Schema Definition">
-            <t>
-                A JSON Schema is a JSON Object that defines various attributes (including usage and
-                valid values) of a JSON value. JSON Schema has recursive capabilities; there are a
-                number of elements in the structure that allow for nested JSON Schemas.
-            </t>
-
-            <figure>
-                <preamble>An example JSON Schema definition could look like:</preamble>
-                <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-    "description": "A person",
-    "type": "object",
-
-    "properties": {
-        "name": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "age": {
-            "type": "integer",
-            "maximum": 125
-        }
-    }
-}
-]]>
-                </artwork>
-            </figure>
-
-            <t>
-                A JSON Schema object may have any of the following properties, called schema
-                attributes (all attributes are optional):
-            </t>
-
-            <section title="type">
-                <t>
-                    This attribute defines what the primitive type or the schema of the instance
-                    MUST be in order to validate. This attribute can take one of two forms:
-
-                    <list style="hanging">
-                        <t hangText="Simple Types">
-                            A string indicating a primitive or simple type. The following are
-                            acceptable string values:
-
-                            <list style="hanging">
-                                <t hangText="string">Value MUST be a string.</t>
-                                <t hangText="number">Value MUST be a number, floating point numbers
-                                are allowed. </t>
-                                <t hangText="integer">Value MUST be an integer, no floating point
-                                numbers are allowed. This is a subset of the number type.</t>
-                                <t hangText="boolean">Value MUST be a boolean. </t>
-                                <t hangText="object">Value MUST be an object.</t>
-                                <t hangText="array">Value MUST be an array.</t>
-                                <t hangText="null">Value MUST be null. Note this is mainly for
-                                purpose of being able use union types to define nullability. If this
-                                type is not included in a union, null values are not allowed (the
-                                primitives listed above do not allow nulls on their own).</t>
-                                <t hangText="any">Value MAY be of any type including null.</t>
-                            </list>
-
-                            If the property is not defined or is not in this list, then any type of
-                            value is acceptable. Other type values MAY be used for custom purposes,
-                            but minimal validators of the specification implementation can allow any
-                            instance value on unknown type values.
-                        </t>
-
-                        <t hangText="Union Types">
-                            An array of two or more simple type definitions. Each item in the array
-                            MUST be a simple type definition or a schema. The instance value is
-                            valid if it is of the same type as one of the simple type definitions,
-                            or valid by one of the schemas, in the array.
-                        </t>
-                    </list>
-                </t>
-
-                <figure>
-                    <preamble>For example, a schema that defines if an instance can be a string or a
-                    number would be:</preamble>
-                    <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-    "type": ["string", "number"]
-}
-]]></artwork>
-                </figure>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="properties" anchor="properties">
-                <t>This attribute is an object with property definitions that define the valid
-                values of instance object property values. When the instance value is an object, the
-                property values of the instance object MUST conform to the property definitions in
-                this object. In this object, each property definition's value MUST be a schema, and
-                the property's name MUST be the name of the instance property that it defines. The
-                instance property value MUST be valid according to the schema from the property
-                definition. Properties are considered unordered, the order of the instance
-                properties MAY be in any order.</t> </section>
-
-            <section title="patternProperties">
-                <t>This attribute is an object that defines the schema for a set of property names
-                of an object instance. The name of each property of this attribute's object is a
-                regular expression pattern in the ECMA 262/Perl 5 format, while the value is a
-                schema. If the pattern matches the name of a property on the instance object, the
-                value of the instance's property MUST be valid against the pattern name's schema
-                value.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="additionalProperties" anchor="additionalProperties">
-                <t>This attribute defines a schema for all properties that are not explicitly
-                defined in an object type definition. If specified, the value MUST be a schema or a
-                boolean. If false is provided, no additional properties are allowed beyond the
-                properties defined in the schema. The default value is an empty schema which allows
-                any value for additional properties.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="items">
-                <t>This attribute defines the allowed items in an instance array, and MUST be a
-                schema or an array of schemas. The default value is an empty schema which allows any
-                value for items in the instance array.</t>
-                <t>When this attribute value is a schema and the instance value is an array, then
-                all the items in the array MUST be valid according to the schema.</t>
-                <t>When this attribute value is an array of schemas and the instance value is an
-                array, each position in the instance array MUST conform to the schema in the
-                corresponding position for this array. This called tuple typing. When tuple typing
-                is used, additional items are allowed, disallowed, or constrained by the <xref
-                target="additionalItems">"additionalItems"</xref> attribute using the same rules as
-                <xref target="additionalProperties">"additionalProperties"</xref> for objects.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="additionalItems" anchor="additionalItems">
-                <t>This provides a definition for additional items in an array instance when tuple
-                definitions of the items is provided. This can be false to indicate additional items
-                in the array are not allowed, or it can be a schema that defines the schema of the
-                additional items.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="required">
-                <t>This attribute indicates if the instance must have a value, and not be undefined.
-                This is false by default, making the instance optional.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="dependencies">
-                <t>This attribute is an object that defines the requirements of a property on an
-                instance object. If an object instance has a property with the same name as a
-                property in this attribute's object, then the instance must be valid against the
-                attribute's property value (hereafter referred to as the "dependency value").</t>
-                <t>
-                    The dependency value can take one of two forms:
-
-                    <list style="hanging">
-                        <t hangText="Simple Dependency">
-                            If the dependency value is a string, then the instance object MUST have
-                            a property with the same name as the dependency value. If the dependency
-                            value is an array of strings, then the instance object MUST have a
-                            property with the same name as each string in the dependency value's
-                            array.
-                        </t>
-                        <t hangText="Schema Dependency">
-                            If the dependency value is a schema, then the instance object MUST be
-                            valid against the schema.
-                        </t>
-                    </list>
-                </t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="minimum">
-                <t>This attribute defines the minimum value of the instance property when the type
-                of the instance value is a number.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="maximum">
-                <t>This attribute defines the maximum value of the instance property when the type
-                of the instance value is a number.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="exclusiveMinimum">
-                <t>This attribute indicates if the value of the instance (if the instance is a
-                number) can not equal the number defined by the "minimum" attribute. This is false
-                by default, meaning the instance value can be greater then or equal to the minimum
-                value.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="exclusiveMaximum">
-                <t>This attribute indicates if the value of the instance (if the instance is a
-                number) can not equal the number defined by the "maximum" attribute. This is false
-                by default, meaning the instance value can be less then or equal to the maximum
-                value.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="minItems">
-                <t>This attribute defines the minimum number of values in an array when the array is
-                the instance value.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="maxItems">
-                <t>This attribute defines the maximum number of values in an array when the array is
-                the instance value.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="uniqueItems" anchor="uniqueItems">
-                <t>This attribute indicates that all items in an array instance MUST be unique
-                (contains no two identical values).</t>
-                <t>
-                    Two instance are consider equal if they are both of the same type and:
-
-                    <list>
-                        <t>are null; or</t>
-                        <t>are booleans/numbers/strings and have the same value; or</t>
-                        <t>are arrays, contains the same number of items, and each item in the array
-                        is equal to the corresponding item in the other array; or</t>
-                        <t>are objects, contains the same property names, and each property in the
-                        object is equal to the corresponding property in the other object.</t>
-                    </list>
-                </t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="pattern">
-                <t>When the instance value is a string, this provides a regular expression that a
-                string instance MUST match in order to be valid. Regular expressions SHOULD follow
-                the regular expression specification from ECMA 262/Perl 5</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="minLength">
-                <t>When the instance value is a string, this defines the minimum length of the
-                string.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="maxLength">
-                <t>When the instance value is a string, this defines the maximum length of the
-                string.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="enum">
-                <t>This provides an enumeration of all possible values that are valid for the
-                instance property. This MUST be an array, and each item in the array represents a
-                possible value for the instance value. If this attribute is defined, the instance
-                value MUST be one of the values in the array in order for the schema to be valid.
-                Comparison of enum values uses the same algorithm as defined in <xref
-                target="uniqueItems">"uniqueItems"</xref>.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="default">
-                <t>This attribute defines the default value of the instance when the instance is
-                undefined.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="title">
-                <t>This attribute is a string that provides a short description of the instance
-                property.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="description">
-                <t>This attribute is a string that provides a full description of the of purpose the
-                instance property.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="format">
-                <t>This property defines the type of data, content type, or microformat to be
-                expected in the instance property values. A format attribute MAY be one of the
-                values listed below, and if so, SHOULD adhere to the semantics describing for the
-                format. A format SHOULD only be used to give meaning to primitive types (string,
-                integer, number, or boolean). Validators MAY (but are not required to) validate that
-                the instance values conform to a format.</t>
-
-                <t>
-                    The following formats are predefined:
-
-                    <list style="hanging">
-                        <t hangText="date-time">This SHOULD be a date in ISO 8601 format of
-                        YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ssZ in UTC time. This is the recommended form of
-                        date/timestamp.</t>
-                        <t hangText="date">This SHOULD be a date in the format of YYYY-MM-DD. It is
-                        recommended that you use the "date-time" format instead of "date" unless you
-                        need to transfer only the date part.</t>
-                        <t hangText="time">This SHOULD be a time in the format of hh:mm:ss. It is
-                        recommended that you use the "date-time" format instead of "time" unless you
-                        need to transfer only the time part.</t>
-                        <t hangText="utc-millisec">This SHOULD be the difference, measured in
-                        milliseconds, between the specified time and midnight, 00:00 of January 1,
-                        1970 UTC. The value SHOULD be a number (integer or float).</t>
-                        <t hangText="regex">A regular expression, following the regular expression
-                        specification from ECMA 262/Perl 5.</t>
-                        <t hangText="color">This is a CSS color (like "#FF0000" or "red"), based on
-                        <xref target="W3C.CR-CSS21-20070719">CSS 2.1</xref>.</t>
-                        <t hangText="style">This is a CSS style definition (like "color: red;
-                        background-color:#FFF"), based on <xref target="W3C.CR-CSS21-20070719">CSS
-                        2.1</xref>.</t>
-                        <t hangText="phone">This SHOULD be a phone number (format MAY follow
-                        E.123).</t>
-                        <t hangText="uri">This value SHOULD be a URI.</t>
-                        <t hangText="email">This SHOULD be an email address.</t>
-                        <t hangText="ip-address">This SHOULD be an ip version 4 address.</t>
-                        <t hangText="ipv6">This SHOULD be an ip version 6 address.</t>
-                        <t hangText="host-name">This SHOULD be a host-name.</t>
-                    </list>
-                </t>
-
-                <t>Additional custom formats MAY be created. These custom formats MAY be expressed
-                as an URI, and this URI MAY reference a schema of that format.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="divisibleBy">
-                <t>This attribute defines what value the number instance must be divisible by with
-                no remainder (the result of the division must be an integer.) The value of this
-                attribute SHOULD NOT be 0.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="disallow">
-                <t>This attribute takes the same values as the "type" attribute, however if the
-                instance matches the type or if this value is an array and the instance matches any
-                type or schema in the array, then this instance is not valid.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="extends">
-                <t>The value of this property MUST be another schema which will provide a base
-                schema which the current schema will inherit from. The inheritance rules are such
-                that any instance that is valid according to the current schema MUST be valid
-                according to the referenced schema. This MAY also be an array, in which case, the
-                instance MUST be valid for all the schemas in the array. A schema that extends
-                another schema MAY define additional attributes, constrain existing attributes, or
-                add other constraints.</t>
-                <t>
-                    Conceptually, the behavior of extends can be seen as validating an instance
-                    against all constraints in the extending schema as well as the extended
-                    schema(s). More optimized implementations that merge schemas are possible, but
-                    are not required. Some examples of using "extends":
-
-                    <figure>
-                        <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-    "description": "An adult",
-    "properties": {
-        "age": {
-            "minimum": 21
-        }
-    },
-    "extends": {"$ref": "person"}
-}
-]]>
-                        </artwork>
-                    </figure>
-
-                    <figure>
-                        <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-    "description": "Extended schema",
-    "properties": {
-        "deprecated": {
-            "type": "boolean"
-        }
-    },
-    "extends": {"$ref": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/schema"}
-}
-]]>
-                        </artwork>
-                    </figure>
-                </t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="id">
-                <t>
-                    This attribute defines the current URI of this schema (this attribute is
-                    effectively a "self" link). This URI MAY be relative or absolute. If the URI is
-                    relative it is resolved against the current URI of the parent schema it is
-                    contained in. If this schema is not contained in any parent schema, the current
-                    URI of the parent schema is held to be the URI under which this schema was
-                    addressed. If id is missing, the current URI of a schema is defined to be that
-                    of the parent schema. The current URI of the schema is also used to construct
-                    relative references such as for $ref.
-                </t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="$ref">
-                <t>
-                    This attribute defines a URI of a schema that contains the full representation
-                    of this schema. When a validator encounters this attribute, it SHOULD replace
-                    the current schema with the schema referenced by the value's URI (if known and
-                    available) and re-validate the instance. This URI MAY be relative or absolute,
-                    and relative URIs SHOULD be resolved against the URI of the current schema.
-                </t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="$schema">
-                <t>
-                    This attribute defines a URI of a JSON Schema that is the schema of the current
-                    schema. When this attribute is defined, a validator SHOULD use the schema
-                    referenced by the value's URI (if known and available) when resolving <xref
-                    target="hyper-schema">Hyper Schema</xref><xref target="links">links</xref>.
-                </t>
-
-                <t>
-                    A validator MAY use this attribute's value to determine which version of JSON
-                    Schema the current schema is written in, and provide the appropriate validation
-                    features and behavior. Therefore, it is RECOMMENDED that all schema authors
-                    include this attribute in their schemas to prevent conflicts with future JSON
-                    Schema specification changes.
-                </t>
-            </section>
-        </section>
-
-        <section title="Hyper Schema" anchor="hyper-schema">
-            <t>
-                The following attributes are specified in addition to those attributes that already
-                provided by the core schema with the specific purpose of informing user agents of
-                relations between resources based on JSON data. Just as with JSON schema attributes,
-                all the attributes in hyper schemas are optional. Therefore, an empty object is a
-                valid (non-informative) schema, and essentially describes plain JSON (no constraints
-                on the structures). Addition of attributes provides additive information for user
-                agents.
-            </t>
-
-            <section title="links" anchor="links">
-                <t>
-                    The value of the links property MUST be an array, where each item in the array
-                    is a link description object which describes the link relations of the
-                    instances.
-                </t>
-
-                <section title="Link Description Object">
-                    <t>
-                        A link description object is used to describe link relations. In the context
-                        of a schema, it defines the link relations of the instances of the schema,
-                        and can be parameterized by the instance values. The link description format
-                        can be used on its own in regular (non-schema documents), and use of this
-                        format can be declared by referencing the normative link description schema
-                        as the the schema for the data structure that uses the links. The URI of the
-                        normative link description schema is: <eref
-                        target="http://json-schema.org/links">http://json-schema.org/links</eref>
-                        (latest version) or <eref
-                        target="http://json-schema.org/draft-03/links">http://json-schema.org/draft-03/links</eref>
-                        (draft-03 version).
-                    </t>
-
-                    <section title="href">
-                        <t>
-                            The value of the "href" link description property indicates the target
-                            URI of the related resource. The value of the instance property SHOULD
-                            be resolved as a URI-Reference per <xref target="RFC3986">RFC
-                            3986</xref> and MAY be a relative URI. The base URI to be used for
-                            relative resolution SHOULD be the URI used to retrieve the instance
-                            object (not the schema) when used within a schema. Also, when links are
-                            used within a schema, the URI SHOULD be parametrized by the property
-                            values of the instance object, if property values exist for the
-                            corresponding variables in the template (otherwise they MAY be provided
-                            from alternate sources, like user input).
-                        </t>
-
-                        <t>
-                            Instance property values SHOULD be substituted into the URIs where
-                            matching braces ('{', '}') are found surrounding zero or more
-                            characters, creating an expanded URI. Instance property value
-                            substitutions are resolved by using the text between the braces to
-                            denote the property name from the instance to get the value to
-                            substitute.
-
-                            <figure>
-                                <preamble>For example, if an href value is defined:</preamble>
-                                <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-http://somesite.com/{id}
-]]>
-                                </artwork>
-                                <postamble>Then it would be resolved by replace the value of the
-                                "id" property value from the instance object.</postamble>
-                            </figure>
-
-                            <figure>
-                                <preamble>If the value of the "id" property was "45", the expanded
-                                URI would be:</preamble>
-                                <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-http://somesite.com/45
-]]>
-                                </artwork>
-                            </figure>
-
-                            If matching braces are found with the string "@" (no quotes) between the
-                            braces, then the actual instance value SHOULD be used to replace the
-                            braces, rather than a property value. This should only be used in
-                            situations where the instance is a scalar (string, boolean, or number),
-                            and not for objects or arrays.
-                        </t>
-                    </section>
-
-                    <section title="rel">
-                        <t>
-                            The value of the "rel" property indicates the name of the relation to
-                            the target resource. The relation to the target SHOULD be interpreted as
-                            specifically from the instance object that the schema (or sub-schema)
-                            applies to, not just the top level resource that contains the object
-                            within its hierarchy. If a resource JSON representation contains a sub
-                            object with a property interpreted as a link, that sub-object holds the
-                            relation with the target. A relation to target from the top level
-                            resource MUST be indicated with the schema describing the top level JSON
-                            representation.
-                        </t>
-
-                        <t>
-                            Relationship definitions SHOULD NOT be media type dependent, and users
-                            are encouraged to utilize existing accepted relation definitions,
-                            including those in existing relation registries (see <xref
-                            target="RFC4287">RFC 4287</xref>). However, we define these relations
-                            here for clarity of normative interpretation within the context of JSON
-                            hyper schema defined relations:
-
-                            <list style="hanging">
-                                <t hangText="self">
-                                    If the relation value is "self", when this property is
-                                    encountered in the instance object, the object represents a
-                                    resource and the instance object is treated as a full
-                                    representation of the target resource identified by the
-                                    specified URI.
-                                </t>
-
-                                <t hangText="full">
-                                    This indicates that the target of the link is the full
-                                    representation for the instance object. The object that contains
-                                    this link possibly may not be the full representation.
-                                </t>
-
-                                <t hangText="describedby">
-                                    This indicates the target of the link is the schema for the
-                                    instance object. This MAY be used to specifically denote the
-                                    schemas of objects within a JSON object hierarchy, facilitating
-                                    polymorphic type data structures.
-                                </t>
-
-                                <t hangText="root">
-                                    This relation indicates that the target of the link SHOULD be
-                                    treated as the root or the body of the representation for the
-                                    purposes of user agent interaction or fragment resolution. All
-                                    other properties of the instance objects can be regarded as
-                                    meta-data descriptions for the data.
-                                </t>
-                            </list>
-                        </t>
-
-                        <t>
-                            The following relations are applicable for schemas (the schema as the
-                            "from" resource in the relation):
-
-                            <list style="hanging">
-                                <t hangText="instances">This indicates the target resource that
-                                represents collection of instances of a schema.</t>
-                                <t hangText="create">This indicates a target to use for creating new
-                                instances of a schema. This link definition SHOULD be a submission
-                                link with a non-safe method (like POST).</t>
-                            </list>
-                        </t>
-
-                        <t>
-                            <figure>
-                                <preamble>For example, if a schema is defined:</preamble>
-                                <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-    "links": [{
-        "rel": "self",
-        "href": "{id}"
-    }, {
-        "rel": "up",
-        "href": "{upId}"
-    }, {
-        "rel": "children",
-        "href": "?upId={id}"
-    }]
-}
-]]>
-                                </artwork>
-                            </figure>
-
-                            <figure>
-                                <preamble>And if a collection of instance resource's JSON
-                                representation was retrieved:</preamble>
-                                <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-GET /Resource/
-
-[{
-    "id": "thing",
-    "upId": "parent"
-}, {
-    "id": "thing2",
-    "upId": "parent"
-}]
-]]>
-                                </artwork>
-                            </figure>
-
-                            This would indicate that for the first item in the collection, its own
-                            (self) URI would resolve to "/Resource/thing" and the first item's "up"
-                            relation SHOULD be resolved to the resource at "/Resource/parent". The
-                            "children" collection would be located at "/Resource/?upId=thing".
-                        </t>
-                    </section>
-
-                    <section title="targetSchema">
-                        <t>This property value is a schema that defines the expected structure of
-                        the JSON representation of the target of the link.</t>
-                    </section>
-
-                    <section title="Submission Link Properties">
-                        <t>
-                            The following properties also apply to link definition objects, and
-                            provide functionality analogous to HTML forms, in providing a means for
-                            submitting extra (often user supplied) information to send to a server.
-                        </t>
-
-                        <section title="method">
-                            <t>
-                                This attribute defines which method can be used to access the target
-                                resource. In an HTTP environment, this would be "GET" or "POST"
-                                (other HTTP methods such as "PUT" and "DELETE" have semantics that
-                                are clearly implied by accessed resources, and do not need to be
-                                defined here). This defaults to "GET".
-                            </t>
-                        </section>
-
-                        <section title="enctype">
-                            <t>
-                                If present, this property indicates a query media type format that
-                                the server supports for querying or posting to the collection of
-                                instances at the target resource. The query can be suffixed to the
-                                target URI to query the collection with property-based constraints
-                                on the resources that SHOULD be returned from the server or used to
-                                post data to the resource (depending on the method).
-
-                                <figure>
-                                    <preamble>For example, with the following schema:</preamble>
-                                    <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-    "links": [{
-        "enctype": "application/x-www-form-urlencoded",
-        "method": "GET",
-        "href": "/Product/",
-        "properties": {
-            "name": {
-                "description": "name of the product"
-            }
-        }
-    }]
-}
-]]>
-                                    </artwork>
-                                    <postamble>This indicates that the client can query the server
-                                    for instances that have a specific name.</postamble>
-                                </figure>
-
-                                <figure>
-                                    <preamble>For example:</preamble>
-                                    <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-/Product/?name=Slinky
-]]>
-                                    </artwork>
-                                </figure>
-
-                                If no enctype or method is specified, only the single URI specified
-                                by the href property is defined. If the method is POST,
-                                "application/json" is the default media type.
-                            </t>
-                        </section>
-
-                        <section title="schema">
-                            <t>
-                                This attribute contains a schema which defines the acceptable
-                                structure of the submitted request (for a GET request, this schema
-                                would define the properties for the query string and for a POST
-                                request, this would define the body).
-                            </t>
-                        </section>
-                    </section>
-                </section>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="fragmentResolution">
-                <t>
-                    This property indicates the fragment resolution protocol to use for resolving
-                    fragment identifiers in URIs within the instance representations. This applies
-                    to the instance object URIs and all children of the instance object's URIs. The
-                    default fragment resolution protocol is "slash-delimited", which is defined
-                    below. Other fragment resolution protocols MAY be used, but are not defined in
-                    this document.
-                </t>
-
-                <t>
-                    The fragment identifier is based on <xref target="RFC2396">RFC 2396, Sec
-                    5</xref>, and defines the mechanism for resolving references to entities within
-                    a document.
-                </t>
-
-                <section title="slash-delimited fragment resolution">
-                    <t>
-                        With the slash-delimited fragment resolution protocol, the fragment
-                        identifier is interpreted as a series of property reference tokens that
-                        start with and are delimited by the "/" character (\x2F). Each property
-                        reference token is a series of unreserved or escaped URI characters. Each
-                        property reference token SHOULD be interpreted, starting from the beginning
-                        of the fragment identifier, as a path reference in the target JSON
-                        structure. The final target value of the fragment can be determined by
-                        starting with the root of the JSON structure from the representation of the
-                        resource identified by the pre-fragment URI. If the target is a JSON object,
-                        then the new target is the value of the property with the name identified by
-                        the next property reference token in the fragment. If the target is a JSON
-                        array, then the target is determined by finding the item in array the array
-                        with the index defined by the next property reference token (which MUST be a
-                        number). The target is successively updated for each property reference
-                        token, until the entire fragment has been traversed.
-                    </t>
-
-                    <t>
-                        Property names SHOULD be URI-encoded. In particular, any "/" in a property
-                        name MUST be encoded to avoid being interpreted as a property delimiter.
-                    </t>
-
-                    <t>
-                        <figure>
-                            <preamble>For example, for the following JSON representation:</preamble>
-                            <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-    "foo": {
-        "anArray": [{
-            "prop": 44
-        }],
-        "another prop": {
-            "baz": "A string"
-        }
-    }
-}
-]]>
-                            </artwork>
-                        </figure>
-
-                        <figure>
-                            <preamble>The following fragment identifiers would be
-                            resolved:</preamble>
-                            <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-fragment identifier      resolution
--------------------      ----------
-#                        self, the root of the resource itself
-#/foo                    the object referred to by the foo property
-#/foo/another%20prop     the object referred to by the "another prop"
-                         property of the object referred to by the
-                         "foo" property
-#/foo/another%20prop/baz the string referred to by the value of "baz"
-                         property of the "another prop" property of
-                         the object referred to by the "foo" property
-#/foo/anArray/0          the first object in the "anArray" array
-]]>
-                            </artwork>
-                        </figure>
-                    </t>
-                </section>
-
-                <section title="dot-delimited fragment resolution">
-                    <t>
-                        The dot-delimited fragment resolution protocol is the same as
-                        slash-delimited fragment resolution protocol except that the "." character
-                        (\x2E) is used as the delimiter between property names (instead of "/") and
-                        the path does not need to start with a ".". For example, #.foo and #foo are
-                        a valid fragment identifiers for referencing the value of the foo propery.
-                    </t>
-                </section>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="readonly">
-                <t>This attribute indicates that the instance property SHOULD NOT be changed.
-                Attempts by a user agent to modify the value of this property are expected to be
-                rejected by a server.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="contentEncoding">
-                <t>If the instance property value is a string, this attribute defines that the
-                string SHOULD be interpreted as binary data and decoded using the encoding named by
-                this schema property. <xref target="RFC2045">RFC 2045, Sec 6.1</xref> lists the
-                possible values for this property.</t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="pathStart">
-                <t>
-                    This attribute is a URI that defines what the instance's URI MUST start with in
-                    order to validate.  The value of the "pathStart" attribute MUST be resolved as
-                    per <xref target="RFC3986">RFC 3986, Sec 5</xref>, and is relative to the
-                    instance's URI.
-                </t>
-
-                <t>
-                    When multiple schemas have been referenced for an instance, the user agent can
-                    determine if this schema is applicable for a particular instance by determining
-                    if the URI of the instance begins with the the value of the "pathStart"
-                    attribute. If the URI of the instance does not start with this URI, or if
-                    another schema specifies a starting URI that is longer and also matches the
-                    instance, this schema SHOULD NOT be applied to the instance. Any schema that
-                    does not have a pathStart attribute SHOULD be considered applicable to all the
-                    instances for which it is referenced.
-                </t>
-            </section>
-
-            <section title="mediaType">
-                <t>This attribute defines the media type of the instance representations that this
-                schema is defining.</t>
-            </section>
-        </section>
-
-        <section title="Security Considerations">
-            <t>
-                This specification is a sub-type of the JSON format, and consequently the security
-                considerations are generally the same as <xref target="RFC4627">RFC 4627</xref>.
-                However, an additional issue is that when link relation of "self" is used to denote
-                a full representation of an object, the user agent SHOULD NOT consider the
-                representation to be the authoritative representation of the resource denoted by the
-                target URI if the target URI is not equivalent to or a sub-path of the the URI used
-                to request the resource representation which contains the target URI with the "self"
-                link.
-
-                <figure>
-                    <preamble>For example, if a hyper schema was defined:</preamble>
-                    <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-{
-    "links": [{
-        "rel": "self",
-        "href": "{id}"
-    }]
-}
-]]>
-                    </artwork>
-                </figure>
-
-                <figure>
-                    <preamble>And a resource was requested from somesite.com:</preamble>
-                    <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-GET /foo/
-]]>
-                    </artwork>
-                </figure>
-
-                <figure>
-                    <preamble>With a response of:</preamble>
-                    <artwork>
-<![CDATA[
-Content-Type: application/json; profile=/schema-for-this-data
-
-[{
-    "id": "bar",
-    "name": "This representation can be safely treated \
-        as authoritative "
-}, {
-    "id": "/baz",
-    "name": "This representation should not be treated as \
-        authoritative the user agent should make request the resource\
-        from '/baz' to ensure it has the authoritative representation"
-}, {
-    "id": "http://othersite.com/something",
-    "name": "This representation\
-        should also not be treated as authoritative and the target\
-        resource representation should be retrieved for the\
-        authoritative representation"
-}]
-]]>
-                    </artwork>
-                </figure>
-            </t>
-        </section>
-
-        <section title="IANA Considerations">
-            <t>The proposed MIME media type for JSON Schema is "application/schema+json".</t>
-            <t>Type name: application</t>
-            <t>Subtype name: schema+json</t>
-            <t>Required parameters: profile</t>
-            <t>
-                The value of the profile parameter SHOULD be a URI (relative or absolute) that
-                refers to the schema used to define the structure of this structure (the
-                meta-schema). Normally the value would be
-                http://json-schema.org/draft-03/hyper-schema, but it is allowable to use other
-                schemas that extend the hyper schema's meta- schema.
-            </t>
-            <t>Optional parameters: pretty</t>
-            <t>The value of the pretty parameter MAY be true or false to indicate if additional
-            whitespace has been included to make the JSON representation easier to read.</t>
-
-            <section title="Registry of Link Relations">
-                <t>
-                    This registry is maintained by IANA per <xref target="RFC4287">RFC 4287</xref>
-                    and this specification adds four values: "full", "create", "instances", "root".
-                    New assignments are subject to IESG Approval, as outlined in <xref
-                    target="RFC5226">RFC 5226</xref>.  Requests should be made by email to IANA,
-                    which will then forward the request to the IESG, requesting approval.
-                </t>
-            </section>
-        </section>
-    </middle>
-
-    <back>
-        <!-- References Section -->
-        <references title="Normative References">
-            &rfc2045;
-            &rfc2119;
-            &rfc2396;
-            &rfc3339;
-            &rfc3986;
-            &rfc4287;
-        </references>
-        <references title="Informative References">
-            &rfc2616;
-            &rfc4627;
-            &rfc5226;
-            &iddiscovery;
-            &uritemplate;
-            &linkheader;
-            &html401;
-            &css21;
-        </references>
-
-        <section title="Change Log">
-            <t>
-                <list style="hanging">
-                    <t hangText="draft-03">
-                        <list style="symbols">
-                            <t>Added example and verbiage to "extends" attribute.</t>
-                            <t>Defined slash-delimited to use a leading slash.</t>
-                            <t>Made "root" a relation instead of an attribute.</t>
-                            <t>Removed address values, and MIME media type from format to reduce
-                            confusion (mediaType already exists, so it can be used for MIME
-                            types).</t>
-                            <t>Added more explanation of nullability.</t>
-                            <t>Removed "alternate" attribute.</t>
-                            <t>Upper cased many normative usages of must, may, and should.</t>
-                            <t>Replaced the link submission "properties" attribute to "schema"
-                            attribute.</t>
-                            <t>Replaced "optional" attribute with "required" attribute.</t>
-                            <t>Replaced "maximumCanEqual" attribute with "exclusiveMaximum"
-                            attribute.</t>
-                            <t>Replaced "minimumCanEqual" attribute with "exclusiveMinimum"
-                            attribute.</t>
-                            <t>Replaced "requires" attribute with "dependencies" attribute.</t>
-                            <t>Moved "contentEncoding" attribute to hyper schema.</t>
-                            <t>Added "additionalItems" attribute.</t>
-                            <t>Added "id" attribute.</t>
-                            <t>Switched self-referencing variable substitution from "-this" to "@"
-                            to align with reserved characters in URI template.</t>
-                            <t>Added "patternProperties" attribute.</t>
-                            <t>Schema URIs are now namespace versioned.</t>
-                            <t>Added "$ref" and "$schema" attributes.</t>
-                        </list>
-                    </t>
-
-                    <t hangText="draft-02">
-                        <list style="symbols">
-                            <t>Replaced "maxDecimal" attribute with "divisibleBy" attribute.</t>
-                            <t>Added slash-delimited fragment resolution protocol and made it the
-                            default.</t>
-                            <t>Added language about using links outside of schemas by referencing
-                            its normative URI.</t>
-                            <t>Added "uniqueItems" attribute.</t>
-                            <t>Added "targetSchema" attribute to link description object.</t>
-                        </list>
-                    </t>
-
-                    <t hangText="draft-01">
-                        <list style="symbols">
-                            <t>Fixed category and updates from template.</t>
-                        </list>
-                    </t>
-
-                    <t hangText="draft-00">
-                        <list style="symbols">
-                            <t>Initial draft.</t>
-                        </list>
-                    </t>
-                </list>
-            </t>
-        </section>
-
-        <section title="Open Issues">
-            <t>
-                <list>
-                    <t>Should we give a preference to MIME headers over Link headers (or only use
-                    one)?</t>
-                    <t>Should "root" be a MIME parameter?</t>
-                    <t>Should "format" be renamed to "mediaType" or "contentType" to reflect the
-                    usage MIME media types that are allowed?</t>
-                    <t>How should dates be handled?</t>
-                </list>
-            </t>
-        </section>
-    </back>
-</rfc>
diff --git a/draft-zyp-json-schema-04.xml b/draft-zyp-json-schema-04.xml
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..da5c1786
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft-zyp-json-schema-04.xml
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+_includes/draft-04/jsonschema-core.xml
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/hyper-schema b/draft/2019-09/hyper-schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..8a058c65
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/hyper-schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../_includes/draft/2019-09/hyper-schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html b/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..80fb2685
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html
@@ -0,0 +1,2423 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
+  "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
+<head profile="http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/">
+  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" />
+
+  <title>JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents</title>
+
+  <style type="text/css" title="Xml2Rfc (sans serif)">
+  /*<![CDATA[*/
+	  a {
+	  text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+      /* info code from SantaKlauss at http://www.madaboutstyle.com/tooltip2.html */
+      a.info {
+          /* This is the key. */
+          position: relative;
+          z-index: 24;
+          text-decoration: none;
+      }
+      a.info:hover {
+          z-index: 25;
+          color: #FFF; background-color: #900;
+      }
+      a.info span { display: none; }
+      a.info:hover span.info {
+          /* The span will display just on :hover state. */
+          display: block;
+          position: absolute;
+          font-size: smaller;
+          top: 2em; left: -5em; width: 15em;
+          padding: 2px; border: 1px solid #333;
+          color: #900; background-color: #EEE;
+          text-align: left;
+      }
+	  a.smpl {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  a:hover {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  a:active {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  address {
+	  margin-top: 1em;
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  body {
+	  color: black;
+	  font-family: verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  max-width: 55em;
+	  
+	  }
+	  cite {
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  dd {
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  dl {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.empty {
+	  list-style-type: none;
+	  }
+	  ul.empty li {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  dl p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  dt {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  h1 {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h1.np {
+	  page-break-before: always;
+	  }
+	  h1 a {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  }
+	  h2 {
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 15pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h2 a, h3 a, h4 a, h5 a, h6 a {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  img {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  }
+	  li {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  p {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  pre {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  background-color: lightyellow;
+	  padding: .25em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text2 {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f0f0f0;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.inline {
+	  background-color: white;
+	  padding: 0em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.drawing {
+	  border-style: solid;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  padding: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table.tt {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt td {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full td {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt th {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full th {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers th {
+	  border-style: none none inset none;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.left {
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.right {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.center {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  caption {
+	  caption-side: bottom;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+	  border-spacing: 1px;
+	  width: 95%;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.top {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  td.topnowrap {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap; 
+	  }
+	  table.header td {
+	  background-color: gray;
+	  width: 50%;
+	  }
+	  table.header a {
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.reference {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap;
+	  padding-right: 1em;
+	  }
+	  thead {
+	  display:table-header-group;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc, ul.toc ul {
+	  list-style: none;
+	  margin-left: 1.5em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  padding-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li {
+	  line-height: 150%;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li li {
+	  line-height: normal;
+	  font-weight: normal;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  li.excluded {
+	  font-size: 0pt;
+	  }
+	  ul p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	
+	  .comment {
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	  .center {
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .error {
+	  color: red;
+	  font-style: italic;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .figure {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  }
+	  .filename {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .fn {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .hidden {
+	  display: none;
+	  }
+	  .left {
+	  text-align: left;
+	  }
+	  .right {
+	  text-align: right;
+	  }
+	  .title {
+	  color: #990000;
+	  font-size: 18pt;
+	  line-height: 18pt;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  margin-top: 36pt;
+	  }
+	  .vcardline {
+	  display: block;
+	  }
+	  .warning {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	
+	
+	  @media print {
+	  .noprint {
+		display: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  a {
+		color: black;
+		text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+		width: 90%;
+	  }
+	
+	  td.header {
+		width: 50%;
+		color: black;
+		background-color: white;
+		vertical-align: top;
+		font-size: 12pt;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.toc a::after {
+		content: leader('.') target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.ind li li a {
+		content: target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  .print2col {
+		column-count: 2;
+		-moz-column-count: 2;
+		column-fill: auto;
+	  }
+	  }
+	
+	  @page {
+	  @top-left {
+		   content: "Internet-Draft"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-right {
+		   content: "December 2010"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-center {
+		   content: "Abbreviated Title";
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-left {
+		   content: "Doe"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-center {
+		   content: "Expires June 2011"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-right {
+		   content: "[Page " counter(page) "]"; 
+	  } 
+	  }
+	
+	  @page:first { 
+		@top-left {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-right {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-center {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+	  }
+  /*]]>*/
+  </style>
+
+  <link href="#rfc.toc" rel="Contents">
+<link href="#rfc.section.1" rel="Chapter" title="1 Introduction">
+<link href="#rfc.section.2" rel="Chapter" title="2 Conventions and Terminology">
+<link href="#rfc.section.3" rel="Chapter" title="3 Overview">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4" rel="Chapter" title="4 Definitions">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.1" rel="Chapter" title="4.1 JSON Document">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.2" rel="Chapter" title="4.2 Instance">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="4.2.1 Instance Data Model">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="4.2.2 Instance Media Types">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.2.3" rel="Chapter" title="4.2.3 Instance Equality">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3" rel="Chapter" title="4.3 JSON Schema Documents">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="4.3.1 JSON Schema Objects and Keywords">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="4.3.2 Boolean JSON Schemas">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3.3" rel="Chapter" title="4.3.3 Schema Vocabularies">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3.4" rel="Chapter" title="4.3.4 Meta-Schemas">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3.5" rel="Chapter" title="4.3.5 Root Schema and Subschemas and Resources">
+<link href="#rfc.section.5" rel="Chapter" title="5 Fragment Identifiers">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6" rel="Chapter" title="6 General Considerations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.1 Range of JSON Values">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.2 Programming Language Independence">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.3 Mathematical Integers">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.4 Regular Expressions">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.5 Extending JSON Schema">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7" rel="Chapter" title="7 Keyword Behaviors">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.1 Lexical Scope and Dynamic Scope">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.2 Keyword Interactions">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.3 Default Behaviors">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.4" rel="Chapter" title="7.4 Identifiers">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.5" rel="Chapter" title="7.5 Applicators">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.5.1 Referenced and Referencing Schemas">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.6" rel="Chapter" title="7.6 Assertions">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.6.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.6.1 Assertions and Instance Primitive Types">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.7" rel="Chapter" title="7.7 Annotations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.7.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.7.1 Collecting Annotations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.8" rel="Chapter" title="7.8 Reserved Locations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8" rel="Chapter" title="8 The JSON Schema Core Vocabulary">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1" rel="Chapter" title="8.1 Meta-Schemas and Vocabularies">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1.1" rel="Chapter" title='8.1.1 The "$schema" Keyword'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1.2" rel="Chapter" title='8.1.2 The "$vocabulary" Keyword'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1.3" rel="Chapter" title="8.1.3 Updates to Meta-Schema and Vocabulary URIs">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1.4" rel="Chapter" title="8.1.4 Detecting a Meta-Schema">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2" rel="Chapter" title="8.2 Base URI, Anchors, and Dereferencing">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="8.2.1 Initial Base URI">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2.2" rel="Chapter" title='8.2.2 The "$id" Keyword'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2.3" rel="Chapter" title='8.2.3 Defining location-independent identifiers with "$anchor"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2.4" rel="Chapter" title="8.2.4 Schema References">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2.5" rel="Chapter" title='8.2.5 Schema Re-Use With "$defs"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.3" rel="Chapter" title='8.3 Comments With "$comment"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9" rel="Chapter" title="9 A Vocabulary for Applying Subschemas">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.1" rel="Chapter" title="9.1 Keyword Independence">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.2" rel="Chapter" title="9.2 Keywords for Applying Subschemas in Place">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="9.2.1 Keywords for Applying Subschemas With Boolean Logic">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="9.2.2 Keywords for Applying Subschemas Conditionally">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.3" rel="Chapter" title="9.3 Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Child Instances">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="9.3.1 Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Arrays">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="9.3.2 Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Objects">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10" rel="Chapter" title="10 Output Formatting">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.1" rel="Chapter" title="10.1 Format">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.2" rel="Chapter" title="10.2 Output Formats">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.3" rel="Chapter" title="10.3 Minimum Information">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="10.3.1 Keyword Relative Location">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="10.3.2 Keyword Absolute Location">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.3.3" rel="Chapter" title="10.3.3 Instance Location">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.3.4" rel="Chapter" title="10.3.4 Error or Annotation">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.3.5" rel="Chapter" title="10.3.5 Nested Results">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.4" rel="Chapter" title="10.4 Output Structure">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.4.1" rel="Chapter" title="10.4.1 Flag">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.4.2" rel="Chapter" title="10.4.2 Basic">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.4.3" rel="Chapter" title="10.4.3 Detailed">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.4.4" rel="Chapter" title="10.4.4 Verbose">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.4.5" rel="Chapter" title="10.4.5 Output validation schemas">
+<link href="#rfc.section.11" rel="Chapter" title="11 Usage for Hypermedia">
+<link href="#rfc.section.11.1" rel="Chapter" title="11.1 Linking to a Schema">
+<link href="#rfc.section.11.2" rel="Chapter" title="11.2 Identifying a Schema via a Media Type Parameter">
+<link href="#rfc.section.11.3" rel="Chapter" title="11.3 Usage Over HTTP">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12" rel="Chapter" title="12 Security Considerations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.13" rel="Chapter" title="13 IANA Considerations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.13.1" rel="Chapter" title="13.1 application/schema+json">
+<link href="#rfc.section.13.2" rel="Chapter" title="13.2 application/schema-instance+json">
+<link href="#rfc.references" rel="Chapter" title="14 References">
+<link href="#rfc.references.1" rel="Chapter" title="14.1 Normative References">
+<link href="#rfc.references.2" rel="Chapter" title="14.2 Informative References">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A" rel="Chapter" title="A Schema identification examples">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.B" rel="Chapter" title="B Manipulating schema documents and references">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.B.1" rel="Chapter" title="B.1 Bundling schema resources into a single document">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.B.2" rel="Chapter" title="B.2 Reference removal is not always safe">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.C" rel="Chapter" title="C Example of recursive schema extension">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.D" rel="Chapter" title="D Working with vocabularies">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.D.1" rel="Chapter" title="D.1 Best practices for vocabulary and meta-schema authors">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.D.2" rel="Chapter" title="D.2 Example meta-schema with vocabulary declarations">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.E" rel="Chapter" title="E References and generative use cases">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.F" rel="Chapter" title="F Acknowledgments">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.G" rel="Chapter" title="G ChangeLog">
+<link href="#rfc.authors" rel="Chapter">
+
+
+  <meta name="generator" content="xml2rfc version 2.20.1 - https://tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc" />
+  <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" />
+
+  <meta name="dct.creator" content="Wright, A., Ed., Andrews, H., Ed., Hutton, B., Ed., and G. Dennis" />
+  <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-handrews-json-schema-02" />
+  <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2019-17" />
+  <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Schema defines the media type &quot;application/schema+json&quot;, a JSON-based format for describing the structure of JSON data.  JSON Schema asserts what a JSON document must look like, ways to extract information from it, and how to interact with it.  The &quot;application/schema-instance+json&quot; media type provides additional feature-rich integration with &quot;application/schema+json&quot; beyond what can be offered for &quot;application/json&quot; documents.  " />
+  <meta name="description" content="JSON Schema defines the media type &quot;application/schema+json&quot;, a JSON-based format for describing the structure of JSON data.  JSON Schema asserts what a JSON document must look like, ways to extract information from it, and how to interact with it.  The &quot;application/schema-instance+json&quot; media type provides additional feature-rich integration with &quot;application/schema+json&quot; beyond what can be offered for &quot;application/json&quot; documents.  " />
+
+</head>
+
+<body>
+
+  <table class="header">
+    <tbody>
+    
+    	<tr>
+<td class="left">Internet Engineering Task Force</td>
+<td class="right">A. Wright, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
+<td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Intended status: Informational</td>
+<td class="right">H. Andrews, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Expires: March 20, 2020</td>
+<td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left"></td>
+<td class="right">B. Hutton, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left"></td>
+<td class="right">Wellcome Sanger Institute</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left"></td>
+<td class="right">G. Dennis</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left"></td>
+<td class="right">September 17, 2019</td>
+</tr>
+
+    	
+    </tbody>
+  </table>
+
+  <p class="title">JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents<br />
+  <span class="filename">draft-handrews-json-schema-02</span></p>
+  
+  <h1 id="rfc.abstract"><a href="#rfc.abstract">Abstract</a></h1>
+<p>JSON Schema defines the media type "application/schema+json", a JSON-based format for describing the structure of JSON data.  JSON Schema asserts what a JSON document must look like, ways to extract information from it, and how to interact with it.  The "application/schema-instance+json" media type provides additional feature-rich integration with "application/schema+json" beyond what can be offered for "application/json" documents.  </p>
+<h1><a>Note to Readers</a></h1>
+<p>The issues list for this draft can be found at <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues">https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>For additional information, see <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/">https://json-schema.org/</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>To provide feedback, use this issue tracker, the communication methods listed on the homepage, or email the document editors.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.status"><a href="#rfc.status">Status of This Memo</a></h1>
+<p>This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.</p>
+<p>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/.</p>
+<p>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."</p>
+<p>This Internet-Draft will expire on March 20, 2020.</p>
+<h1 id="rfc.copyrightnotice"><a href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a></h1>
+<p>Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors.  All rights reserved.</p>
+<p>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.</p>
+
+  
+  <hr class="noprint" />
+  <h1 class="np" id="rfc.toc"><a href="#rfc.toc">Table of Contents</a></h1>
+  <ul class="toc">
+
+  	<li>1.   <a href="#rfc.section.1">Introduction</a>
+</li>
+<li>2.   <a href="#rfc.section.2">Conventions and Terminology</a>
+</li>
+<li>3.   <a href="#rfc.section.3">Overview</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.   <a href="#rfc.section.4">Definitions</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>4.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.1">JSON Document</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.2">Instance</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>4.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.2.1">Instance Data Model</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.2.2">Instance Media Types</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.2.3">Instance Equality</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>4.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3">JSON Schema Documents</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>4.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3.1">JSON Schema Objects and Keywords</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3.2">Boolean JSON Schemas</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.3.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3.3">Schema Vocabularies</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.3.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3.4">Meta-Schemas</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.3.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3.5">Root Schema and Subschemas and Resources</a>
+</li>
+</ul></ul><li>5.   <a href="#rfc.section.5">Fragment Identifiers</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6">General Considerations</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1">Range of JSON Values</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2">Programming Language Independence</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3">Mathematical Integers</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4">Regular Expressions</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5">Extending JSON Schema</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7">Keyword Behaviors</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.1">Lexical Scope and Dynamic Scope</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2">Keyword Interactions</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3">Default Behaviors</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.4">Identifiers</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.5">Applicators</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.5.1">Referenced and Referencing Schemas</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>7.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.6">Assertions</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.6.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.6.1">Assertions and Instance Primitive Types</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>7.7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.7">Annotations</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.7.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.7.1">Collecting Annotations</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>7.8.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.8">Reserved Locations</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>8.   <a href="#rfc.section.8">The JSON Schema Core Vocabulary</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>8.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1">Meta-Schemas and Vocabularies</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>8.1.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1.1">The "$schema" Keyword</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.1.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1.2">The "$vocabulary" Keyword</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.1.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1.3">Updates to Meta-Schema and Vocabulary URIs</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.1.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1.4">Detecting a Meta-Schema</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>8.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2">Base URI, Anchors, and Dereferencing</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>8.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2.1">Initial Base URI</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2.2">The "$id" Keyword</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2.3">Defining location-independent identifiers with "$anchor"</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.2.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2.4">Schema References</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.2.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2.5">Schema Re-Use With "$defs"</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>8.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.3">Comments With "$comment"</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>9.   <a href="#rfc.section.9">A Vocabulary for Applying Subschemas</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>9.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.1">Keyword Independence</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.2">Keywords for Applying Subschemas in Place</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>9.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.2.1">Keywords for Applying Subschemas With Boolean Logic</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.2.2">Keywords for Applying Subschemas Conditionally</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>9.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.3">Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Child Instances</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>9.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.3.1">Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Arrays</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.3.2">Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Objects</a>
+</li>
+</ul></ul><li>10.   <a href="#rfc.section.10">Output Formatting</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>10.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.1">Format</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.2">Output Formats</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.3">Minimum Information</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>10.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.3.1">Keyword Relative Location</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.3.2">Keyword Absolute Location</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.3.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.3.3">Instance Location</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.3.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.3.4">Error or Annotation</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.3.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.3.5">Nested Results</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>10.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.4">Output Structure</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>10.4.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.4.1">Flag</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.4.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.4.2">Basic</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.4.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.4.3">Detailed</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.4.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.4.4">Verbose</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.4.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.4.5">Output validation schemas</a>
+</li>
+</ul></ul><li>11.   <a href="#rfc.section.11">Usage for Hypermedia</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>11.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.11.1">Linking to a Schema</a>
+</li>
+<li>11.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.11.2">Identifying a Schema via a Media Type Parameter</a>
+</li>
+<li>11.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.11.3">Usage Over HTTP</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>12.   <a href="#rfc.section.12">Security Considerations</a>
+</li>
+<li>13.   <a href="#rfc.section.13">IANA Considerations</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>13.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.13.1">application/schema+json</a>
+</li>
+<li>13.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.13.2">application/schema-instance+json</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>14.   <a href="#rfc.references">References</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>14.1.   <a href="#rfc.references.1">Normative References</a>
+</li>
+<li>14.2.   <a href="#rfc.references.2">Informative References</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>Appendix A.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Schema identification examples</a>
+</li>
+<li>Appendix B.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.B">Manipulating schema documents and references</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>B.1.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.B.1">Bundling schema resources into a single document</a>
+</li>
+<li>B.2.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.B.2">Reference removal is not always safe</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>Appendix C.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.C">Example of recursive schema extension</a>
+</li>
+<li>Appendix D.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.D">Working with vocabularies</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>D.1.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.D.1">Best practices for vocabulary and meta-schema authors</a>
+</li>
+<li>D.2.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.D.2">Example meta-schema with vocabulary declarations</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>Appendix E.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.E">References and generative use cases</a>
+</li>
+<li>Appendix F.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.F">Acknowledgments</a>
+</li>
+<li>Appendix G.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.G">ChangeLog</a>
+</li>
+<li><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a>
+</li>
+
+
+  </ul>
+
+  <h1 id="rfc.section.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.1">1.</a> Introduction</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.1">JSON Schema is a JSON media type for defining the structure of JSON data. JSON Schema is intended to define validation, documentation, hyperlink navigation, and interaction control of JSON data.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.2">This specification defines JSON Schema core terminology and mechanisms, including pointing to another JSON Schema by reference, dereferencing a JSON Schema reference, specifying the vocabulary being used, and defining the expected output.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.3">Other specifications define the vocabularies that perform assertions about validation, linking, annotation, navigation, and interaction.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.2">2.</a> Conventions and Terminology</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.1">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 <a href="#RFC2119" class="xref">RFC 2119</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.2">The terms "JSON", "JSON text", "JSON value", "member", "element", "object", "array", "number", "string", "boolean", "true", "false", and "null" in this document are to be interpreted as defined in <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC 8259</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.3">3.</a> Overview</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.1">This document proposes a new media type "application/schema+json" to identify a JSON Schema for describing JSON data.  It also proposes a further optional media type, "application/schema-instance+json", to provide additional integration features.  JSON Schemas are themselves JSON documents.  This, and related specifications, define keywords allowing authors to describe JSON data in several ways.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.2">JSON Schema uses keywords to assert constraints on JSON instances or annotate those instances with additional information.  Additional keywords are used to apply assertions and annotations to more complex JSON data structures, or based on some sort of condition.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.3">To facilitate re-use, keywords can be organized into vocabularies.  A vocabulary consists of a list of keywords, together with their syntax and semantics.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.4">JSON Schema can be extended either by defining additional vocabularies, or less formally by defining additional keywords outside of any vocabulary.  Unrecognized individual keywords are ignored, while the behavior with respect to an unrecognized vocabulary can be controlled when declaring which vocabularies are in use.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.5">This document defines a core vocabulary that MUST be supported by any implementation, and cannot be disabled.  Its keywords are each prefixed with a "$" character to emphasize their required nature.  This vocabulary is essential to the functioning of the "application/schema+json" media type, and is used to bootstrap the loading of other vocabularies.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.6">Additionally, this document defines a RECOMMENDED vocabulary of keywords for applying subschemas conditionally, and for applying subschemas to the contents of objects and arrays.  Either this vocabulary or one very much like it is required to write schemas for non-trivial JSON instances, whether those schemas are intended for assertion validation, annotation, or both.  While not part of the required core vocabulary, for maximum interoperability this additional vocabulary is included in this document and its use is strongly encouraged.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.7">Further vocabularies for purposes such as structural validation or hypermedia annotation are defined in other documents.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4">4.</a> Definitions</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.1">4.1.</a> JSON Document</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.1">A JSON document is an information resource (series of octets) described by the application/json media type.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.2">In JSON Schema, the terms "JSON document", "JSON text", and "JSON value" are interchangeable because of the data model it defines.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.3">JSON Schema is only defined over JSON documents. However, any document or memory structure that can be parsed into or processed according to the JSON Schema data model can be interpreted against a JSON Schema, including media types like <a href="#RFC7049" class="xref">CBOR</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.2">4.2.</a> Instance</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.p.1">A JSON document to which a schema is applied is known as an "instance".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.2.1">4.2.1.</a> Instance Data Model</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.1.p.1">JSON Schema interprets documents according to a data model. A JSON value interpreted according to this data model is called an "instance".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.1.p.2">An instance has one of six primitive types, and a range of possible values depending on the type: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>null:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A JSON "null" production</dd>
+<dt>boolean:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A "true" or "false" value, from the JSON "true" or "false" productions</dd>
+<dt>object:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">An unordered set of properties mapping a string to an instance, from the JSON "object" production</dd>
+<dt>array:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">An ordered list of instances, from the JSON "array" production</dd>
+<dt>number:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">An arbitrary-precision, base-10 decimal number value, from the JSON "number" production</dd>
+<dt>string:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string of Unicode code points, from the JSON "string" production</dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.1.p.3">Whitespace and formatting concerns, including different lexical representations of numbers that are equal within the data model, are thus outside the scope of JSON Schema.  JSON Schema <a href="#vocabulary" class="xref">vocabularies</a> that wish to work with such differences in lexical representations SHOULD define keywords to precisely interpret formatted strings within the data model rather than relying on having the original JSON representation Unicode characters available.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.1.p.4">Since an object cannot have two properties with the same key, behavior for a JSON document that tries to define two properties (the "member" production) with the same key (the "string" production) in a single object is undefined.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.1.p.5">Note that JSON Schema vocabularies are free to define their own extended type system.  This should not be confused with the core data model types defined here.  As an example, "integer" is a reasonable type for a vocabulary to define as a value for a keyword, but the data model makes no distinction between integers and other numbers.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.2.2">4.2.2.</a> Instance Media Types</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.2.p.1">JSON Schema is designed to fully work with "application/json" documents, as well as media types using the "+json" structured syntax suffix.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.2.p.2">Some functionality that is useful for working with schemas is defined by each media type, namely media type parameters and URI fragment identifier syntax and semantics.  These features are useful in content negotiation and in calculating URIs for specific locations within an instance, respectively.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.2.p.3">This specification defines the "application/schema-instance+json" media type in order to allow instance authors to take full advantage of parameters and fragment identifiers for these purposes.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.2.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.2.3">4.2.3.</a> Instance Equality</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.3.p.1">Two JSON instances are said to be equal if and only if they are of the same type and have the same value according to the data model. Specifically, this means: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>both are null; or</li>
+<li>both are true; or</li>
+<li>both are false; or</li>
+<li>both are strings, and are the same codepoint-for-codepoint; or</li>
+<li>both are numbers, and have the same mathematical value; or</li>
+<li>both are arrays, and have an equal value item-for-item; or</li>
+<li>both are objects, and each property in one has exactly one property with a key equal to the other's, and that other property has an equal value.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.3.p.2">Implied in this definition is that arrays must be the same length, objects must have the same number of members, properties in objects are unordered, there is no way to define multiple properties with the same key, and mere formatting differences (indentation, placement of commas, trailing zeros) are insignificant.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.3">4.3.</a> <a href="#schema-document" id="schema-document">JSON Schema Documents</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.p.1">A JSON Schema document, or simply a schema, is a JSON document used to describe an instance.  A schema can itself be interpreted as an instance, but SHOULD always be given the media type "application/schema+json" rather than "application/schema-instance+json".  The "application/schema+json" media type is defined to offer a superset of the media type parameter and fragment identifier syntax and semantics provided by "application/schema-instance+json".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.p.2">A JSON Schema MUST be an object or a boolean.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.3.1">4.3.1.</a> JSON Schema Objects and Keywords</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.1">Object properties that are applied to the instance are called keywords, or schema keywords.  Broadly speaking, keywords fall into one of four categories: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>identifiers:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">control schema identification through setting the schema's canonical URI and/or changing how the base URI is determined </dd>
+<dt>assertions:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">produce a boolean result when applied to an instance </dd>
+<dt>annotations:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">attach information to an instance for application use </dd>
+<dt>applicators:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">apply one or more subschemas to a particular location in the instance, and combine or modify their results </dd>
+<dt>reserved locations:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">do not directly affect results, but reserve a place for a specific purpose to ensure interoperability </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.2">Keywords may fall into multiple categories, although applicators SHOULD only produce assertion results based on their subschemas' results.  They should not define additional constraints independent of their subschemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.3">Extension keywords, meaning those defined outside of this document and its companions, are free to define other behaviors as well.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.4">A JSON Schema MAY contain properties which are not schema keywords.  Unknown keywords SHOULD be ignored.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.5">An empty schema is a JSON Schema with no properties, or only unknown properties.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.3.2">4.3.2.</a> Boolean JSON Schemas</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.2.p.1">The boolean schema values "true" and "false" are trivial schemas that always produce themselves as assertions results, regardless of the instance value.  They never produce annotation results.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.2.p.2">These boolean schemas exist to clarify schema author intent and facilitate schema processing optimizations.  They behave identically to the following schema objects (where "not" is part of the subschema application vocabulary defined in this document).  </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>true:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">Always passes validation, as if the empty schema {} </dd>
+<dt>false:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">Always fails validation, as if the schema { "not": {} } </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> While the empty schema object is unambiguous, there are many possible equivalents to the "false" schema.  Using the boolean values ensures that the intent is clear to both human readers and implementations.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.3.3">4.3.3.</a> Schema Vocabularies</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.3.p.1">A schema vocabulary, or simply a vocabulary, is a set of keywords, their syntax, and their semantics.  A vocabulary is generally organized around a particular purpose.  Different uses of JSON Schema, such as validation, hypermedia, or user interface generation, will involve different sets of vocabularies.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.3.p.2">Vocabularies are the primary unit of re-use in JSON Schema, as schema authors can indicate what vocabularies are required or optional in order to process the schema.  Since vocabularies are identified by URIs in the meta-schema, generic implementations can load extensions to support previously unknown vocabularies.  While keywords can be supported outside of any vocabulary, there is no analogous mechanism to indicate individual keyword usage.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.3.4">4.3.4.</a> Meta-Schemas</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.4.p.1">A schema that itself describes a schema is called a meta-schema.  Meta-schemas are used to validate JSON Schemas and specify which vocabularies they are using.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.4.p.2">Typically, a meta-schema will specify a set of vocabularies, and validate schemas that conform to the syntax of those vocabularies.  However, meta-schemas and vocabularies are separate in order to allow meta-schemas to validate schema conformance more strictly or more loosely than the vocabularies' specifications call for.  Meta-schemas may also describe and validate additional keywords that are not part of a formal vocabulary.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.3.5">4.3.5.</a> <a href="#root" id="root">Root Schema and Subschemas and Resources</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.5.p.1">A JSON Schema resource is a schema which is <a href="#RFC6596" class="xref">canonically</a> identified by an <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">absolute URI</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.5.p.2">The root schema is the schema that comprises the entire JSON document in question.  The root schema is always a schema resource, where the URI is determined as described in section <a href="#initial-base" class="xref">8.2.1</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.5.p.3">Some keywords take schemas themselves, allowing JSON Schemas to be nested: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "title": "root",
+    "items": {
+        "title": "array item"
+    }
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.5.p.4">In this example document, the schema titled "array item" is a subschema, and the schema titled "root" is the root schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.5.p.5">As with the root schema, a subschema is either an object or a boolean.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.5.p.6">As discussed in section <a href="#id-keyword" class="xref">8.2.2</a>, a JSON Schema document can contain multiple JSON Schema resources.  When used without qualification, the term "root schema" refers to the document's root schema.  In some cases, resource root schemas are discussed.  A resource's root schema is its top-level schema object, which would also be a document root schema if the resource were to be extracted to a standalone JSON Schema document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.5">5.</a> <a href="#fragments" id="fragments">Fragment Identifiers</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.1">In accordance with section 3.1 of <a href="#RFC6839" class="xref">[RFC6839]</a>, the syntax and semantics of fragment identifiers specified for any +json media type SHOULD be as specified for "application/json".  (At publication of this document, there is no fragment identification syntax defined for "application/json".) </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.2">Additionally, the "application/schema+json" media type supports two fragment identifier structures: plain names and JSON Pointers.  The "application/schema-instance+json" media type supports one fragment identifier structure: JSON Pointers.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.3">The use of JSON Pointers as URI fragment identifiers is described in <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901</a>.  For "application/schema+json", which supports two fragment identifier syntaxes, fragment identifiers matching the JSON Pointer syntax, including the empty string, MUST be interpreted as JSON Pointer fragment identifiers.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.4">Per the W3C's <a href="#W3C.WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025" class="xref">best practices for fragment identifiers</a>, plain name fragment identifiers in "application/schema+json" are reserved for referencing locally named schemas.  All fragment identifiers that do not match the JSON Pointer syntax MUST be interpreted as plain name fragment identifiers.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.5">Defining and referencing a plain name fragment identifier within an "application/schema+json" document are specified in the <a href="#anchor" class="xref">"$anchor" keyword</a> section.  </p>
+<p></p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6">6.</a> General Considerations</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.1">6.1.</a> Range of JSON Values</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.p.1">An instance may be any valid JSON value as defined by <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">JSON</a>.  JSON Schema imposes no restrictions on type: JSON Schema can describe any JSON value, including, for example, null.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2">6.2.</a> <a href="#language" id="language">Programming Language Independence</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.p.1">JSON Schema is programming language agnostic, and supports the full range of values described in the data model.  Be aware, however, that some languages and JSON parsers may not be able to represent in memory the full range of values describable by JSON.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.3">6.3.</a> <a href="#integers" id="integers">Mathematical Integers</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.p.1">Some programming languages and parsers use different internal representations for floating point numbers than they do for integers.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.p.2">For consistency, integer JSON numbers SHOULD NOT be encoded with a fractional part.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4">6.4.</a> <a href="#regex" id="regex">Regular Expressions</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.1">Keywords MAY use regular expressions to express constraints, or constrain the instance value to be a regular expression.  These regular expressions SHOULD be valid according to the regular expression dialect described in <a href="#ecma262" class="xref">ECMA 262, section 15.10.1</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.2">Furthermore, given the high disparity in regular expression constructs support, schema authors SHOULD limit themselves to the following regular expression tokens: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>individual Unicode characters, as defined by the <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">JSON specification</a>;</li>
+<li>simple character classes ([abc]), range character classes ([a-z]);</li>
+<li>complemented character classes ([^abc], [^a-z]);</li>
+<li>simple quantifiers: "+" (one or more), "*" (zero or more), "?" (zero or one), and their lazy versions ("+?", "*?", "??");</li>
+<li>range quantifiers: "{x}" (exactly x occurrences), "{x,y}" (at least x, at most y, occurrences), {x,} (x occurrences or more), and their lazy versions;</li>
+<li>the beginning-of-input ("^") and end-of-input ("$") anchors;</li>
+<li>simple grouping ("(...)") and alternation ("|").</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.3">Finally, implementations MUST NOT take regular expressions to be anchored, neither at the beginning nor at the end. This means, for instance, the pattern "es" matches "expression".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5">6.5.</a> <a href="#extending" id="extending">Extending JSON Schema</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.p.1">Additional schema keywords and schema vocabularies MAY be defined by any entity.  Save for explicit agreement, schema authors SHALL NOT expect these additional keywords and vocabularies to be supported by implementations that do not explicitly document such support.  Implementations SHOULD ignore keywords they do not support.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.p.2">Implementations MAY provide the ability to register or load handlers for vocabularies that they do not support directly.  The exact mechanism for registering and implementing such handlers is implementation-dependent.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7">7.</a> Keyword Behaviors</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.1">JSON Schema keywords fall into several general behavior categories.  Assertions validate that an instance satisfies constraints, producing a boolean result.  Annotations attach information that applications may use in any way they see fit.  Applicators apply subschemas to parts of the instance and combine their results.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.2">Extension keywords SHOULD stay within these categories, keeping in mind that annotations in particular are extremely flexible.  Complex behavior is usually better delegated to applications on the basis of annotation data than implemented directly as schema keywords.  However, extension keywords MAY define other behaviors for specialized purposes.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.3">Evaluating an instance against a schema involves processing all of the keywords in the schema against the appropriate locations within the instance.  Typically, applicator keywords are processed until a schema object with no applicators (and therefore no subschemas) is reached.  The appropriate location in the instance is evaluated against the assertion and annotation keywords in the schema object, and their results are gathered into the parent schema according to the rules of the applicator.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.4">Evaluation of a parent schema object can complete once all of its subschemas have been evaluated, although in some circumstances evaluation may be short-circuited due to assertion results.  When annotations are being collected, some assertion result short-circuiting is not possible due to the need to examine all subschemas for annotation collection, including those that cannot further change the assertion result.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.1">7.1.</a> <a href="#scopes" id="scopes">Lexical Scope and Dynamic Scope</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.1">While most JSON Schema keywords can be evaluated on their own, or at most need to take into account the values or results of adjacent keywords in the same schema object, a few have more complex behavior.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.2">The lexical scope of a keyword is determined by the nested JSON data structure of objects and arrays.  The largest such scope is an entire schema document.  The smallest scope is a single schema object with no subschemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.3">Keywords MAY be defined with a partial value, such as a URI-reference, which must be resolved against another value, such as another URI-reference or a full URI, which is found through the lexical structure of the JSON document.  The "$id" core keyword and the "base" JSON Hyper-Schema keyword are examples of this sort of behavior.  Additionally, "$ref" and "$recursiveRef" from this specification resolve their values in this way, although they do not change how further values are resolved.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.4">Note that some keywords, such as "$schema", apply to the lexical scope of the entire schema document, and therefore MUST only appear in a schema resource's root schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.5">Other keywords may take into account the dynamic scope that exists during the evaluation of a schema, typically together with an instance document.  The outermost dynamic scope is the root schema of the schema document in which processing begins.  The path from this root schema to any particular keyword (that includes any "$ref" and "$recursiveRef" keywords that may have been resolved) is considered the keyword's "validation path." <a id="CREF1" class="info">[CREF1]<span class="info">Or should this be the schema object at which processing begins, even if it is not a root?  This has some implications for the case where "$recursiveAnchor" is only allowed in the root schema but processing begins in a subschema.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.6">Lexical and dynamic scopes align until a reference keyword is encountered.  While following the reference keyword moves processing from one lexical scope into a different one, from the perspective of dynamic scope, following reference is no different from descending into a subschema present as a value.  A keyword on the far side of that reference that resolves information through the dynamic scope will consider the originating side of the reference to be their dynamic parent, rather than examining the local lexically enclosing parent.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.7">The concept of dynamic scope is primarily used with "$recursiveRef" and "$recursiveAnchor", and should be considered an advanced feature and used with caution when defining additional keywords.  It also appears when reporting errors and collected annotations, as it may be possible to revisit the same lexical scope repeatedly with different dynamic scopes.  In such cases, it is important to inform the user of the dynamic path that produced the error or annotation.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.2">7.2.</a> Keyword Interactions</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.1">Keyword behavior MAY be defined in terms of the annotation results of <a href="#root" class="xref">subschemas</a> and/or adjacent keywords.  Such keywords MUST NOT result in a circular dependency.  Keywords MAY modify their behavior based on the presence or absence of another keyword in the same <a href="#schema-document" class="xref">schema object</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3">7.3.</a> Default Behaviors</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.1">A missing keyword MUST NOT produce a false assertion result, MUST NOT produce annotation results, and MUST NOT cause any other schema to be evaluated as part of its own behavioral definition.  However, given that missing keywords do not contribute annotations, the lack of annotation results may indirectly change the behavior of other keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.2">In some cases, the missing keyword assertion behavior of a keyword is identical to that produced by a certain value, and keyword definitions SHOULD note such values where known.  However, even if the value which produces the default behavior would produce annotation results if present, the default behavior still MUST NOT result in annotations.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.3">Because annotation collection can add significant cost in terms of both computation and memory, implementations MAY opt out of this feature.  Keywords known to an implementation to have assertion or applicator behavior that depend on annotation results MUST then be treated as errors, unless an alternate implementation producing the same behavior is available.  Keywords of this sort SHOULD describe reasonable alternate approaches when appropriate.  This approach is demonstrated by the "<a href="#additionalItems" class="xref">additionalItems</a>" and "<a href="#additionalProperties" class="xref">additionalProperties</a>" keywords in this document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.4">7.4.</a> <a href="#identifiers" id="identifiers">Identifiers</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.1">Identifiers set the canonical URI of a schema, or affect how such URIs are resolved in <a href="#references" class="xref">references</a>, or both.  The Core vocabulary defined in this document defines several identifying keywords, most notably "$id".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.2">Canonical schema URIs MUST NOT change while processing an instance, but keywords that affect URI-reference resolution MAY have behavior that is only fully determined at runtime.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.3">While custom identifier keywords are possible, vocabulary designers should take care not to disrupt the functioning of core keywords. For example, the "$recursiveAnchor" keyword in this specification limits its URI resolution effects to the matching "$recursiveRef" keyword, leaving "$ref" undisturbed.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.5">7.5.</a> <a href="#applicators" id="applicators">Applicators</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.1">Applicators allow for building more complex schemas than can be accomplished with a single schema object.  Evaluation of an instance against a <a href="#schema-document" class="xref">schema document</a> begins by applying the <a href="#root" class="xref">root schema</a> to the complete instance document.  From there, keywords known as applicators are used to determine which additional schemas are applied.  Such schemas may be applied in-place to the current location, or to a child location.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.2">The schemas to be applied may be present as subschemas comprising all or part of the keyword's value.  Alternatively, an applicator may refer to a schema elsewhere in the same schema document, or in a different one.  The mechanism for identifying such referenced schemas is defined by the keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.3">Applicator keywords also define how subschema or referenced schema boolean <a href="#assertions" class="xref">assertion</a> results are modified and/or combined to produce the boolean result of the applicator.  Applicators may apply any boolean logic operation to the assertion results of subschemas, but MUST NOT introduce new assertion conditions of their own.  </p>
+<p><a href="#annotations" class="xref">Annotation</a> results are combined according to the rules specified by each annotation keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.5.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.5.1">7.5.1.</a> <a href="#referenced" id="referenced">Referenced and Referencing Schemas</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.1.p.1">As noted in <a href="#applicators" class="xref">Section 7.5</a>, an applicator keyword may refer to a schema to be applied, rather than including it as a subschema in the applicator's value.  In such situations, the schema being applied is known as the referenced schema, while the schema containing the applicator keyword is the referencing schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.1.p.2">While root schemas and subschemas are static concepts based on a schema's position within a schema document, referenced and referencing schemas are dynamic.  Different pairs of schemas may find themselves in various referenced and referencing arrangements during the evaluation of an instance against a schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.1.p.3">For some by-reference applicators, such as <a href="#ref" class="xref">"$ref"</a>, the referenced schema can be determined by static analysis of the schema document's lexical scope.  Others, such as "$recursiveRef" and "$recursiveAnchor",  may make use of dynamic scoping, and therefore only be resolvable in the process of evaluating the schema with an instance.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.6">7.6.</a> <a href="#assertions" id="assertions">Assertions</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.p.1">JSON Schema can be used to assert constraints on a JSON document, which either passes or fails the assertions.  This approach can be used to validate conformance with the constraints, or document what is needed to satisfy them.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.p.2">JSON Schema implementations produce a single boolean result when evaluating an instance against schema assertions.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.p.3">An instance can only fail an assertion that is present in the schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.6.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.6.1">7.6.1.</a> Assertions and Instance Primitive Types</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.1.p.1">Most assertions only constrain values within a certain primitive type.  When the type of the instance is not of the type targeted by the keyword, the instance is considered to conform to the assertion.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.1.p.2">For example, the "maxLength" keyword from the companion <a href="#json-schema-validation" class="xref">validation vocabulary</a>: will only restrict certain strings (that are too long) from being valid.  If the instance is a number, boolean, null, array, or object, then it is valid against this assertion.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.1.p.3">This behavior allows keywords to be used more easily with instances that can be of multiple primitive types.  The companion validation vocabulary also includes a "type" keyword which can independently restrict the instance to one or more primitive types.  This allows for a concise expression of use cases such as a function that might return either a string of a certain length or a null value: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": ["string", "null"],
+    "maxLength": 255
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<p>If "maxLength" also restricted the instance type to be a string, then this would be substantially more cumbersome to express because the example as written would not actually allow null values.  Each keyword is evaluated separately unless explicitly specified otherwise, so if "maxLength" restricted the instance to strings, then including "null" in "type" would not have any useful effect.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.7">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.7">7.7.</a> <a href="#annotations" id="annotations">Annotations</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.p.1">JSON Schema can annotate an instance with information, whenever the instance validates against the schema object containing the annotation, and all of its parent schema objects.  The information can be a simple value, or can be calculated based on the instance contents.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.p.2">Annotations are attached to specific locations in an instance.  Since many subschemas can be applied to any single location, annotation keywords need to specify any unusual handling of multiple applicable occurrences of the keyword with different values.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.p.3">Unlike assertion results, annotation data can take a wide variety of forms, which are provided to applications to use as they see fit.  JSON Schema implementations are not expected to make use of the collected information on behalf of applications.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.p.4">Unless otherwise specified, the value of an annotation keyword's annotation is the keyword's value.  However, other behaviors are possible.  For example, <a href="#json-hyper-schema" class="xref">JSON Hyper-Schema's</a> "links" keyword is a complex annotation that produces a value based in part on the instance data.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.p.5">While "short-circuit" evaluation is possible for assertions, collecting annotations requires examining all schemas that apply to an instance location, even if they cannot change the overall assertion result.  The only exception is that subschemas of a schema object that has failed validation MAY be skipped, as annotations are not retained for failing schemas.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.7.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.7.1">7.7.1.</a> Collecting Annotations</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.p.1">Annotations are collected by keywords that explicitly define annotation-collecting behavior.  Note that boolean schemas cannot produce annotations as they do not make use of keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.p.2">A collected annotation MUST include the following information: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>The name of the keyword that produces the annotation </li>
+<li>The instance location to which it is attached, as a JSON Pointer </li>
+<li>The schema location path, indicating how reference keywords such as "$ref" were followed to reach the absolute schema location.  </li>
+<li>The absolute schema location of the attaching keyword, as a URI.  This MAY be omitted if it is the same as the schema location path from above.  </li>
+<li>The attached value(s) </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.p.3">If the same keyword attaches values from multiple schema locations to the same instance location, and the annotation defines a process for combining such values, then the combined value MUST also be associated with the instance location.  The <a href="#output" class="xref">output formats</a> described in this specification that include annotation information meet this requirement.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.7.1.1">7.7.1.1.</a> Distinguishing Among Multiple Values</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1.p.1">Applications MAY make decisions on which of multiple annotation values to use based on the schema location that contributed the value.  This is intended to allow flexible usage.  Collecting the schema location facilitates such usage.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1.p.2">For example, consider this schema, which uses annotations and assertions from the <a href="#json-schema-validation" class="xref">Validation specification</a>: </p>
+<p>Note that some lines are wrapped for clarity.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "title": "Feature list",
+    "type": "array",
+    "items": [
+        {
+            "title": "Feature A",
+            "properties": {
+                "enabled": {
+                    "$ref": "#/$defs/enabledToggle",
+                    "default": true
+                }
+            }
+        },
+        {
+            "title": "Feature B",
+            "properties": {
+                "enabled": {
+                    "description": "If set to null, Feature B
+                                    inherits the enabled
+                                    value from Feature A",
+                    "$ref": "#/$defs/enabledToggle"
+                }
+            }
+        }
+    ],
+    "$defs": {
+        "enabledToggle": {
+            "title": "Enabled",
+            "description": "Whether the feature is enabled (true),
+                            disabled (false), or under
+                            automatic control (null)",
+            "type": ["boolean", "null"],
+            "default": null
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+                            </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1.p.3">In this example, both Feature A and Feature B make use of the re-usable "enabledToggle" schema.  That schema uses the "title", "description", and "default" annotations, none of which define special behavior for handling multiple values.  Therefore the application has to decide how to handle the additional "default" value for Feature A, and the additional "description" value for Feature B.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1.p.4">The application programmer and the schema author need to agree on the usage.  For this example, let's assume that they agree that the most specific "default" value will be used, and any additional, more generic "default" values will be silently ignored.  Let's also assume that they agree that all "description" text is to be used, starting with the most generic, and ending with the most specific.  This requires the schema author to write descriptions that work when combined in this way.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1.p.5">The application can use the schema location path to determine which values are which.  The values in the feature's immediate "enabled" property schema are more specific, while the values under the re-usable schema that is referenced to with "$ref" are more generic.  The schema location path will show whether each value was found by crossing a "$ref" or not.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1.p.6">Feature A will therefore use a default value of true, while Feature B will use the generic default value of null.  Feature A will only have the generic description from the "enabledToggle" schema, while Feature B will use that description, and also append its locally defined description that explains how to interpret a null value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1.p.7">Note that there are other reasonable approaches that a different application might take.  For example, an application may consider the presence of two different values for "default" to be an error, regardless of their schema locations.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.7.1.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.7.1.2">7.7.1.2.</a> Annotations and Assertions</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.2.p.1">Schema objects that produce a false assertion result MUST NOT produce any annotation results, whether from their own keywords or from keywords in subschemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.2.p.2">Note that the overall schema results may still include annotations collected from other schema locations.  Given this schema: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "oneOf": [
+        {
+            "title": "Integer Value",
+            "type": "integer"
+        },
+        {
+            "title": "String Value",
+            "type": "string"
+        }
+    ]
+}
+
+                            </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.2.p.3">And the instance <samp>"This is a string"</samp>, the title annotation "Integer Value" is discarded because the type assertion in that schema object fails.  The title annotation "String Value" is kept, as the instance passes the string type assertions.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.7.1.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.7.1.3">7.7.1.3.</a> Annotations and Applicators</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.3.p.1">In addition to possibly defining annotation results of their own, applicator keywords aggregate the annotations collected in their subschema(s) or referenced schema(s).  The rules for aggregating annotation values are defined by each annotation keyword, and are not directly affected by the logic used for combining assertion results.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.8">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.8">7.8.</a> Reserved Locations</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.8.p.1">A fourth category of keywords simply reserve a location to hold re-usable components or data of interest to schema authors that is not suitable for re-use.  These keywords do not affect validation or annotation results.  Their purpose in the core vocabulary is to ensure that locations are available for certain purposes and will not be redefined by extension keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.8.p.2">While these keywords do not directly affect results, as explained in section <a href="#non-schemas" class="xref">8.2.4.4</a> unrecognized extension keywords that reserve locations for re-usable schemas may have undesirable interactions with references in certain circumstances.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8">8.</a> The JSON Schema Core Vocabulary</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.1">Keywords declared in this section, which all begin with "$", make up the JSON Schema Core vocabulary.  These keywords are either required in order process any schema or meta-schema, including those split across multiple documents, or exist to reserve keywords for purposes that require guaranteed interoperability.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.2">The Core vocabulary MUST be considered mandatory at all times, in order to bootstrap the processing of further vocabularies.  Meta-schemas that use the <a href="#vocabulary" class="xref">"$vocabulary"</a> keyword to declare the vocabularies in use MUST explicitly list the Core vocabulary, which MUST have a value of true indicating that it is required.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.3">The behavior of a false value for this vocabulary (and only this vocabulary) is undefined, as is the behavior when "$vocabulary" is present but the Core vocabulary is not included.  However, it is RECOMMENDED that implementations detect these cases and raise an error when they occur.  It is not meaningful to declare that a meta-schema optionally uses Core.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.4">Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" MUST be considered to require the Core vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.5">The current URI for the Core vocabulary is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/core">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/core</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.6">The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/core">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/core</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.7">While the "$" prefix is not formally reserved for the Core vocabulary, it is RECOMMENDED that extension keywords (in vocabularies or otherwise) begin with a character other than "$" to avoid possible future collisions.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1">8.1.</a> <a href="#vocabulary" id="vocabulary">Meta-Schemas and Vocabularies</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.1">Two concepts, meta-schemas and vocabularies, are used to inform an implementation how to interpret a schema.  Every schema has a meta-schema, which can be declared using the "$schema" keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.2">The meta-schema serves two purposes: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>Declaring the vocabularies in use</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">The "$vocabulary" keyword, when it appears in a meta-schema, declares which vocabularies are available to be used in schemas that refer to that meta-schema.  Vocabularies define keyword semantics, as well as their general syntax.  </dd>
+<dt>Describing valid schema syntax</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A schema MUST successfully validate against its meta-schema, which constrains the syntax of the available keywords.  The syntax described is expected to be compatible with the vocabularies declared; while it is possible to describe an incompatible syntax, such a meta-schema would be unlikely to be useful.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.3">Meta-schemas are separate from vocabularies to allow for vocabularies to be combined in different ways, and for meta-schema authors to impose additional constraints such as forbidding certain keywords, or performing unusually strict syntactical validation, as might be done during a development and testing cycle.  Each vocabulary typically identifies a meta-schema consisting only of the vocabulary's keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.4">Meta-schema authoring is an advanced usage of JSON Schema, so the design of meta-schema features emphasizes flexibility over simplicity.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1.1">8.1.1.</a> The "$schema" Keyword</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.1.p.1">The "$schema" keyword is both used as a JSON Schema feature set identifier and as the identifier of a resource which is itself a JSON Schema, which describes the set of valid schemas written for this particular feature set.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.1.p.2">The value of this keyword MUST be a <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">URI</a> (containing a scheme) and this URI MUST be normalized.  The current schema MUST be valid against the meta-schema identified by this URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.1.p.3">If this URI identifies a retrievable resource, that resource SHOULD be of media type "application/schema+json".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.1.p.4">The "$schema" keyword SHOULD be used in a resource root schema.  It MUST NOT appear in resource subschemas.  If absent from the root schema, the resulting behavior is implementation-defined.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.1.p.5">If multiple schema resources are present in a single document, then all schema resources SHOULD Have the same value for "$schema".  The result of differing values for "$schema" within the same schema document is implementation-defined.  <a id="CREF2" class="info">[CREF2]<span class="info">Using multiple "$schema" keywords in the same document would imply that the feature set and therefore behavior can change within a document.  This would necessitate resolving a number of implementation concerns that have not yet been clearly defined.  So, while the pattern of using "$schema" only in root schemas is likely to remain the best practice for schema authoring, implementation behavior is subject to be revised or liberalized in future drafts.  </span></a> <a id="CREF3" class="info">[CREF3]<span class="info">The exception made for embedded schema resources is to allow bundling multiple schema resources into a single schema document without needing to change their contents, as described later in this specification.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.1.p.6">Values for this property are defined elsewhere in this and other documents, and by other parties.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1.2">8.1.2.</a> The "$vocabulary" Keyword</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.p.1">The "$vocabulary" keyword is used in meta-schemas to identify the vocabularies available for use in schemas described by that meta-schema.  It is also used to indicate whether each vocabulary is required or optional, in the sense that an implementation MUST understand the required vocabularies in order to successfully process the schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.p.2">The value of this keyword MUST be an object.  The property names in the object MUST be URIs (containing a scheme) and this URI MUST be normalized.  Each URI that appears as a property name identifies a specific set of keywords and their semantics.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.p.3">The URI MAY be a URL, but the nature of the retrievable resource is currently undefined, and reserved for future use.  Vocabulary authors MAY use the URL of the vocabulary specification, in a human-readable media type such as text/html or text/plain, as the vocabulary URI.  <a id="CREF4" class="info">[CREF4]<span class="info">Vocabulary documents may be added in forthcoming drafts.  For now, identifying the keyword set is deemed sufficient as that, along with meta-schema validation, is how the current "vocabularies" work today.  Any future vocabulary document format will be specified as a JSON document, so using text/html or other non-JSON formats in the meantime will not produce any future ambiguity.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.p.4">The values of the object properties MUST be booleans.  If the value is true, then implementations that do not recognize the vocabulary MUST refuse to process any schemas that declare this meta-schema with "$schema".  If the value is false, implementations that do not recognize the vocabulary SHOULD proceed with processing such schemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.p.5">Per <a href="#extending" class="xref">6.5</a>, unrecognized keywords SHOULD be ignored.  This remains the case for keywords defined by unrecognized vocabularies.  It is not currently possible to distinguish between unrecognized keywords that are defined in vocabularies from those that are not part of any vocabulary.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.p.6">The "$vocabulary" keyword SHOULD be used in the root schema of any schema document intended for use as a meta-schema.  It MUST NOT appear in subschemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.p.7">The "$vocabulary" keyword MUST be ignored in schema documents that are not being processed as a meta-schema.  This allows validating a meta-schema M against its own meta-schema M' without requiring the validator to understand the vocabularies declared by M.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1.2.1">8.1.2.1.</a> Default vocabularies</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.1.p.1">If "$vocabulary" is absent, an implementation MAY determine behavior based on the meta-schema if it is recognized from the URI value of the referring schema's "$schema" keyword.  This is how behavior (such as Hyper-Schema usage) has been recognized prior to the existence of vocabularies.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.1.p.2">If the meta-schema, as referenced by the schema, is not recognized, or is missing, then the behavior is implementation-defined.  If the implementation proceeds with processing the schema, it MUST assume the use of the core vocabulary.  If the implementation is built for a specific purpose, then it SHOULD assume the use of all of the most relevant vocabularies for that purpose.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.1.p.3">For example, an implementation that is a validator SHOULD assume the use of all vocabularies in this specification and the companion Validation specification.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1.2.2">8.1.2.2.</a> Non-inheritability of vocabularies </h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.2.p.1">Note that the processing restrictions on "$vocabulary" mean that meta-schemas that reference other meta-schemas using "$ref" or similar keywords do not automatically inherit the vocabulary declarations of those other meta-schemas.  All such declarations must be repeated in the root of each schema document intended for use as a meta-schema.  This is demonstrated in <a href="#example-meta-schema" class="xref">the example meta-schema</a>.  <a id="CREF5" class="info">[CREF5]<span class="info">This requirement allows implementations to find all vocabulary requirement information in a single place for each meta-schema.  As schema extensibility means that there are endless potential ways to combine more fine-grained meta-schemas by reference, requiring implementations to anticipate all possibilities and search for vocabularies in referenced meta-schemas would be overly burdensome.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1.3">8.1.3.</a> Updates to Meta-Schema and Vocabulary URIs</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.3.p.1">Updated vocabulary and meta-schema URIs MAY be published between specification drafts in order to correct errors.  Implementations SHOULD consider URIs dated after this specification draft and before the next to indicate the same syntax and semantics as those listed here.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1.4">8.1.4.</a> Detecting a Meta-Schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.4.p.1">Implementations MUST recognize a schema as a meta-schema if it is being examined because it was identified as such by another schema's "$schema" keyword.  This means that a single schema document might sometimes be considered a regular schema, and other times be considered a meta-schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.4.p.2">In the case of examining a schema which is its own meta-schema, when an implementation begins processing it as a regular schema, it is processed under those rules.  However, when loaded a second time as a result of checking its own "$schema" value, it is treated as a meta-schema.  So the same document is processed both ways in the course of one session.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.4.p.3">Implementations MAY allow a schema to be explicitly passed as a meta-schema, for implementation-specific purposes, such as pre-loading a commonly used meta-schema and checking its vocabulary support requirements up front.  Meta-schema authors MUST NOT expect such features to be interoperable across implementations.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2">8.2.</a> Base URI, Anchors, and Dereferencing</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.1">To differentiate between schemas in a vast ecosystem, schemas are identified by <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">URI</a>, and can embed references to other schemas by specifying their URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.2">Several keywords can accept a relative <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">URI-reference</a>, or a value used to construct a relative URI-reference.  For these keywords, it is necessary to establish a base URI in order to resolve the reference.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.1">8.2.1.</a> <a href="#initial-base" id="initial-base">Initial Base URI</a>
+</h1>
+<p><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986 Section 5.1</a> defines how to determine the default base URI of a document.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.1.p.2">Informatively, the initial base URI of a schema is the URI at which it was found, whether that was a network location, a local filesystem, or any other situation identifiable by a URI of any known scheme.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.1.p.3">If a schema document defines no explicit base URI with "$id" (embedded in content), the base URI is that determined per <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986 section 5</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.1.p.4">If no source is known, or no URI scheme is known for the source, a suitable implementation-specific default URI MAY be used as described in <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986 Section 5.1.4</a>.  It is RECOMMENDED that implementations document any default base URI that they assume.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.1.p.5">Unless the "$id" keyword described in the next section is present in the root schema, this base URI SHOULD be considered the canonical URI of the schema document's root schema resource.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.2">8.2.2.</a> <a href="#id-keyword" id="id-keyword">The "$id" Keyword</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.1">The "$id" keyword identifies a schema resource with its <a href="#RFC6596" class="xref">canonical</a> URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.2">Note that this URI is an identifier and not necessarily a network locator.  In the case of a network-addressable URL, a schema need not be downloadable from its canonical URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.3">If present, the value for this keyword MUST be a string, and MUST represent a valid <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">URI-reference</a>.  This URI-reference SHOULD be normalized, and MUST resolve to an <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">absolute-URI</a> (without a fragment).  Therefore, "$id" MUST NOT contain a non-empty fragment, and SHOULD NOT contain an empty fragment.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.4">Since an empty fragment in the context of the application/schema+json media type refers to the same resource as the base URI without a fragment, an implementation MAY normalize a URI ending with an empty fragment by removing the fragment.  However, schema authors SHOULD NOT rely on this behavior across implementations.  <a id="CREF6" class="info">[CREF6]<span class="info">This is primarily allowed because older meta-schemas have an empty fragment in their $id (or previously, id).  A future draft may outright forbid even empty fragments in "$id".  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.5">This URI also serves as the base URI for relative URI-references in keywords within the schema resource, in accordance with <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986 section 5.1.1</a> regarding base URIs embedded in content.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.6">The presence of "$id" in a subschema indicates that the subschema constitutes a distinct schema resource within a single schema document.  Furthermore, in accordance with <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986 section 5.1.2</a> regarding encapsulating entities, if an "$id" in a subschema is a relative URI-reference, the base URI for resolving that reference is the URI of the parent schema resource.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.7">If no parent schema object explicitly identifies itself as a resource with "$id", the base URI is that of the entire document, as established by the steps given in the <a href="#initial-base" class="xref">previous section.</a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.2.1">8.2.2.1.</a> Identifying the root schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.1.p.1">The root schema of a JSON Schema document SHOULD contain an "$id" keyword with an <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">absolute-URI</a> (containing a scheme, but no fragment).  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.2.2">8.2.2.2.</a> <a href="#embedded" id="embedded">JSON Pointer fragments and embedded schema resources</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.2.p.1">Since JSON Pointer URI fragments are constructed based on the structure of the schema document, an embedded schema resource and its subschemas can be identified by JSON Pointer fragments relative to either its own canonical URI, or relative to the containing resource's URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.2.p.2">Conceptually, a set of linked schema resources should behave identically whether each resource is a separate document connected with <a href="#references" class="xref">schema references</a>, or is structured as a single document with one or more schema resources embedded as subschemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.2.p.3">Since URIs involving JSON Pointer fragments relative to the parent schema resource's URI cease to be valid when the embedded schema is moved to a separate document and referenced, applications and schemas SHOULD NOT use such URIs to identify embedded schema resources or locations within them.  </p>
+<p>Consider the following schema document that contains another schema resource embedded within it: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/foo",
+  "items": {
+    "$id": "https://example.com/bar",
+    "additionalProperties": { }
+  }
+}
+
+                            </pre>
+<p>The URI "https://example.com/foo#/items/additionalProperties" points to the schema of the "additionalProperties" keyword in the embedded resource.  The canonical URI of that schema, however, is "https://example.com/bar#/additionalProperties".  </p>
+<p>Now consider the following two schema resources linked by reference using a URI value for "$ref": </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/foo",
+  "items": {
+    "$ref": "bar"
+  }
+}
+
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/bar",
+  "additionalProperties": { }
+}
+
+                            </pre>
+<p>Here we see that the canonical URI for that "additionalProperties" subschema is still valid, while the non-canonical URI with the fragment beginning with "#/items/$ref" now resolves to nothing.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.2.p.4">Note also that "https://example.com/foo#/items" is valid in both arrangments, but resolves to a different value.  This URI ends up functioning similarly to a retrieval URI for a resource.  While valid, examining the resolved value and either using the "$id" (if the value is a subschema), or resolving the reference and using the "$id" of the reference target, is preferable.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.2.p.5">An implementation MAY choose not to support addressing schemas by non-canonical URIs. As such, it is RECOMENDED that schema authors only use canonical URIs, as using non-canonical URIs may reduce schema interoperability.  <a id="CREF7" class="info">[CREF7]<span class="info">This is to avoid requiring implementations to keep track of a whole stack of possible base URIs and JSON Pointer fragments for each, given that all but one will be fragile if the schema resources are reorganized.  Some have argued that this is easy so there is no point in forbidding it, while others have argued that it complicates schema identification and should be forbidden.  Feedback on this topic is encouraged.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.2.p.6">Further examples of such non-canonical URIs, as well as the appropriate canonical URIs to use instead, are provided in appendix <a href="#idExamples" class="xref">A</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.3">8.2.3.</a> <a href="#anchor" id="anchor">Defining location-independent identifiers with "$anchor"</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.p.1">Using JSON Pointer fragments requires knowledge of the structure of the schema.  When writing schema documents with the intention to provide re-usable schemas, it may be preferable to use a plain name fragment that is not tied to any particular structural location.  This allows a subschema to be relocated without requiring JSON Pointer references to be updated.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.p.2">The "$anchor" keyword is used to specify such a fragment.  It is an identifier keyword that can only be used to create plain name fragments.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.p.3">If present, the value of this keyword MUST be a string, which MUST start with a letter ([A-Za-z]), followed by any number of letters, digits ([0-9]), hyphens ("-"), underscores ("_"), colons (":"), or periods (".").  <a id="CREF8" class="info">[CREF8]<span class="info">Note that the anchor string does not include the "#" character, as it is not a URI-reference.  An "$anchor": "foo" becomes the fragment "#foo" when used in a URI.  See below for full examples.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.p.4">The base URI to which the resulting fragment is appended is determined by the "$id" keyword as explained in the previous section.  Two "$anchor" keywords in the same schema document MAY have the same value if they apply to different base URIs, as the resulting full URIs will be distinct.  However, the effect of two "$anchor" keywords with the same value and the same base URI is undefined.  Implementations MAY raise an error if such usage is detected.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.4">8.2.4.</a> <a href="#references" id="references">Schema References</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.p.1">Several keywords can be used to reference a schema which is to be applied to the current instance location. "$ref" and "$recursiveRef" are applicator keywords, applying the referenced schema to the instance.  "$recursiveAnchor" is an identifier keyword that controls how the base URI for resolving the URI-reference value of "$recursiveRef is determined.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.p.2">As the values of "$ref" and "$recursiveRef" are URI References, this allows the possibility to externalise or divide a schema across multiple files, and provides the ability to validate recursive structures through self-reference.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.p.3">The resolved URI produced by these keywords is not necessarily a network locator, only an identifier. A schema need not be downloadable from the address if it is a network-addressable URL, and implementations SHOULD NOT assume they should perform a network operation when they encounter a network-addressable URI.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.4.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.4.1">8.2.4.1.</a> <a href="#ref" id="ref">Direct References with "$ref"</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.1.p.1">The "$ref" keyword is an applicator that is used to reference a statically identified schema.  Its results are the results of the referenced schema.  <a id="CREF9" class="info">[CREF9]<span class="info">Note that this definition of how the results are determined means that other keywords can appear alongside of "$ref" in the same schema object.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.1.p.2">The value of the "$ref" property MUST be a string which is a URI-Reference.  Resolved against the current URI base, it produces the URI of the schema to apply.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.4.2">8.2.4.2.</a> <a href="#recursive-ref" id="recursive-ref">Recursive References with "$recursiveRef" and "$recursiveAnchor"</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.p.1">The "$recursiveRef" and "$recursiveAnchor" keywords are used to construct extensible recursive schemas.  A recursive schema is one that has a reference to its own root, identified by the empty fragment URI reference ("#").  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.p.2">Simply stated, a "$recursiveRef" behaves identically to "$ref", except when its target schema contains "$recursiveAnchor" with a value of true.  In that case, the dynamic scope is examined to determine a new base URI, and the URI-reference in "$recursiveRef" is re-evaluated against that base URI.  Unlike base URI changes with "$id", changes with "$recursiveAnchor" are calculated each time a "$recursiveRef" is resolved, and do not impact any other keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.p.3">For an example using these keyword, see appendix <a href="#recursive-example" class="xref">C</a>.  <a id="CREF10" class="info">[CREF10]<span class="info">The difference between the hyper-schema meta-schema in previous drafts and an this draft dramatically demonstrates the utility of these keywords.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.4.2.1">8.2.4.2.1.</a> Dynamically recursive references with "$recursiveRef"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.1.p.1">The value of the "$recursiveRef" property MUST be a string which is a URI-reference.  It is a by-reference applicator that uses a dynamically calculated base URI to resolve its value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.1.p.2">The behavior of this keyword is defined only for the value "#".  Implementations MAY choose to consider other values to be errors.  <a id="CREF11" class="info">[CREF11]<span class="info">This restriction may be relaxed in the future, but to date only the value "#" has a clear use case.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.1.p.3">The value of "$recursiveRef" is initially resolved against the current base URI, in the same manner as for "$ref".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.1.p.4">The schema identified by the resulting URI is examined for the presence of "$recursiveAnchor", and a new base URI is calculated as described for that keyword in the following section.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.1.p.5">Finally, the value of "$recursiveRef" is resolved against the new base URI determined according to "$recursiveAnchor" producing the final resolved reference URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.1.p.6">Note that in the absence of "$recursiveAnchor" (and in some cases when it is present), "$recursiveRef"'s behavior is identical to that of "$ref".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.1.p.7">As with "$ref", the results of this keyword are the results of the referenced schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.4.2.2">8.2.4.2.2.</a> Enabling Recursion with "$recursiveAnchor"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.2.p.1">The value of the "$recursiveAnchor" property MUST be a boolean.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.2.p.2">"$recursiveAnchor" is used to dynamically identify a base URI at runtime for "$recursiveRef" by marking where such a calculation can start, and where it stops.  This keyword MUST NOT affect the base URI of other keywords, unless they are explicitly defined to rely on it.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.2.p.3">If set to true, then when the containing schema object is used as a target of "$recursiveRef", a new base URI is determined by examining the <a href="#scopes" class="xref">dynamic scope</a> for the outermost schema that also contains "$recursiveAnchor" with a value of true.  The base URI of that schema is then used as the dynamic base URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.2.p.4">If no such schema exists, then the base URI is unchanged.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.2.p.5">If this keyword is set to false, the base URI is unchanged.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.2.2.p.6">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of false.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.4.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.4.3">8.2.4.3.</a> Guarding Against Infinite Recursion</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.3.p.1">A schema MUST NOT be run into an infinite loop against an instance. For example, if two schemas "#alice" and "#bob" both have an "allOf" property that refers to the other, a naive validator might get stuck in an infinite recursive loop trying to validate the instance.  Schemas SHOULD NOT make use of infinite recursive nesting like this; the behavior is undefined.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.4.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.4.4">8.2.4.4.</a> <a href="#non-schemas" id="non-schemas">References to Possible Non-Schemas</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.4.p.1">Subschema objects (or booleans) are recognized by their use with known applicator keywords or with location-reserving keywords such as <a href="#defs" class="xref">"$defs"</a> that take one or more subschemas as a value.  These keywords may be "$defs" and the standard applicators from this document, or extension keywords from a known vocabulary, or implementation-specific custom keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.4.p.2">Multi-level structures of unknown keywords are capable of introducing nested subschemas, which would be subject to the processing rules for "$id".  Therefore, having a reference target in such an unrecognized structure cannot be reliably implemented, and the resulting behavior is undefined.  Similarly, a reference target under a known keyword, for which the value is known not to be a schema, results in undefined behavior in order to avoid burdening implementations with the need to detect such targets.  <a id="CREF12" class="info">[CREF12]<span class="info">These scenarios are analogous to fetching a schema over HTTP but receiving a response with a Content-Type other than application/schema+json.  An implementation can certainly try to interpret it as a schema, but the origin server offered no guarantee that it actually is any such thing.  Therefore, interpreting it as such has security implications and may produce unpredictable results.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.4.p.3">Note that single-level custom keywords with identical syntax and semantics to "$defs" do not allow for any intervening "$id" keywords, and therefore will behave correctly under implementations that attempt to use any reference target as a schema.  However, this behavior is implementation-specific and MUST NOT be relied upon for interoperability.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.4.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.4.5">8.2.4.5.</a> Loading a referenced schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.5.p.1">The use of URIs to identify remote schemas does not necessarily mean anything is downloaded, but instead JSON Schema implementations SHOULD understand ahead of time which schemas they will be using, and the URIs that identify them.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.5.p.2">When schemas are downloaded, for example by a generic user-agent that doesn't know until runtime which schemas to download, see <a href="#hypermedia" class="xref">Usage for Hypermedia</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.5.p.3">Implementations SHOULD be able to associate arbitrary URIs with an arbitrary schema and/or automatically associate a schema's "$id"-given URI, depending on the trust that the validator has in the schema.  Such URIs and schemas can be supplied to an implementation prior to processing instances, or may be noted within a schema document as it is processed, producing associations as shown in appendix <a href="#idExamples" class="xref">A</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.5.p.4">A schema MAY (and likely will) have multiple URIs, but there is no way for a URI to identify more than one schema. When multiple schemas try to identify as the same URI, validators SHOULD raise an error condition.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.4.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.4.6">8.2.4.6.</a> Dereferencing</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.6.p.1">Schemas can be identified by any URI that has been given to them, including a JSON Pointer or their URI given directly by "$id".  In all cases, dereferencing a "$ref" reference involves first resolving its value as a URI reference against the current base URI per <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.6.p.2">If the resulting URI identifies a schema within the current document, or within another schema document that has been made available to the implementation, then that schema SHOULD be used automatically.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.6.p.3">For example, consider this schema: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "$id": "https://example.net/root.json",
+    "items": {
+        "type": "array",
+        "items": { "$ref": "#item" }
+    },
+    "$defs": {
+        "single": {
+            "$anchor": "item",
+            "type": "object",
+            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "other.json" }
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+                            </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.6.p.4">When an implementation encounters the &lt;#/$defs/single&gt; schema, it resolves the "$id" URI reference against the current base URI to form &lt;https://example.net/root.json#item&gt;.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.6.p.5">When an implementation then looks inside the &lt;#/items&gt; schema, it encounters the &lt;#item&gt; reference, and resolves this to &lt;https://example.net/root.json#item&gt;, which it has seen defined in this same document and can therefore use automatically.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.6.p.6">When an implementation encounters the reference to "other.json", it resolves this to &lt;https://example.net/other.json&gt;, which is not defined in this document.  If a schema with that identifier has otherwise been supplied to the implementation, it can also be used automatically.  <a id="CREF13" class="info">[CREF13]<span class="info">What should implementations do when the referenced schema is not known? Are there circumstances in which automatic network dereferencing is allowed?  A same origin policy?  A user-configurable option?  In the case of an evolving API described by Hyper-Schema, it is expected that new schemas will be added to the system dynamically, so placing an absolute requirement of pre-loading schema documents is not feasible.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.5">8.2.5.</a> <a href="#defs" id="defs">Schema Re-Use With "$defs"</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.5.p.1">The "$defs" keyword reserves a location for schema authors to inline re-usable JSON Schemas into a more general schema.  The keyword does not directly affect the validation result.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.5.p.2">This keyword's value MUST be an object.  Each member value of this object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": "array",
+    "items": { "$ref": "#/$defs/positiveInteger" },
+    "$defs": {
+        "positiveInteger": {
+            "type": "integer",
+            "exclusiveMinimum": 0
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+                            </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.5.p.3">As an example, here is a schema describing an array of positive integers, where the positive integer constraint is a subschema in "$defs": </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.3">8.3.</a> Comments With "$comment"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.1">This keyword reserves a location for comments from schema authors to readers or maintainers of the schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.2">The value of this keyword MUST be a string. Implementations MUST NOT present this string to end users.  Tools for editing schemas SHOULD support displaying and editing this keyword.  The value of this keyword MAY be used in debug or error output which is intended for developers making use of schemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.3">Schema vocabularies SHOULD allow "$comment" within any object containing vocabulary keywords.  Implementations MAY assume "$comment" is allowed unless the vocabulary specifically forbids it.  Vocabularies MUST NOT specify any effect of "$comment" beyond what is described in this specification.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.4">Tools that translate other media types or programming languages to and from application/schema+json MAY choose to convert that media type or programming language's native comments to or from "$comment" values.  The behavior of such translation when both native comments and "$comment" properties are present is implementation-dependent.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.5">Implementations SHOULD treat "$comment" identically to an unknown extension keyword.  They MAY strip "$comment" values at any point during processing.  In particular, this allows for shortening schemas when the size of deployed schemas is a concern.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.6">Implementations MUST NOT take any other action based on the presence, absence, or contents of "$comment" properties.  In particular, the value of "$comment" MUST NOT be collected as an annotation result.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9">9.</a> A Vocabulary for Applying Subschemas</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.1">This section defines a vocabulary of applicator keywords that are RECOMMENDED for use as the basis of other vocabularies.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.2">Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" SHOULD be considered to require this vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.3">The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Applicator vocabulary, is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/applicator">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/applicator</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.4">The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/applicator">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/applicator</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.5">Updated vocabulary and meta-schema URIs MAY be published between specification drafts in order to correct errors.  Implementations SHOULD consider URIs dated after this specification draft and before the next to indicate the same syntax and semantics as those listed here.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.1">9.1.</a> Keyword Independence</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.1">Schema keywords typically operate independently, without affecting each other's outcomes.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.2">For schema author convenience, there are some exceptions among the keywords in this vocabulary: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>"additionalProperties", whose behavior is defined in terms of "properties" and "patternProperties" </li>
+<li>"unevaluatedProperties", whose behavior is defined in terms of annotations from "properties", "patternProperties", "additionalProperties" and itself </li>
+<li>"additionalItems", whose behavior is defined in terms of "items" </li>
+<li>"unevaluatedItems", whose behavior is defined in terms of annotations from "items", "additionalItems" and itself </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2">9.2.</a> <a href="#in-place" id="in-place">Keywords for Applying Subschemas in Place</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.1">These keywords apply subschemas to the same location in the instance as the parent schema is being applied.  They allow combining or modifying the subschema results in various ways.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2.1">9.2.1.</a> <a href="#logic" id="logic">Keywords for Applying Subschemas With Boolean Logic</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.1.p.1">These keywords correspond to logical operators for combining or modifying the boolean assertion results of the subschemas.  They have no direct impact on annotation collection, although they enable the same annotation keyword to be applied to an instance location with different values.  Annotation keywords define their own rules for combining such values.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2.1.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2.1.1">9.2.1.1.</a> <a href="#allOf" id="allOf">allOf</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.1.1.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a non-empty array.  Each item of the array MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.1.1.p.2">An instance validates successfully against this keyword if it validates successfully against all schemas defined by this keyword's value.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2.1.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2.1.2">9.2.1.2.</a> anyOf</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.1.2.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a non-empty array.  Each item of the array MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.1.2.p.2">An instance validates successfully against this keyword if it validates successfully against at least one schema defined by this keyword's value.  Note that when annotations are being collected, all subschemas MUST be examined so that annotations are collected from each subschema that validates successfully.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2.1.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2.1.3">9.2.1.3.</a> oneOf</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.1.3.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a non-empty array.  Each item of the array MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.1.3.p.2">An instance validates successfully against this keyword if it validates successfully against exactly one schema defined by this keyword's value.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2.1.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2.1.4">9.2.1.4.</a> <a href="#not" id="not">not</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.1.4.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.1.4.p.2">An instance is valid against this keyword if it fails to validate successfully against the schema defined by this keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2.2">9.2.2.</a> <a href="#conditional" id="conditional">Keywords for Applying Subschemas Conditionally</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.p.1">Three of these keywords work together to implement conditional application of a subschema based on the outcome of another subschema.  The fourth is a shortcut for a specific conditional case.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.p.2">"if", "then", and "else" MUST NOT interact with each other across subschema boundaries.  In other words, an "if" in one branch of an "allOf" MUST NOT have an impact on a "then" or "else" in another branch.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.p.3">There is no default behavior for "if", "then", or "else" when they are not present.  In particular, they MUST NOT be treated as if present with an empty schema, and when "if" is not present, both "then" and "else" MUST be entirely ignored.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2.2.1">9.2.2.1.</a> if</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.1.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.1.p.2">This validation outcome of this keyword's subschema has no direct effect on the overall validation result.  Rather, it controls which of the "then" or "else" keywords are evaluated.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.1.p.3">Instances that successfully validate against this keyword's subschema MUST also be valid against the subschema value of the "then" keyword, if present.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.1.p.4">Instances that fail to validate against this keyword's subschema MUST also be valid against the subschema value of the "else" keyword, if present.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.1.p.5">If <a href="#annotations" class="xref">annotations</a> are being collected, they are collected from this keyword's subschema in the usual way, including when the keyword is present without either "then" or "else".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2.2.2">9.2.2.2.</a> then</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.2.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.2.p.2">When "if" is present, and the instance successfully validates against its subschema, then validation succeeds against this keyword if the instance also successfully validates against this keyword's subschema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.2.p.3">This keyword has no effect when "if" is absent, or when the instance fails to validate against its subschema.  Implementations MUST NOT evaluate the instance against this keyword, for either validation or annotation collection purposes, in such cases.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2.2.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2.2.3">9.2.2.3.</a> else</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.3.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.3.p.2">When "if" is present, and the instance fails to validate against its subschema, then validation succeeds against this keyword if the instance successfully validates against this keyword's subschema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.3.p.3">This keyword has no effect when "if" is absent, or when the instance successfully validates against its subschema.  Implementations MUST NOT evaluate the instance against this keyword, for either validation or annotation collection purposes, in such cases.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2.2.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2.2.4">9.2.2.4.</a> dependentSchemas</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.4.p.1">This keyword specifies subschemas that are evaluated if the instance is an object and contains a certain property.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.4.p.2">This keyword's value MUST be an object.  Each value in the object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.4.p.3">If the object key is a property in the instance, the entire instance must validate against the subschema.  Its use is dependent on the presence of the property.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.2.4.p.4">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty object.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3">9.3.</a> Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Child Instances</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.1">Each of these keywords defines a rule for applying its subschema(s) to child instances, specifically object properties and array items, and combining their results.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3.1">9.3.1.</a> Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Arrays</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3.1.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3.1.1">9.3.1.1.</a> items</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.1.p.1">The value of "items" MUST be either a valid JSON Schema or an array of valid JSON Schemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.1.p.2">If "items" is a schema, validation succeeds if all elements in the array successfully validate against that schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.1.p.3">If "items" is an array of schemas, validation succeeds if each element of the instance validates against the schema at the same position, if any.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.1.p.4">This keyword produces an annotation value which is the largest index to which this keyword applied a subschema.  The value MAY be a boolean true if a subschema was applied to every index of the instance, such as when "items" is a schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.1.p.5">Annotation results for "items" keywords from multiple schemas applied to the same instance location are combined by setting the combined result to true if any of the values are true, and otherwise retaining the largest numerical value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.1.p.6">Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as an empty schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3.1.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3.1.2">9.3.1.2.</a> <a href="#additionalItems" id="additionalItems">additionalItems</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.2.p.1">The value of "additionalItems" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.2.p.2">The behavior of this keyword depends on the presence and annotation result of "items" within the same schema object.  If "items" is present, and its annotation result is a number, validation succeeds if every instance element at an index greater than that number validates against "additionalItems".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.2.p.3">Otherwise, if "items" is absent or its annotation result is the boolean true, "additionalItems" MUST be ignored.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.2.p.4">If the "additionalItems" subschema is applied to any positions within the instance array, it produces an annotation result of boolean true, analogous to the single schema behavior of "items".  If any "additionalItems" keyword from any subschema applied to the same instance location produces an annotation value of true, then the combined result from these keywords is also true.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.2.p.5">Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as an empty schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.2.p.6">Implementations MAY choose to implement or optimize this keyword in another way that produces the same effect, such as by directly checking for the presence and size of an "items" array.  Implementations that do not support annotation collection MUST do so.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3.1.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3.1.3">9.3.1.3.</a> <a href="#unevaluatedItems" id="unevaluatedItems">unevaluatedItems</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.3.p.1">The value of "unevaluatedItems" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.3.p.2">The behavior of this keyword depends on the annotation results of adjacent keywords that apply to the instance location being validated.  Specifically, the annotations from "items" and  "additionalItems", which can come from those keywords when they are adjacent to the "unevaluatedItems" keyword.  Those two annotations, as well as "unevaluatedItems", can also result from any and all adjacent <a href="#in-place" class="xref">in-place applicator</a> keywords.  This includes but is not limited to the in-place applicators defined in this document.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.3.p.3">If an "items" annotation is present, and its annotation result is a number, and no "additionalItems" or "unevaluatedItems" annotation is present, then validation succeeds if every instance element at an index greater than the "items" annotation validates against "unevaluatedItems".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.3.p.4">Otherwise, if any "items", "additionalItems", or "unevaluatedItems" annotations are present with a value of boolean true, then "unevaluatedItems" MUST be ignored.  However, if none of these annotations are present, "unevaluatedItems" MUST be applied to all locations in the array.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.3.p.5">This means that "items", "additionalItems", and all in-place applicators MUST be evaluated before this keyword can be evaluated.  Authors of extension keywords MUST NOT define an in-place applicator that would need to be evaluated before this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.3.p.6">If the "unevaluatedItems" subschema is applied to any positions within the instance array, it produces an annotation result of boolean true, analogous to the single schema behavior of "items".  If any "unevaluatedItems" keyword from any subschema applied to the same instance location produces an annotation value of true, then the combined result from these keywords is also true.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.3.p.7">Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as an empty schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.3.p.8">Implementations that do not collect annotations MUST raise an error upon encountering this keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3.1.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3.1.4">9.3.1.4.</a> contains</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.4.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.4.p.2">An array instance is valid against "contains" if at least one of its elements is valid against the given schema.  Note that when collecting annotations, the subschema MUST be applied to every array element even after the first match has been found.  This is to ensure that all possible annotations are collected.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3.2">9.3.2.</a> Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Objects</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3.2.1">9.3.2.1.</a> properties</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.1.p.1">The value of "properties" MUST be an object.  Each value of this object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.1.p.2">Validation succeeds if, for each name that appears in both the instance and as a name within this keyword's value, the child instance for that name successfully validates against the corresponding schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.1.p.3">The annotation result of this keyword is the set of instance property names matched by this keyword.  Annotation results for "properties" keywords from multiple schemas applied to the same instance location are combined by taking the union of the sets.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.1.p.4">Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as an empty object.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3.2.2">9.3.2.2.</a> patternProperties</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.2.p.1">The value of "patternProperties" MUST be an object. Each property name of this object SHOULD be a valid regular expression, according to the ECMA 262 regular expression dialect. Each property value of this object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.2.p.2">Validation succeeds if, for each instance name that matches any regular expressions that appear as a property name in this keyword's value, the child instance for that name successfully validates against each schema that corresponds to a matching regular expression.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.2.p.3">The annotation result of this keyword is the set of instance property names matched by this keyword.  Annotation results for "patternProperties" keywords from multiple schemas applied to the same instance location are combined by taking the union of the sets.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.2.p.4">Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as an empty object.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3.2.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3.2.3">9.3.2.3.</a> <a href="#additionalProperties" id="additionalProperties">additionalProperties</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.3.p.1">The value of "additionalProperties" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.3.p.2">The behavior of this keyword depends on the presence and annotation results of "properties" and "patternProperties" within the same schema object.  Validation with "additionalProperties" applies only to the child values of instance names that do not appear in the annotation results of either "properties" or "patternProperties".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.3.p.3">For all such properties, validation succeeds if the child instance validates against the "additionalProperties" schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.3.p.4">The annotation result of this keyword is the set of instance property names validated by this keyword's subschema.  Annotation results for "additionalProperties" keywords from multiple schemas applied to the same instance location are combined by taking the union of the sets.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.3.p.5">Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as an empty schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.3.p.6">Implementations MAY choose to implement or optimize this keyword in another way that produces the same effect, such as by directly checking the names in "properties" and the patterns in "patternProperties" against the instance property set.  Implementations that do not support annotation collection MUST do so.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3.2.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3.2.4">9.3.2.4.</a> <a href="#unevaluatedProperties" id="unevaluatedProperties">unevaluatedProperties</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.4.p.1">The value of "unevaluatedProperties" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.4.p.2">The behavior of this keyword depends on the annotation results of adjacent keywords that apply to the instance location being validated.  Specifically, the annotations from "properties", "patternProperties", and "additionalProperties", which can come from those keywords when they are adjacent to the "unevaluatedProperties" keyword.  Those three annotations, as well as "unevaluatedProperties", can also result from any and all adjacent <a href="#in-place" class="xref">in-place applicator</a> keywords.  This includes but is not limited to the in-place applicators defined in this document.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.4.p.3">Validation with "unevaluatedProperties" applies only to the child values of instance names that do not appear in the "properties", "patternProperties", "additionalProperties", or "unevaluatedProperties" annotation results that apply to the instance location being validated.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.4.p.4">For all such properties, validation succeeds if the child instance validates against the "unevaluatedProperties" schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.4.p.5">This means that "properties", "patternProperties", "additionalProperties", and all in-place applicators MUST be evaluated before this keyword can be evaluated.  Authors of extension keywords MUST NOT define an in-place applicator that would need to be evaluated before this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.4.p.6">The annotation result of this keyword is the set of instance property names validated by this keyword's subschema.  Annotation results for "unevaluatedProperties" keywords from multiple schemas applied to the same instance location are combined by taking the union of the sets.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.4.p.7">Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as an empty schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.4.p.8">Implementations that do not collect annotations MUST raise an error upon encountering this keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3.2.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3.2.5">9.3.2.5.</a> propertyNames</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.5.p.1">The value of "propertyNames" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.5.p.2">If the instance is an object, this keyword validates if every property name in the instance validates against the provided schema.  Note the property name that the schema is testing will always be a string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.5.p.3">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10">10.</a> <a href="#output" id="output">Output Formatting</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.1">JSON Schema is defined to be platform-independent.  As such, to increase compatibility across platforms, implementations SHOULD conform to a standard validation output format.  This section describes the minimum requirements that consumers will need to properly interpret validation results.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.1">10.1.</a> Format</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.1">JSON Schema output is defined using the JSON Schema data instance model as described in section 4.2.1.  Implementations MAY deviate from this as supported by their specific languages and platforms, however it is RECOMMENDED that the output be convertible to the JSON format defined herein via serialization or other means.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.2">10.2.</a> Output Formats</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.p.1">This specification defines four output formats.  See the "Output Structure" section for the requirements of each format.  </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>Flag - A boolean which simply indicates the overall validation result with no further details.  </li>
+<li>Basic - Provides validation information in a flat list structure.  </li>
+<li>Detailed - Provides validation information in a condensed hierarchical structure based on the structure of the schema.  </li>
+<li>Verbose - Provides validation information in an uncondensed hierarchical structure that matches the exact structure of the schema.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> An implementation SHOULD provide at least the "flag", "basic", or "detailed" format and MAY provide the "verbose" format.  If it provides one or more of the complex formats, it MUST also provide the "flag" format. Implementations SHOULD specify in their documentation which formats they support.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3">10.3.</a> Minimum Information</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.1">Beyond the simplistic "flag" output, additional information is useful to aid in debugging a schema or instance.  Each sub-result SHOULD contain the information contained within this section at a minimum.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.2">A single object that contains all of these components is considered an output unit.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.3">Implementations MAY elect to provide additional information.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3.1">10.3.1.</a> Keyword Relative Location</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.p.1">The relative location of the validating keyword that follows the validation path.  The value MUST be expressed as a JSON Pointer, and it MUST include any by-reference applicators such as "$ref" or "$recursiveRef".  </p>
+<pre>
+
+#/properties/width/$ref/minimum
+
+                        </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.p.2">Note that this pointer may not be resolvable by the normal JSON Pointer process due to the inclusion of these by-reference applicator keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.p.3">The JSON key for this information is "keywordLocation".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3.2">10.3.2.</a> Keyword Absolute Location</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.p.1">The absolute, dereferenced location of the validating keyword.  The value MUST be expressed as an absolute URI using the canonical URI of the relevant schema object, and it MUST NOT include by-reference applicators such as "$ref" or "$recursiveRef" as non-terminal path components.  It MAY end in such keywords if the error or annotation is for that keyword, such as an unresolvable reference.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+https://example.com/schemas/common#/$defs/count/minimum
+
+                        </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.p.2">This information MAY be omitted only if either the relative location contains no references or if the schema does not declare an absolute URI as its "$id".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.p.3">The JSON key for this information is "absoluteKeywordLocation".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3.3">10.3.3.</a> Instance Location</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.3.p.1">The location of the JSON value within the instance being validated.  The value MUST be expressed as a URI fragment-encoded JSON Pointer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.3.p.2">The JSON key for this information is "instanceLocation".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3.4">10.3.4.</a> Error or Annotation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.4.p.1">The error or annotation that is produced by the validation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.4.p.2">For errors, the specific wording for the message is not defined by this specification.  Implementations will need to provide this.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.4.p.3">For annotations, each keyword that produces an annotation specifies its format.  By default, it is the keyword's value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.4.p.4">The JSON key for failed validations is "error"; for successful validations it is "annotation".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3.5">10.3.5.</a> Nested Results</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.5.p.1">For the two hierarchical structures, this property will hold nested errors and annotations.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.5.p.2">The JSON key for nested results in failed validations is "errors"; for successful validations it is "annotations".  Note the plural forms, as a keyword with nested results can also have a local error or annotation.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.4">10.4.</a> Output Structure</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.4.p.1">The output MUST be an object containing a boolean property named "valid".  When additional information about the result is required, the output MUST also contain "errors" or "annotations" as described below.  </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>"valid" - a boolean value indicating the overall validation success or failure </li>
+<li>"errors" - the collection of errors or annotations produced by a failed validation </li>
+<li>"annotations" - the collection of errors or annotations produced by a successful validation </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> For these examples, the following schema and instance will be used.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/polygon",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/schema",
+  "$defs": {
+    "point": {
+      "type": "object",
+      "properties": {
+        "x": { "type": "number" },
+        "y": { "type": "number" }
+      },
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "required": [ "x", "y" ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "array",
+  "items": { "$ref": "#/$defs/point" },
+  "minItems": 3
+}
+
+[
+  {
+    "x": 2.5,
+    "y": 1.3,
+  },
+  {
+    "x": 1,
+    "z": 6.7
+  }
+]
+
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.4.p.2">This instance will fail validation and produce errors, but it's trivial to deduce examples for passing schemas that produce annotations.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.4.p.3">Specifically, the errors it will produce are: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>The second element in the "vertices" property is missing a "y" property.  </li>
+<li>The second element in the "vertices" property has a disallowed "z" property.  </li>
+<li>There are only two vertices, but three are required.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> Note that the error message wording as depicted in these examples is not a requirement of this specification.  Implementations SHOULD craft error messages tailored for their audience or provide a templating mechanism that allows their users to craft their own messages.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.4.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.4.1">10.4.1.</a> Flag</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.4.1.p.1">In the simplest case, merely the boolean result for the "valid" valid property needs to be fulfilled.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "valid": false
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.4.1.p.2">Because no errors or annotations are returned with this format, it is RECOMMENDED that implementations use short-circuiting logic to return failure or success as soon as the outcome can be determined.  For example, if an "anyOf" keyword contains five sub-schemas, and the second one passes, there is no need to check the other three.  The logic can simply return with success.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.4.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.4.2">10.4.2.</a> Basic</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.4.2.p.1">The "Basic" structure is a flat list of output units.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "valid": false,
+  "errors": [
+    {
+      "keywordLocation": "#",
+      "instanceLocation": "#",
+      "error": "A subschema had errors."
+    },
+    {
+      "keywordLocation": "#/items/$ref",
+      "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+        "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point",
+      "instanceLocation": "#/1",
+      "error": "A subschema had errors."
+    },
+    {
+      "keywordLocation": "#/items/$ref/required",
+      "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+        "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point/required",
+      "instanceLocation": "#/1",
+      "error": "Required property 'y' not found."
+    },
+    {
+      "keywordLocation": "#/items/$ref/additionalProperties",
+      "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+        "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point/additionalProperties",
+      "instanceLocation": "#/1/z",
+      "error": "Additional property 'z' found but was invalid."
+    },
+    {
+      "keywordLocation": "#/minItems",
+      "instanceLocation": "#",
+      "error": "Expected at least 3 items but found 2"
+    }
+  ]
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.4.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.4.3">10.4.3.</a> Detailed</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.4.3.p.1">The "Detailed" structure is based on the schema and can be more readable for both humans and machines.  Having the structure organized this way makes associations between the errors more apparent.  For example, the fact that the missing "y" property and the extra "z" property both stem from the same location in the instance is not immediately obvious in the "Basic" structure.  In a hierarchy, the correlation is more easily identified.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.4.3.p.2">The following rules govern the construction of the results object: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>All applicator keywords ("*Of", "$ref", "if"/"then"/"else", etc.) require a node.  </li>
+<li>Nodes that have no children are removed.  </li>
+<li>Nodes that have a single child are replaced by the child.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> Branch nodes do not require an error message or an annotation.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "valid": false,
+  "keywordLocation": "#",
+  "instanceLocation": "#",
+  "errors": [
+    {
+      "valid": false,
+      "keywordLocation": "#/items/$ref",
+      "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+        "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point",
+      "instanceLocation": "#/1",
+      "errors": [
+        {
+          "valid": false,
+          "keywordLocation": "#/items/$ref/required",
+          "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+            "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point/required",
+          "instanceLocation": "#/1",
+          "error": "Required property 'y' not found."
+        },
+        {
+          "valid": false,
+          "keywordLocation": "#/items/$ref/additionalProperties",
+          "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+            "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point/additionalProperties",
+          "instanceLocation": "#/1/z",
+          "error": "Additional property 'z' found but was invalid."
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "valid": false,
+      "keywordLocation": "#/minItems",
+      "instanceLocation": "#",
+      "error": "Expected at least 3 items but found 2"
+    }
+  ]
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.4.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.4.4">10.4.4.</a> Verbose</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.4.4.p.1">The "Verbose" structure is a fully realized hierarchy that exactly matches that of the schema.  This structure has applications in form generation and validation where the error's location is important.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.4.4.p.2">The primary difference between this and the "Detailed" structure is that all results are returned.  This includes sub-schema validation results that would otherwise be removed (e.g. annotations for failed validations, successful validations inside a `not` keyword, etc.).  Because of this, it is RECOMMENDED that each node also carry a `valid` property to indicate the validation result for that node.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.4.4.p.3">Because this output structure can be quite large, a smaller example is given here for brevity.  The URI of the full output structure of the example above is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/output/verbose-example">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/output/verbose-example</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+// schema
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/polygon",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/schema",
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "validProp": true,
+  },
+  "additionalProperties": false
+}
+
+// instance
+{
+  "validProp": 5,
+  "disallowedProp": "value"
+}
+
+// result
+{
+  "valid": false,
+  "keywordLocation": "#",
+  "instanceLocation": "#",
+  "errors": [
+    {
+      "valid": true,
+      "keywordLocation": "#/type",
+      "instanceLocation": "#"
+    },
+    {
+      "valid": true,
+      "keywordLocation": "#/properties",
+      "instanceLocation": "#"
+    },
+    {
+      "valid": false,
+      "keywordLocation": "#/additionalProperties",
+      "instanceLocation": "#",
+      "errors": [
+        {
+          "valid": false,
+          "keywordLocation": "#/additionalProperties",
+          "instanceLocation": "#/disallowedProp",
+          "error": "Additional property 'disallowedProp' found but was invalid."
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.4.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.4.5">10.4.5.</a> Output validation schemas</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.4.5.p.1">For convenience, JSON Schema has been provided to validate output generated by implementations.  Its URI is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/output/schema">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/output/schema</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.11">
+<a href="#rfc.section.11">11.</a> <a href="#hypermedia" id="hypermedia">Usage for Hypermedia</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.1">JSON has been adopted widely by HTTP servers for automated APIs and robots. This section describes how to enhance processing of JSON documents in a more RESTful manner when used with protocols that support media types and <a href="#RFC8288" class="xref">Web linking</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.11.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.11.1">11.1.</a> Linking to a Schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.1.p.1">It is RECOMMENDED that instances described by a schema provide a link to a downloadable JSON Schema using the link relation "describedby", as defined by <a href="#W3C.REC-ldp-20150226" class="xref">Linked Data Protocol 1.0, section 8.1</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.1.p.2">In HTTP, such links can be attached to any response using the <a href="#RFC8288" class="xref">Link header</a>. An example of such a header would be: </p>
+<pre>
+
+Link: &lt;https://example.com/my-hyper-schema#&gt;; rel="describedby"
+
+                    </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.11.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.11.2">11.2.</a> <a href="#parameter" id="parameter">Identifying a Schema via a Media Type Parameter</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.2.p.1">Media types MAY allow for a "schema" media type parameter, which gives HTTP servers the ability to perform Content-Type Negotiation based on schema.  The media-type parameter MUST be a whitespace-separated list of URIs (i.e. relative references are invalid).  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.2.p.2">When using the media type application/schema-instance+json, the "schema" parameter MUST be supplied.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.2.p.3">When using the media type application/schema+json, the "schema" parameter MAY be supplied. If supplied, it SHOULD contain the same URI as identified by the "$schema" keyword, and MAY contain additional URIs.  The "$schema" URI MUST be considered the schema's canonical meta-schema, regardless of the presence of alternative or additional meta-schemas as a media type parameter.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.2.p.4">The schema URI is opaque and SHOULD NOT automatically be dereferenced.  If the implementation does not understand the semantics of the provided schema, the implementation can instead follow the "describedby" links, if any, which may provide information on how to handle the schema.  Since "schema" doesn't necessarily point to a network location, the "describedby" relation is used for linking to a downloadable schema.  However, for simplicity, schema authors should make these URIs point to the same resource when possible.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.2.p.5">In HTTP, the media-type parameter would be sent inside the Content-Type header: </p>
+<pre>
+
+Content-Type: application/json;
+          schema="https://example.com/my-hyper-schema#"
+
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.2.p.6">Multiple schemas are whitespace separated, and indicate that the instance conforms to all of the listed schemas: </p>
+<pre>
+
+Content-Type: application/json;
+          schema="https://example.com/alice https://example.com/bob"
+
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.2.p.7">Media type parameters are also used in HTTP's Accept request header: </p>
+<pre>
+
+Accept: application/json;
+          schema="https://example.com/qiang https://example.com/li",
+        application/json;
+          schema="https://example.com/kumar"
+
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.2.p.8">As with Content-Type, multiple schema parameters in the same string requests an instance that conforms to all of the listed schemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.2.p.9">Unlike Content-Type, Accept can contain multiple values to indicate that the client can accept several media types.  In the above example, note that the two media types differ only by their schema parameter values.  This requests an application/json representation that conforms to at least one of the identified schemas.  </p>
+<p><a id="CREF14" class="info">[CREF14]<span class="info">This paragraph assumes that we can register a "schema" link relation.  Should we instead specify something like "tag:json-schema.org,2017:schema" for now? </span></a> HTTP can also send the "schema" in a Link, though this may impact media-type semantics and Content-Type negotiation if this replaces the media-type parameter entirely: </p>
+<pre>
+
+Link: &lt;/alice&gt;;rel="schema", &lt;/bob&gt;;rel="schema"
+
+                    </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.11.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.11.3">11.3.</a> Usage Over HTTP</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.3.p.1">When used for hypermedia systems over a network, <a href="#RFC7231" class="xref">HTTP</a> is frequently the protocol of choice for distributing schemas. Misbehaving clients can pose problems for server maintainers if they pull a schema over the network more frequently than necessary, when it's instead possible to cache a schema for a long period of time.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.3.p.2">HTTP servers SHOULD set long-lived caching headers on JSON Schemas.  HTTP clients SHOULD observe caching headers and not re-request documents within their freshness period.  Distributed systems SHOULD make use of a shared cache and/or caching proxy.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+User-Agent: product-name/5.4.1 so-cool-json-schema/1.0.2 curl/7.43.0
+
+                        </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.3.p.3">Clients SHOULD set or prepend a User-Agent header specific to the JSON Schema implementation or software product. Since symbols are listed in decreasing order of significance, the JSON Schema library name/version should precede the more generic HTTP library name (if any). For example: </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.3.p.4">Clients SHOULD be able to make requests with a "From" header so that server operators can contact the owner of a potentially misbehaving script.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12">12.</a> <a href="#security" id="security">Security Considerations</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.p.1">Both schemas and instances are JSON values. As such, all security considerations defined in <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC 8259</a> apply.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.p.2">Instances and schemas are both frequently written by untrusted third parties, to be deployed on public Internet servers.  Validators should take care that the parsing and validating against schemas doesn't consume excessive system resources.  Validators MUST NOT fall into an infinite loop.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.p.3">Servers MUST ensure that malicious parties can't change the functionality of existing schemas by uploading a schema with a pre-existing or very similar "$id".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.p.4">Individual JSON Schema vocabularies are liable to also have their own security considerations. Consult the respective specifications for more information.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.p.5">Schema authors should take care with "$comment" contents, as a malicious implementation can display them to end-users in violation of a spec, or fail to strip them if such behavior is expected.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.p.6">A malicious schema author could place executable code or other dangerous material within a "$comment".  Implementations MUST NOT parse or otherwise take action based on "$comment" contents.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.13">
+<a href="#rfc.section.13">13.</a> IANA Considerations</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.13.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.13.1">13.1.</a> application/schema+json</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.13.1.p.1">The proposed MIME media type for JSON Schema is defined as follows: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>Type name: application</li>
+<li>Subtype name: schema+json</li>
+<li>Required parameters: N/A</li>
+<li>Optional parameters: <dl>
+<dt>schema:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A non-empty list of space-separated URIs, each identifying a JSON Schema resource.  The instance SHOULD successfully validate against at least one of these meta-schemas.  Non-validating meta-schemas MAY be included for purposes such as allowing clients to make use of older versions of a meta-schema as long as the runtime instance validates against that older version.  </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</li>
+<li>Encoding considerations: Encoding considerations are identical to those specified for the "application/json" media type.  See <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">JSON</a>.  </li>
+<li>Security considerations: See Section <a href="#security" class="xref">12</a> above.  </li>
+<li>Interoperability considerations: See Sections <a href="#language" class="xref">6.2</a>, <a href="#integers" class="xref">6.3</a>, and <a href="#regex" class="xref">6.4</a> above.  </li>
+<li>Fragment identifier considerations: See Section <a href="#fragments" class="xref">5</a> </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.13.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.13.2">13.2.</a> application/schema-instance+json</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.13.2.p.1">The proposed MIME media type for JSON Schema Instances that require a JSON Schema-specific media type is defined as follows: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>Type name: application</li>
+<li>Subtype name: schema-instance+json</li>
+<li>Required parameters: <dl>
+<dt>schema:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A non-empty list of space-separated URIs, each identifying a JSON Schema resource.  The instance SHOULD successfully validate against at least one of these schemas.  Non-validating schemas MAY be included for purposes such as allowing clients to make use of older versions of a schema as long as the runtime instance validates against that older version.  </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</li>
+<li>Encoding considerations: Encoding considerations are identical to those specified for the "application/json" media type.  See <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">JSON</a>.  </li>
+<li>Security considerations: See Section <a href="#security" class="xref">12</a> above.  </li>
+<li>Interoperability considerations: See Sections <a href="#language" class="xref">6.2</a>, <a href="#integers" class="xref">6.3</a>, and <a href="#regex" class="xref">6.4</a> above.  </li>
+<li>Fragment identifier considerations: See Section <a href="#fragments" class="xref">5</a> </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.references">
+<a href="#rfc.references">14.</a> References</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.1">
+<a href="#rfc.references.1">14.1.</a> Normative References</h1>
+<table><tbody>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="ecma262">[ecma262]</b></td>
+<td class="top">"<a href="http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/Ecma-262.pdf">ECMA 262 specification</a>"</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bradner, S.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</a>", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC3986">[RFC3986]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Berners-Lee, T.</a>, <a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>L. Masinter</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986">Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax</a>", STD 66, RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6839">[RFC6839]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Hansen, T.</a> and <a>A. Melnikov</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6839">Additional Media Type Structured Syntax Suffixes</a>", RFC 6839, DOI 10.17487/RFC6839, January 2013.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6901">[RFC6901]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bryan, P.</a>, <a>Zyp, K.</a> and <a>M. Nottingham</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6901">JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Pointer</a>", RFC 6901, DOI 10.17487/RFC6901, April 2013.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC8259">[RFC8259]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bray, T.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8259">The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format</a>", STD 90, RFC 8259, DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="W3C.REC-ldp-20150226">[W3C.REC-ldp-20150226]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Speicher, S.</a>, <a>Arwe, J.</a> and <a>A. Malhotra</a>, "<a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/REC-ldp-20150226">Linked Data Platform 1.0</a>", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation REC-ldp-20150226, February 2015.</td>
+</tr>
+</tbody></table>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.2">
+<a href="#rfc.references.2">14.2.</a> Informative References</h1>
+<table><tbody>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="json-hyper-schema">[json-hyper-schema]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Andrews, H.</a> and <a>A. Wright</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-02">JSON Hyper-Schema: A Vocabulary for Hypermedia Annotation of JSON</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-02, November 2017.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="json-schema-validation">[json-schema-validation]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Wright, A.</a>, <a>Andrews, H.</a> and <a>G. Luff</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-02">JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-02, November 2017.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6596">[RFC6596]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Ohye, M.</a> and <a>J. Kupke</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6596">The Canonical Link Relation</a>", RFC 6596, DOI 10.17487/RFC6596, April 2012.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC7049">[RFC7049]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bormann, C.</a> and <a>P. Hoffman</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7049">Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)</a>", RFC 7049, DOI 10.17487/RFC7049, October 2013.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC7231">[RFC7231]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>J. Reschke</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231">Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content</a>", RFC 7231, DOI 10.17487/RFC7231, June 2014.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC8288">[RFC8288]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Nottingham, M.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8288">Web Linking</a>", RFC 8288, DOI 10.17487/RFC8288, October 2017.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="W3C.WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025">[W3C.WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Tennison, J.</a>, "<a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025">Best Practices for Fragment Identifiers and Media Type Definitions</a>", World Wide Web Consortium WD WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025, October 2012.</td>
+</tr>
+</tbody></table>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Appendix A.</a> <a href="#idExamples" id="idExamples">Schema identification examples</a>
+</h1>
+<p>Consider the following schema, which shows "$id" being used to identify both the root schema and various subschemas, and "$anchor" being used to define plain name fragment identifiers.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "$id": "https://example.com/root.json",
+    "$defs": {
+        "A": { "$anchor": "foo" },
+        "B": {
+            "$id": "other.json",
+            "$defs": {
+                "X": { "$anchor": "bar" },
+                "Y": {
+                    "$id": "t/inner.json",
+                    "$anchor": "bar"
+                }
+            }
+        },
+        "C": {
+            "$id": "urn:uuid:ee564b8a-7a87-4125-8c96-e9f123d6766f"
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+                </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.1">The schemas at the following URI-encoded <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">JSON Pointers</a> (relative to the root schema) have the following base URIs, and are identifiable by any listed URI in accordance with sections <a href="#fragments" class="xref">5</a> and <a href="#embedded" class="xref">8.2.2.2</a> above.  </p>
+<p></p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt># (document root)</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<dl>
+<dt>canonical absolute-URI (and also base URI)</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json </dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with pointer fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json# </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>#/$defs/A</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<dl>
+<dt>base URI</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json</dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with plain fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json#foo </dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with pointer fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json#/$defs/A </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>#/$defs/B</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<dl>
+<dt>base URI</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/other.json</dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with pointer fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/other.json# </dd>
+<dt>non-canonical URI with fragment relative to root.json</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json#/$defs/B </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>#/$defs/B/$defs/X</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<dl>
+<dt>base URI</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/other.json</dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with plain fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/other.json#bar </dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with pointer fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/other.json#/$defs/X </dd>
+<dt>non-canonical URI with fragment relative to root.json</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json#/$defs/B/$defs/X </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>#/$defs/B/$defs/Y</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<dl>
+<dt>base URI</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/t/inner.json</dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with plain fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/t/inner.json#bar </dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with pointer fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/t/inner.json# </dd>
+<dt>non-canonical URI with fragment relative to other.json</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/other.json#/$defs/Y </dd>
+<dt>non-canonical URI with fragment relative to root.json</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json#/$defs/B/$defs/Y </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>#/$defs/C</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<dl>
+<dt>base URI</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">urn:uuid:ee564b8a-7a87-4125-8c96-e9f123d6766f </dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with pointer fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">urn:uuid:ee564b8a-7a87-4125-8c96-e9f123d6766f# </dd>
+<dt>non-canonical URI with fragment relative to root.json</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json#/$defs/C </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.B">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.B">Appendix B.</a> Manipulating schema documents and references</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.p.1">Various tools have been created to rearrange schema documents based on how and where references ("$ref") appear.  This appendix discusses which use cases and actions are compliant with this specification.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.B.1">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.B.1">B.1.</a> Bundling schema resources into a single document</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.1.p.1">A set of schema resources intended for use together can be organized with each in its own schema document, all in the same schema document, or any granularity of document grouping in between.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.1.p.2">Numerous tools exist to perform various sorts of reference removal.  A common case of this is producing a single file where all references can be resolved within that file.  This is typically done to simplify distribution, or to simplify coding so that various invocations of JSON Schema libraries do not have to keep track of and load a large number of resources.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.1.p.3">This transformation can be safely and reversibly done as long as all static references (e.g. "$ref") use URI-references that resolve to canonical URIs, and all schema resources have an absolute-URI as the "$id" in their root schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.1.p.4">With these conditions met, each external resource can be copied under "$defs", without breaking any references among the resources' schema objects, and without changing any aspect of validation or annotation results.  The names of the schemas under "$defs" do not affect behavior, assuming they are each unique, as they do not appear in canonical URIs for the embedded resources.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.B.2">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.B.2">B.2.</a> Reference removal is not always safe</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.2.p.1">Attempting to remove all references and produce a single schema document does not, in all cases, produce a schema with identical behavior to the original form.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.2.p.2">Since "$ref" is now treated like any other keyword, with other keywords allowed in the same schema objects, fully supporting non-recursive "$ref" removal in all cases can require relatively complex schema manipulations.  It is beyond the scope of this specification to determine or provide a set of safe "$ref" removal transformations, as they depend not only on the schema structure but also on the intended usage.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.C">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.C">Appendix C.</a> <a href="#recursive-example" id="recursive-example">Example of recursive schema extension</a>
+</h1>
+<p>Consider the following two schemas describing a simple recursive tree structure, where each node in the tree can have a "data" field of any type.  The first schema allows and ignores other instance properties.  The second is more strict and only allows the "data" and "children" properties.  An example instance with "data" misspelled as "daat" is also shown.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+// tree schema, extensible
+{
+    "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/schema",
+    "$id": "https://example.com/tree",
+    "$recursiveAnchor": true,
+
+    "type": "object",
+    "properties": {
+        "data": true,
+        "children": {
+            "type": "array",
+            "items": {
+                "$recursiveRef": "#"
+            }
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+// strict-tree schema, guards against misspelled properties
+{
+    "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/schema",
+    "$id": "https://example.com/strict-tree",
+    "$recursiveAnchor": true,
+
+    "$ref": "tree",
+    "unevaluatedProperties": false
+}
+
+// instance with misspelled field
+{
+    "children": [ { "daat": 1 } ]
+}
+
+                </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.C.p.1">If we apply the "strict-tree" schema to the instance, we will follow the "$ref" to the "tree" schema, examine its "children" subschema, and find the "$recursiveAnchor" in its "items" subschema.  At this point, the dynamic path is "#/$ref/properties/children/items/$recursiveRef".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.C.p.2">The base URI at this point is "https://example.com/tree", so the "$recursiveRef" initially resolves to "https://example.com/tree#".  Since "$recursiveAnchor" is true, we examine the dynamic path to see if there is a different base URI to use.  We find "$recursiveAnchor" with a true value at the dynamic paths of "#" and "#/$ref".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.C.p.3">The outermost is "#", which is the root schema of the "strict-tree" schema, so we use its base URI of "https://example.com/strict-tree", which produces a final resolved URI of "https://example.com/strict-tree#" for the "$recursiveRef".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.C.p.4">This way, the recursion in the "tree" schema recurses to the root of "strict-tree", instead of only applying "strict-tree" to the instance root, but applying "tree" to instance children.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.D">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.D">Appendix D.</a> Working with vocabularies</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.D.1">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.D.1">D.1.</a> Best practices for vocabulary and meta-schema authors</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.1">Vocabulary authors should take care to avoid keyword name collisions if the vocabulary is intended for broad use, and potentially combined with other vocabularies.  JSON Schema does not provide any formal namespacing system, but also does not constrain keyword names, allowing for any number of namespacing approaches.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.2">Vocabularies may build on each other, such as by defining the behavior of their keywords with respect to the behavior of keywords from another vocabulary, or by using a keyword from another vocabulary with a restricted or expanded set of acceptable values.  Not all such vocabulary re-use will result in a new vocabulary that is compatible with the vocabulary on which it is built.  Vocabulary authors should clearly document what level of compatibility, if any, is expected.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.3">Meta-schema authors should not use "$vocabulary" to combine multiple vocabularies that define conflicting syntax or semantics for the same keyword.  As semantic conflicts are not generally detectable through schema validation, implementations are not expected to detect such conflicts.  If conflicting vocabularies are declared, the resulting behavior is undefined.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.4">Vocabulary authors should provide a meta-schema that validates the expected usage of the vocabulary's keywords on their own.  Such meta-schemas should not forbid additional keywords, and must not forbid any keywords from the Core vocabulary.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.5">It is recommended that meta-schema authors reference each vocabulary's meta-schema using the <a href="#allOf" class="xref">"allOf"</a> keyword, although other mechanisms for constructing the meta-schema may be appropriate for certain use cases.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.6">The recursive nature of meta-schemas makes the "$recursiveAnchor" and "$recursiveRef" keywords particularly useful for extending existing meta-schemas, as can be seen in the JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema which extends the Validation meta-schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.7">Meta-schemas may impose additional constraints, including describing keywords not present in any vocabulary, beyond what the meta-schemas associated with the declared vocabularies describe.  This allows for restricting usage to a subset of a vocabulary, and for validating locally defined keywords not intended for re-use.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.8">However, meta-schemas should not contradict any vocabularies that they declare, such as by requiring a different JSON type than the vocabulary expects.  The resulting behavior is undefined.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.9">Meta-schemas intended for local use, with no need to test for vocabulary support in arbitrary implementations, can safely omit "$vocabulary" entirely.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.D.2">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.D.2">D.2.</a> <a href="#example-meta-schema" id="example-meta-schema">Example meta-schema with vocabulary declarations</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.2.p.1">This meta-schema explicitly declares both the Core and Applicator vocabularies, together with an extension vocabulary, and combines their meta-schemas with an "allOf".  The extension vocabulary's meta-schema, which describes only the keywords in that vocabulary, is shown after the main example meta-schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.2.p.2">The main example meta-schema also restricts the usage of the Applicator vocabulary by forbidding the keywords prefixed with "unevaluated", which are particularly complex to implement.  This does not change the semantics or set of keywords defined by the Applicator vocabulary.  It just ensures that schemas using this meta-schema that attempt to use the keywords prefixed with "unevaluted" will fail validation against this meta-schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.2.p.3">Finally, this meta-schema describes the syntax of a keyword, "localKeyword", that is not part of any vocabulary.  Presumably, the implementors and users of this meta-schema will understand the semantics of "localKeyword".  JSON Schema does not define any mechanism for expressing keyword semantics outside of vocabularies, making them unsuitable for use except in a specific environment in which they are understood.  </p>
+<p>This meta-schema combines several vocabularies for general use.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/meta/general-use-example",
+  "$recursiveAnchor": true,
+  "$vocabulary": {
+    "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/core": true,
+    "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/applicator": true,
+    "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/validation": true,
+    "https://example.com/vocab/example-vocab": true
+  },
+  "allOf": [
+    {"$ref": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/core"},
+    {"$ref": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/applicator"},
+    {"$ref": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/validation"},
+    {"$ref": "https://example.com/meta/example-vocab",
+  ],
+  "patternProperties": {
+    "^unevaluated.*$": false
+  },
+  "properties": {
+    "localKeyword": {
+      "$comment": "Not in vocabulary, but validated if used",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  }
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>This meta-schema describes only a single extension vocabulary.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/meta/example-vocab",
+  "$recursiveAnchor": true,
+  "$vocabulary": {
+    "https://example.com/vocab/example-vocab": true,
+  },
+  "type": ["object", "boolean"],
+  "properties": {
+    "minDate": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "pattern": "\d\d\d\d-\d\d-\d\d",
+      "format": "date",
+    }
+  }
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.2.p.4">As shown above, even though each of the single-vocabulary meta-schemas referenced in the general-use meta-schema's "allOf" declares its corresponding vocabulary, this new meta-schema must re-declare them.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.2.p.5">The standard meta-schemas that combine all vocabularies defined by the Core and Validation specification, and that combine all vocabularies defined by those specifications as well as the Hyper-Schema specification, demonstrate additional complex combinations.  These URIs for these meta-schemas may be found in the Validation and Hyper-Schema specifications, respectively.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.2.p.6">While the general-use meta-schema can validate the syntax of "minDate", it is the vocabulary that defines the logic behind the semantic meaning of "minDate".  Without an understanding of the semantics (in this example, that the instance value must be a date equal to or after the date provided as the keyword's value in the schema), an implementation can only validate the syntactic usage.  In this case, that means validating that it is a date-formatted string (using "pattern" to ensure that it is validated even when "format" functions purely as an annotation, as explained in the <a href="#json-schema-validation" class="xref">Validation specification</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.E">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.E">Appendix E.</a> References and generative use cases</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.E.p.1">While the presence of references is expected to be transparent to validation results, generative use cases such as code generators and UI renderers often consider references to be semantically significant.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.E.p.2">To make such use case-specific semantics explicit, the best practice is to create an annotation keyword for use in the same schema object alongside of a reference keyword such as "$ref".  </p>
+<p>For example, here is a hypothetical keyword for determining whether a code generator should consider the reference target to be a distinct class, and how those classes are related.  Note that this example is solely for illustrative purposes, and is not intended to propose a functional code generation keyword.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "allOf": [
+        {
+            "classRelation": "is-a",
+            "$ref": "classes/base.json"
+        },
+        {
+            "$ref": "fields/common.json"
+        }
+    ],
+    "properties": {
+        "foo": {
+            "classRelation": "has-a",
+            "$ref": "classes/foo.json"
+        },
+        "date": {
+            "$ref": "types/dateStruct.json",
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+                </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.E.p.3">Here, this schema represents some sort of object-oriented class.  The first reference in the "allOf" is noted as the base class.  The second is not assigned a class relationship, meaning that the code generator should combine the target's definition with this one as if no reference were involved.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.E.p.4">Looking at the properties, "foo" is flagged as object composition, while the "date" property is not.  It is simply a field with sub-fields, rather than an instance of a distinct class.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.E.p.5">This style of usage requires the annotation to be in the same object as the reference, which must be recognizable as a reference.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.F">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.F">Appendix F.</a> Acknowledgments</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.F.p.1">Thanks to Gary Court, Francis Galiegue, Kris Zyp, and Geraint Luff for their work on the initial drafts of JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.F.p.2">Thanks to Jason Desrosiers, Daniel Perrett, Erik Wilde, Ben Hutton, Evgeny Poberezkin, Brad Bowman, Gowry Sankar, Donald Pipowitch, and Dave Finlay for their submissions and patches to the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.G">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.G">Appendix G.</a> ChangeLog</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF15" class="info">[CREF15]<span class="info">This section to be removed before leaving Internet-Draft status.</span></a> </p>
+<p></p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-02</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Update to RFC 8259 for JSON specification</li>
+<li>Moved "definitions" from the Validation specification here as "$defs"</li>
+<li>Moved applicator keywords from the Validation specification as their own vocabulary</li>
+<li>Moved the schema form of "dependencies" from the Validation specification as "dependentSchemas"</li>
+<li>Formalized annotation collection</li>
+<li>Specified recommended output formats</li>
+<li>Defined keyword interactions in terms of annotation and assertion results</li>
+<li>Added "unevaluatedProperties" and "unevaluatedItems"</li>
+<li>Define "$ref" behavior in terms of the assertion, applicator, and annotation model</li>
+<li>Allow keywords adjacent to "$ref"</li>
+<li>Note undefined behavior for "$ref" targets involving unknown keywords</li>
+<li>Add recursive referencing, primarily for meta-schema extension</li>
+<li>Add the concept of formal vocabularies, and how they can be recognized through meta-schemas</li>
+<li>Additional guidance on initial base URIs beyond network retrieval</li>
+<li>Allow "schema" media type parameter for "application/schema+json"</li>
+<li>Better explanation of media type parameters and the HTTP Accept header</li>
+<li>Use "$id" to establish canonical and base absolute-URIs only, no fragments</li>
+<li>Replace plain-name-fragment-only form of "$id" with "$anchor"</li>
+<li>Clarified that the behavior of JSON Pointers across "$id" boundary is unreliable</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-01</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>This draft is purely a clarification with no functional changes</li>
+<li>Emphasized annotations as a primary usage of JSON Schema</li>
+<li>Clarified $id by use cases</li>
+<li>Exhaustive schema identification examples</li>
+<li>Replaced "external referencing" with how and when an implementation might know of a schema from another document</li>
+<li>Replaced "internal referencing" with how an implementation should recognized schema identifiers during parsing</li>
+<li>Dereferencing the former "internal" or "external" references is always the same process</li>
+<li>Minor formatting improvements</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Make the concept of a schema keyword vocabulary more clear</li>
+<li>Note that the concept of "integer" is from a vocabulary, not the data model</li>
+<li>Classify keywords as assertions or annotations and describe their general behavior</li>
+<li>Explain the boolean schemas in terms of generalized assertions</li>
+<li>Reserve "$comment" for non-user-visible notes about the schema</li>
+<li>Wording improvements around "$id" and fragments</li>
+<li>Note the challenges of extending meta-schemas with recursive references</li>
+<li>Add "application/schema-instance+json" media type</li>
+<li>Recommend a "schema" link relation / parameter instead of "profile"</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-wright-json-schema-01</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Updated intro</li>
+<li>Allowed for any schema to be a boolean</li>
+<li>"$schema" SHOULD NOT appear in subschemas, although that may change</li>
+<li>Changed "id" to "$id"; all core keywords prefixed with "$"</li>
+<li>Clarify and formalize fragments for application/schema+json</li>
+<li>Note applicability to formats such as CBOR that can be represented in the JSON data model</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-wright-json-schema-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Updated references to JSON</li>
+<li>Updated references to HTTP</li>
+<li>Updated references to JSON Pointer</li>
+<li>Behavior for "id" is now specified in terms of RFC3986</li>
+<li>Aligned vocabulary usage for URIs with RFC3986</li>
+<li>Removed reference to draft-pbryan-zyp-json-ref-03</li>
+<li>Limited use of "$ref" to wherever a schema is expected</li>
+<li>Added definition of the "JSON Schema data model"</li>
+<li>Added additional security considerations</li>
+<li>Defined use of subschema identifiers for "id"</li>
+<li>Rewrote section on usage with HTTP</li>
+<li>Rewrote section on usage with rel="describedBy" and rel="profile"</li>
+<li>Fixed numerous invalid examples</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-zyp-json-schema-04</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Salvaged from draft v3.</li>
+<li>Split validation keywords into separate document.</li>
+<li>Split hypermedia keywords into separate document.</li>
+<li>Initial post-split draft.</li>
+<li>Mandate the use of JSON Reference, JSON Pointer.</li>
+<li>Define the role of "id". Define URI resolution scope.</li>
+<li>Add interoperability considerations.</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-zyp-json-schema-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul><li>Initial draft.</li></ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.authors"><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a></h1>
+<div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Austin Wright</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Wright</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:aaa@bzfx.net">aaa@bzfx.net</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Henry Andrews</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Andrews</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:andrews_henry@yahoo.com">andrews_henry@yahoo.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Ben Hutton</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Hutton</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline">Wellcome Sanger Institute</span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:bh7@sanger.ac.uk">bh7@sanger.ac.uk</a></span>
+
+<span class="vcardline">URI: <a href="https://jsonschema.dev">https://jsonschema.dev</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Greg Dennis</span> 
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Dennis</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality">Auckland</span>,  
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline">NZ</span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:gregsdennis@yahoo.com">gregsdennis@yahoo.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/json-schema-hypermedia.html b/draft/2019-09/json-schema-hypermedia.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..2c919aae
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/json-schema-hypermedia.html
@@ -0,0 +1,2008 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
+  "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
+<head profile="http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/">
+  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" />
+
+  <title>JSON Hyper-Schema: A Vocabulary for Hypermedia Annotation of JSON </title>
+
+  <style type="text/css" title="Xml2Rfc (sans serif)">
+  /*<![CDATA[*/
+	  a {
+	  text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+      /* info code from SantaKlauss at http://www.madaboutstyle.com/tooltip2.html */
+      a.info {
+          /* This is the key. */
+          position: relative;
+          z-index: 24;
+          text-decoration: none;
+      }
+      a.info:hover {
+          z-index: 25;
+          color: #FFF; background-color: #900;
+      }
+      a.info span { display: none; }
+      a.info:hover span.info {
+          /* The span will display just on :hover state. */
+          display: block;
+          position: absolute;
+          font-size: smaller;
+          top: 2em; left: -5em; width: 15em;
+          padding: 2px; border: 1px solid #333;
+          color: #900; background-color: #EEE;
+          text-align: left;
+      }
+	  a.smpl {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  a:hover {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  a:active {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  address {
+	  margin-top: 1em;
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  body {
+	  color: black;
+	  font-family: verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  max-width: 55em;
+	  
+	  }
+	  cite {
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  dd {
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  dl {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.empty {
+	  list-style-type: none;
+	  }
+	  ul.empty li {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  dl p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  dt {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  h1 {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h1.np {
+	  page-break-before: always;
+	  }
+	  h1 a {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  }
+	  h2 {
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 15pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h2 a, h3 a, h4 a, h5 a, h6 a {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  img {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  }
+	  li {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  p {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  pre {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  background-color: lightyellow;
+	  padding: .25em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text2 {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f0f0f0;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.inline {
+	  background-color: white;
+	  padding: 0em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.drawing {
+	  border-style: solid;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  padding: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table.tt {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt td {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full td {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt th {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full th {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers th {
+	  border-style: none none inset none;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.left {
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.right {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.center {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  caption {
+	  caption-side: bottom;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+	  border-spacing: 1px;
+	  width: 95%;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.top {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  td.topnowrap {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap; 
+	  }
+	  table.header td {
+	  background-color: gray;
+	  width: 50%;
+	  }
+	  table.header a {
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.reference {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap;
+	  padding-right: 1em;
+	  }
+	  thead {
+	  display:table-header-group;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc, ul.toc ul {
+	  list-style: none;
+	  margin-left: 1.5em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  padding-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li {
+	  line-height: 150%;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li li {
+	  line-height: normal;
+	  font-weight: normal;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  li.excluded {
+	  font-size: 0pt;
+	  }
+	  ul p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	
+	  .comment {
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	  .center {
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .error {
+	  color: red;
+	  font-style: italic;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .figure {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  }
+	  .filename {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .fn {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .hidden {
+	  display: none;
+	  }
+	  .left {
+	  text-align: left;
+	  }
+	  .right {
+	  text-align: right;
+	  }
+	  .title {
+	  color: #990000;
+	  font-size: 18pt;
+	  line-height: 18pt;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  margin-top: 36pt;
+	  }
+	  .vcardline {
+	  display: block;
+	  }
+	  .warning {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	
+	
+	  @media print {
+	  .noprint {
+		display: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  a {
+		color: black;
+		text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+		width: 90%;
+	  }
+	
+	  td.header {
+		width: 50%;
+		color: black;
+		background-color: white;
+		vertical-align: top;
+		font-size: 12pt;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.toc a::after {
+		content: leader('.') target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.ind li li a {
+		content: target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  .print2col {
+		column-count: 2;
+		-moz-column-count: 2;
+		column-fill: auto;
+	  }
+	  }
+	
+	  @page {
+	  @top-left {
+		   content: "Internet-Draft"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-right {
+		   content: "December 2010"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-center {
+		   content: "Abbreviated Title";
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-left {
+		   content: "Doe"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-center {
+		   content: "Expires June 2011"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-right {
+		   content: "[Page " counter(page) "]"; 
+	  } 
+	  }
+	
+	  @page:first { 
+		@top-left {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-right {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-center {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+	  }
+  /*]]>*/
+  </style>
+
+  <link href="#rfc.toc" rel="Contents">
+<link href="#rfc.section.1" rel="Chapter" title="1 Introduction">
+<link href="#rfc.section.2" rel="Chapter" title="2 Notational Conventions">
+<link href="#rfc.section.3" rel="Chapter" title="3 Overview">
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="3.1 Terminology">
+<link href="#rfc.section.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="3.2 Functionality">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4" rel="Chapter" title="4 Meta-Schemas and Output Schema">
+<link href="#rfc.section.5" rel="Chapter" title="5 Schema Keywords">
+<link href="#rfc.section.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="5.1 base">
+<link href="#rfc.section.5.2" rel="Chapter" title="5.2 links">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6" rel="Chapter" title="6 Link Description Object">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.1 Link Context">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.1.1 anchor">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.1.2 anchorPointer">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.2 Link Relation Type">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.1 rel">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.2" rel="Chapter" title='6.2.2 "self" Links'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.3" rel="Chapter" title='6.2.3 "collection" and "item" Links'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.4 Using Extension Relation Types">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.3 Link Target">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.3.1 href">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.4 Adjusting URI Template Resolution">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.1 templatePointers">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.2 templateRequired">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.5 Link Target Attributes">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.1 title">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.2 description">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.3 targetMediaType">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.4 targetSchema">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.5 targetHints">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6" rel="Chapter" title="6.6 Link Input">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.6.1 hrefSchema">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.6.2 headerSchema">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.6.3 Manipulating the Target Resource Representation">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.6.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.6.4 Submitting Data for Processing">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7" rel="Chapter" title="7 Implementation Requirements">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.1 Link Discovery and Look-Up">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.2 URI Templating">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.2.1 Populating Template Data From the Instance">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.2.2 Accepting Input for Template Data">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.2.3 Encoding Data as Strings">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.3 Providing Access to LDO Keywords">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.4" rel="Chapter" title="7.4 Requests">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.5" rel="Chapter" title="7.5 Responses">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.6" rel="Chapter" title="7.6 Streaming Parsers">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8" rel="Chapter" title="8 JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1" rel="Chapter" title="8.1 One Link Per Target and Relation Type">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2" rel="Chapter" title='8.2 "targetSchema" and HTTP'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.3" rel="Chapter" title='8.3 HTTP POST and the "submission*" keywords'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.4" rel="Chapter" title='8.4 Optimizing HTTP Discoverability With "targetHints"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.5" rel="Chapter" title='8.5 Advertising HTTP Features With "headerSchema"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.6" rel="Chapter" title="8.6 Creating Resources Through Collections">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.7" rel="Chapter" title="8.7 Content Negotiation and Schema Evolution">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9" rel="Chapter" title="9 Examples">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.1" rel="Chapter" title="9.1 Entry Point Links, No Templates">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.2" rel="Chapter" title="9.2 Individually Identified Resources">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.3" rel="Chapter" title="9.3 Submitting a Payload and Accepting URI Input">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.4" rel="Chapter" title='9.4 "anchor", "base" and URI Template Resolution'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.5" rel="Chapter" title="9.5 Collections">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="9.5.1 Pagination">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.5.2" rel="Chapter" title="9.5.2 Creating the First Item">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10" rel="Chapter" title="10 Security Considerations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.1" rel="Chapter" title="10.1 Target Attributes">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.2" rel="Chapter" title='10.2 "self" Links'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.11" rel="Chapter" title="11 Acknowledgments">
+<link href="#rfc.references" rel="Chapter" title="12 References">
+<link href="#rfc.references.1" rel="Chapter" title="12.1 Normative References">
+<link href="#rfc.references.2" rel="Chapter" title="12.2 Informative References">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A" rel="Chapter" title="A Using JSON Hyper-Schema in APIs">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A.1" rel="Chapter" title="A.1 Resource Evolution With Hyper-Schema">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A.2" rel="Chapter" title="A.2 Responses and Errors">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A.3" rel="Chapter" title="A.3 Static Analysis of an API's Hyper-Schemas">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.B" rel="Chapter" title="B ChangeLog">
+<link href="#rfc.authors" rel="Chapter">
+
+
+  <meta name="generator" content="xml2rfc version 2.20.1 - https://tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc" />
+  <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" />
+
+  <meta name="dct.creator" content="Andrews, H., Ed. and A. Wright, Ed." />
+  <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-02" />
+  <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2019-17" />
+  <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Schema is a JSON-based format for describing JSON data using various vocabularies.  This document specifies a vocabulary for annotating JSON documents with hyperlinks.  These hyperlinks include attributes describing how to manipulate and interact with remote resources through hypermedia environments such as HTTP, as well as determining whether the link is usable based on the instance value.  The hyperlink serialization format described in this document is also usable independent of JSON Schema.  " />
+  <meta name="description" content="JSON Schema is a JSON-based format for describing JSON data using various vocabularies.  This document specifies a vocabulary for annotating JSON documents with hyperlinks.  These hyperlinks include attributes describing how to manipulate and interact with remote resources through hypermedia environments such as HTTP, as well as determining whether the link is usable based on the instance value.  The hyperlink serialization format described in this document is also usable independent of JSON Schema.  " />
+
+</head>
+
+<body>
+
+  <table class="header">
+    <tbody>
+    
+    	<tr>
+<td class="left">Internet Engineering Task Force</td>
+<td class="right">H. Andrews, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
+<td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Intended status: Informational</td>
+<td class="right">A. Wright, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Expires: March 20, 2020</td>
+<td class="right">September 17, 2019</td>
+</tr>
+
+    	
+    </tbody>
+  </table>
+
+  <p class="title">JSON Hyper-Schema: A Vocabulary for Hypermedia Annotation of JSON <br />
+  <span class="filename">draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-02</span></p>
+  
+  <h1 id="rfc.abstract"><a href="#rfc.abstract">Abstract</a></h1>
+<p>JSON Schema is a JSON-based format for describing JSON data using various vocabularies.  This document specifies a vocabulary for annotating JSON documents with hyperlinks.  These hyperlinks include attributes describing how to manipulate and interact with remote resources through hypermedia environments such as HTTP, as well as determining whether the link is usable based on the instance value.  The hyperlink serialization format described in this document is also usable independent of JSON Schema.  </p>
+<h1><a>Note to Readers</a></h1>
+<p>The issues list for this draft can be found at <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues">https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>For additional information, see <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/">https://json-schema.org/</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>To provide feedback, use this issue tracker, the communication methods listed on the homepage, or email the document editors.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.status"><a href="#rfc.status">Status of This Memo</a></h1>
+<p>This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.</p>
+<p>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/.</p>
+<p>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."</p>
+<p>This Internet-Draft will expire on March 20, 2020.</p>
+<h1 id="rfc.copyrightnotice"><a href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a></h1>
+<p>Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors.  All rights reserved.</p>
+<p>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.</p>
+
+  
+  <hr class="noprint" />
+  <h1 class="np" id="rfc.toc"><a href="#rfc.toc">Table of Contents</a></h1>
+  <ul class="toc">
+
+  	<li>1.   <a href="#rfc.section.1">Introduction</a>
+</li>
+<li>2.   <a href="#rfc.section.2">Notational Conventions</a>
+</li>
+<li>3.   <a href="#rfc.section.3">Overview</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.1">Terminology</a>
+</li>
+<li>3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.3.2">Functionality</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>4.   <a href="#rfc.section.4">Meta-Schemas and Output Schema</a>
+</li>
+<li>5.   <a href="#rfc.section.5">Schema Keywords</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.5.1">base</a>
+</li>
+<li>5.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.5.2">links</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6">Link Description Object</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1">Link Context</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.1.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1.1">anchor</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.1.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1.2">anchorPointer</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2">Link Relation Type</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.1">rel</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.2">"self" Links</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.3">"collection" and "item" Links</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.2.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.4">Using Extension Relation Types</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3">Link Target</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3.1">href</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4">Adjusting URI Template Resolution</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.4.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.1">templatePointers</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.4.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.2">templateRequired</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5">Link Target Attributes</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.1">title</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.5.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.2">description</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.5.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.3">targetMediaType</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.5.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.4">targetSchema</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.5.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.5">targetHints</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6">Link Input</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.6.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6.1">hrefSchema</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.6.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6.2">headerSchema</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.6.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6.3">Manipulating the Target Resource Representation</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.6.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.6.4">Submitting Data for Processing</a>
+</li>
+</ul></ul><li>7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7">Implementation Requirements</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.1">Link Discovery and Look-Up</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2">URI Templating</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2.1">Populating Template Data From the Instance</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2.2">Accepting Input for Template Data</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2.3">Encoding Data as Strings</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>7.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3">Providing Access to LDO Keywords</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.4">Requests</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.5">Responses</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.6">Streaming Parsers</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>8.   <a href="#rfc.section.8">JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>8.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1">One Link Per Target and Relation Type</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2">"targetSchema" and HTTP</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.3">HTTP POST and the "submission*" keywords</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.4">Optimizing HTTP Discoverability With "targetHints"</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.5">Advertising HTTP Features With "headerSchema"</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.6">Creating Resources Through Collections</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.7.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.7">Content Negotiation and Schema Evolution</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>9.   <a href="#rfc.section.9">Examples</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>9.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.1">Entry Point Links, No Templates</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.2">Individually Identified Resources</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.3">Submitting a Payload and Accepting URI Input</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.4">"anchor", "base" and URI Template Resolution</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.5">Collections</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>9.5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.5.1">Pagination</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.5.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.5.2">Creating the First Item</a>
+</li>
+</ul></ul><li>10.   <a href="#rfc.section.10">Security Considerations</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>10.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.1">Target Attributes</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.2">"self" Links</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>11.   <a href="#rfc.section.11">Acknowledgments</a>
+</li>
+<li>12.   <a href="#rfc.references">References</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>12.1.   <a href="#rfc.references.1">Normative References</a>
+</li>
+<li>12.2.   <a href="#rfc.references.2">Informative References</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>Appendix A.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Using JSON Hyper-Schema in APIs</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>A.1.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A.1">Resource Evolution With Hyper-Schema</a>
+</li>
+<li>A.2.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A.2">Responses and Errors</a>
+</li>
+<li>A.3.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A.3">Static Analysis of an API's Hyper-Schemas</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>Appendix B.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.B">ChangeLog</a>
+</li>
+<li><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a>
+</li>
+
+
+  </ul>
+
+  <h1 id="rfc.section.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.1">1.</a> Introduction</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema is a JSON Schema vocabulary for annotating JSON documents with hyperlinks and instructions for processing and manipulating remote JSON resources through hypermedia environments such as HTTP.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.2">The term JSON Hyper-Schema is used to refer to a JSON Schema that uses these keywords.  The term "hyper-schema" on its own refers to a JSON Hyper-Schema within the scope of this specification.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.3">The primary mechanism introduced for specifying links is the Link Description Object (LDO), which is a serialization of the abstract link model defined in <a href="#RFC8288" class="xref">RFC 8288, section 2</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.4">This specification will use the concepts, syntax, and terminology defined by the <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">JSON Schema core</a> and <a href="#json-schema-validation" class="xref">JSON Schema validation</a> specifications.  It is advised that readers have a copy of these specifications.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.2">2.</a> Notational Conventions</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.1">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 <a href="#RFC2119" class="xref">RFC 2119</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.3">3.</a> Overview</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema makes it possible to build hypermedia systems from JSON documents by describing how to construct hyperlinks from instance data.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.2">The combination of a JSON instance document and a valid application/schema+json hyper-schema for that instance behaves as a single hypermedia representation.  By allowing this separation, hyper-schema-based systems can gracefully support applications that expect plain JSON, while providing full hypermedia capabilities for hyper-schema-aware applications and user agents.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.3">User agents can detect the presence of hyper-schema by looking for the application/schema+json media type and a "$schema" value that indicates the presence of the hyper-schema vocabulary.  A user agent can then use an implementation of JSON Hyper-Schema to provide an interface to the combination of the schema and instance documents as a single logical representation of a resource, just as with any single-document hypermedia representation format.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.4">Hyper-schemas allow representations to take up fewer bytes on the wire, and distribute the burden of link construction from the server to each client.  A user agent need not construct a link unless a client application requests that link.  JSON Hyper-Schema can also be used on the server side to generate other link serializations or representation formats at runtime, or pre-emptively follow links to facilitate server push usage.  </p>
+<p>Here is an example hyper-schema that adds a single link, with the IANA-registered link relation type "self", that is built from an instance with one known object field named "id": </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "type": "object",
+    "properties": {
+        "id": {
+            "type": "number",
+            "readOnly": true
+        }
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "thing/{id}"
+        }
+    ]
+}
+                </pre>
+<p>If the instance is {"id": 1234}, and its base URI according to <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986 section 5.1</a>, is "https://example.com/api/", then "https://example.com/api/thing/1234" is the resulting link's target URI.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.3.1">3.1.</a> Terminology</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.1">The terms "schema", "instance", and "meta-schema" are to be interpreted as defined in the <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">JSON Schema core specification</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.2">The terms "applicable" and "attached" are to be interpreted as defined in <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">Section 3.1 of the JSON Schema core specification</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.3">The terms "link", "link context" (or "context"), "link target" (or "target"), and "target attributes" are to be interpreted as defined in <a href="#RFC8288" class="xref">Section 2 of RFC 8288</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.4">The term "user agent" is to be interpreted as defined in <a href="#RFC7230" class="xref">Section 2.1 of RFC 7230</a>, generalized to apply to any protocol that may be used in a hypermedia system rather than specifically being an HTTP client.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.1.p.5">This specification defines the following terms: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>JSON Hyper-Schema</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A JSON Schema using the keywords defined by this specification.  </dd>
+<dt>hyper-schema</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">Within this document, the term "hyper-schema" always refers to a JSON Hyper-Schema </dd>
+<dt>link validity</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A valid link for an instance is one that is applicable to that instance and does not fail any requirement imposed by the keywords in the Link Description Object.  Note that invalid links can occur when using keywords such as "if" or "oneOf" (from the Core specification) to describe links that are conditional on the representation's structure or value.  </dd>
+<dt>generic user agent</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A user agent which can be used to interact with any resource, from any server, from among the standardized link relations, media types, URI schemes, and protocols that it supports; though it may be extendible to specially handle particular profiles of media types.  </dd>
+<dt>client application</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">An application which uses a hypermedia system for a specific purpose.  Such an application may also be its own user agent, or it may be built on top of a generic user agent.  A client application is programmed with knowledge of link relations, media types, URI schemes, protocols, and data structures that are specific to the application's domain.  </dd>
+<dt>client input</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">Data provided through a user agent, and most often also through a client application.  Such data may be requested from a user interactively, or provided before interaction in forms such as command-line arguments, configuration files, or hardcoded values in source code.  </dd>
+<dt>operation</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A specific use of a hyperlink, such as making a network request (for a URI with a scheme such as "http://" that indicates a protocol) or otherwise taking action based on a link (reading data from a "data:" URI, or constructing an email message based on a "mailto:" link).  For protocols such as HTTP that support multiple methods, each method is considered to be a separate operation on the same link.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.3.2">3.2.</a> Functionality</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.1">A JSON Hyper-Schema implementation is able to take a hyper-schema, an instance, and in some cases client input, and produce a set of fully resolved valid links.  As defined by <a href="#RFC8288" class="xref">RFC 8288, section 2</a>, a link consists of a context, a typed relation, a target, and optionally additional target attributes.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.2">The relation type and target attributes are taken directly from each link's Link Description Object.  The context and target identifiers are constructed from some combination of URI Templates, instance data, and (in the case of the target identifier) client input.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.3">The target is always fully identified by a URI.  Due to the lack of a URI fragment identifier syntax for application/json and many other media types that can be used with JSON Hyper-Schema, the context may be only partially identified by a URI.  In such cases, the remaining identification will be provided as a JSON Pointer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.2.p.4">A few IANA-registered link relation types are given specific semantics in a JSON Hyper-Schema document.  A "self" link is used to interact with the resource that the instance document represents, while "collection" and "item" links identify resources for which collection-specific semantics can be assumed.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4">4.</a> Meta-Schemas and Output Schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.1">The current URI for the JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema is <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/hyper-schema#">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/hyper-schema#</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.2">The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Hyper-Schema vocabulary, is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/hyper-schema">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/hyper-schema</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.3">The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema, which differs from the convenience meta-schema above in that it describes only the hyper-schema keywords ("base" and "link") is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/hyper-schema">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/hyper-schema</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.4">The <a href="#ldo" class="xref">link description format</a> can be used without JSON Schema, and use of this format can be declared by referencing the normative link description schema as the schema for the data structure that uses the links.  The URI of the normative link description schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/links#">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/links#</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.5">JSON Hyper-Schema implementations are free to provide output in any format.  However, a specific format is defined for use in the conformance test suite, which is also used to illustrate points in the <a href="#implementation" class="xref">"Implementation Requirements"</a>, and to show the output generated by <a href="#examples" class="xref">examples</a>.  It is RECOMMENDED that implementations be capable of producing output in this format to facilitated testing.  The URI of the JSON Schema describing the recommended output format is <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/output/hyper-schema#">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/output/hyper-schema#</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.6">Updated vocabulary and meta-schema URIs MAY be published between specification drafts in order to correct errors.  Implementations SHOULD consider URIs dated after this specification draft and before the next to indicate the same syntax and semantics as those listed here.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.5">5.</a> Schema Keywords</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.1">Hyper-schema keywords from all schemas that are applicable to a position in an instance, as defined by <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">Section 3.1 of JSON Schema core</a>, can be used with that instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.2">When multiple subschemas are applicable to a given sub-instance, all "link" arrays MUST be combined, in any order, into a single set.  Each object in the resulting set MUST retain its own list of applicable "base" values, in resolution order, from the same schema and any parent schemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.3">As with all JSON Schema keywords, all keywords described in this section are optional.  The minimal valid JSON Hyper-schema is the blank object.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.5.1">5.1.</a> <a href="#base" id="base">base</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.1">If present, this keyword MUST be first <a href="#uriTemplating" class="xref">resolved as a URI Template</a>, and then MUST be resolved as a URI Reference against the current URI base of the instance.  The result MUST be set as the new URI base for the instance while processing the sub-schema containing "base" and all sub-schemas within it.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.1.p.2">The process for resolving the "base" template can be different when being resolved for use with "anchor" than when being resolved for use with "href", which is explained in detail in the URI Templating section.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.5.2">5.2.</a> links</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.2.p.1">The "links" property of schemas is used to associate Link Description Objects with instances.  The value of this property MUST be an array, and the items in the array must be Link Description Objects, as defined below.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6">6.</a> <a href="#ldo" id="ldo">Link Description Object</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.1">A Link Description Object (LDO) is a serialization of the abstract link model defined in <a href="#RFC8288" class="xref">RFC 8288, section 2</a>.  As described in that document, a link consists of a context, a relation type, a target, and optionally target attributes.  JSON Hyper-Schema's LDO provides all of these, along with additional features using JSON Schema to describe input for use with the links in various ways.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.2">Due to the use of URI Templates to identify link contexts and targets, as well as optional further use of client input when identifying targets, an LDO is a link template that may resolve to multiple links when used with a JSON instance document.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.3">A specific use of an LDO, typically involving a request and response across a protocol, is referred to as an operation.  For many protocols, multiple operations are possible on any given link.  The protocol is indicated by the target's URI scheme.  Note that not all URI schemes indicate a protocol that can be used for communications, and even resources with URI schemes that do indicate such protocols need not be available over that protocol.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.4">A Link Description Object MUST be an object, and the <a href="#href" class="xref">"href"</a> and <a href="#rel" class="xref">"rel"</a> properties MUST be present.  Each keyword is covered briefly in this section, with additional usage explanation and comprehensive examples given later in the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.1">6.1.</a> <a href="#context" id="context">Link Context</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.p.1">In JSON Hyper-Schema, the link's context resource is, by default, the sub-instance to which it is attached (as defined by <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">Section 3.1 of the JSON Schema core specification</a>).  This is often not the entire instance document.  This default context can be changed using the keywords in this section.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.p.2">Depending on the media type of the instance, it may or may not be possible to assign a URI to the exact default context resource.  In particular, application/json does not define a URI fragment resolution syntax, so properties or array elements within a plain JSON document cannot be fully identified by a URI.  When it is not possible to produce a complete URI, the position of the context SHOULD be conveyed by the URI of the instance document, together with a separate plain-string JSON Pointer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.p.3">Implementations MUST be able to construct the link context's URI, and (if necessary for full identification), a JSON Pointer in string representation form as per <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901, section 5</a> in place of a URI fragment.  The process for constructing a URI based on a URI template is given in the <a href="#uriTemplating" class="xref">URI Templating</a> section.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.1.1">6.1.1.</a> <a href="#anchor" id="anchor">anchor</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.1.p.1">This property sets the context URI of the link.  The value of the property is a <a href="#RFC6570" class="xref">URI Template</a>, and the resulting <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">URI-reference</a> MUST be resolved against the base URI of the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.1.p.2">The URI is computed from the provided URI template using the same process described for the <a href="#href" class="xref">"href"</a> property, with the exception that <a href="#hrefSchema" class="xref">"hrefSchema"</a> MUST NOT be applied.  Unlike target URIs, context URIs do not accept user input.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.1.2">6.1.2.</a> <a href="#anchorPointer" id="anchorPointer">anchorPointer</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.1">This property changes the point within the instance that is considered to be the context resource of the link.  The value of the property MUST be a valid JSON Pointer in JSON String representation form, or a valid <a href="#relative-json-pointer" class="xref">Relative JSON Pointer</a> which is evaluated relative to the default context.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.2">While an alternate context with a known URI is best set with the <a href="#anchor" class="xref">"anchor"</a> keyword, the lack of a fragment identifier syntax for application/json means that it is usually not possible to change the context within a JSON instance using a URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.3">Even in "+json" media types that define JSON Pointer as a fragment identifier syntax, if the default context is nested within an array, it is not possible to obtain the index of the default context's position in that array in order to construct a pointer to another property in that same nested JSON object.  This will be demonstrated in the examples.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.4">The result of processing this keyword SHOULD be a URI fragment if the media type of the instance allows for such a fragment.  Otherwise it MUST be a string-encoded JSON Pointer.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2">6.2.</a> <a href="#relationType" id="relationType">Link Relation Type</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.p.1">The link's relation type identifies its semantics.  It is the primary means of conveying how an application can interact with a resource.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.p.2">Relationship definitions are not normally media type dependent, and users are encouraged to utilize the most suitable existing accepted relation definitions.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2.1">6.2.1.</a> <a href="#rel" id="rel">rel</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.1.p.1">The value of this property MUST be either a string or an array of strings.  If the value is an array, it MUST contain at least one string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.1.p.2">Each string MUST be a single Link Relation Type as defined in RFC 8288, Section 2.1, including the restriction that additional semantics SHOULD NOT be inferred based upon the presence or absence of another link relation type.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.1.p.3">This property is required.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2.2">6.2.2.</a> <a href="#self" id="self">"self" Links</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.2.p.1">A "self" link, as originally defined by <a href="#RFC4287" class="xref">Section 4.2.7.2 of RFC 4287</a>, indicates that the target URI identifies a resource equivalent to the link context.  In JSON Hyper-Schema, a "self" link MUST be resolvable from the instance, and therefore "hrefSchema" MUST NOT be present.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.2.p.2">Hyper-schema authors SHOULD use "templateRequired" to ensure that the "self" link has all instance data that is needed for use.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.2.p.3">A hyper-schema implementation MUST recognize that a link with relation type "self" that has the entire current instance document as its context describes how a user agent can interact with the resource represented by that instance document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2.3">6.2.3.</a> <a href="#collectionAndItem" id="collectionAndItem">"collection" and "item" Links</a>
+</h1>
+<p><a href="#RFC6573" class="xref">RFC 6573</a> defines and registers the "item" and "collection" link relation types.  JSON Hyper-Schema imposes additional semantics on collection resources indicated by these types.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.3.p.2">Implementations MUST recognize the target of a "collection" link and the context of an "item" link as collections.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.3.p.3">A well-known design pattern in hypermedia is to use a collection resource to create a member of the collection and give it a server-assigned URI.  If the protocol indicated by the URI scheme defines a specific method that is suited to creating a resource with a server-assigned URI, then a collection resource, as identified by these link relation types, MUST NOT define semantics for that method that conflict with the semantics of creating a collection member.  Collection resources MAY implement item creation via such a protocol method, and user agents MAY assume that any such operation, if it exists, has item creation semantics.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.3.p.4">As such a method would correspond to JSON Hyper-Schema's data submission concept, the <a href="#submissionSchema" class="xref">"submissionSchema"</a> field for the link SHOULD be compatible with the schema of the representation of the collection's items, as indicated by the "item" link's target resource or the "self" link of the "collection" link's context resource.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2.4">6.2.4.</a> <a href="#extensionRelationTypes" id="extensionRelationTypes">Using Extension Relation Types</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.4.p.1">When no registered relation (aside from "related") applies, users are encouraged to mint their own extension relation types, as described in <a href="#RFC8288" class="xref">section 2.1.2 of RFC 8288</a>.  The simplest approaches for choosing link relation type URIs are to either use a URI scheme that is already in use to identify the system's primary resources, or to use a human-readable, non-dereferenceable URI scheme such as <a href="#RFC4151" class="xref">"tag", defined by RFC 4151</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.4.p.2">Extension relation type URIs need not be dereferenceable, even when using a scheme that allows it.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.3">6.3.</a> <a href="#target" id="target">Link Target</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.p.1">The target URI template is used to identify the link's target, potentially making use of instance data.  Additionally, with <a href="#hrefSchema" class="xref">"hrefSchema"</a>, this template can identify a set of possible target resources to use based on client input.  The full process of resolving the URI template, with or without client input, is covered in the <a href="#uriTemplating" class="xref">URI Templating</a> section.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.3.1">6.3.1.</a> <a href="#href" id="href">href</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.1.p.1">The value of the "href" link description property is a template used to determine the target URI of the related resource.  The value of the instance property MUST be resolved as a <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">URI-reference</a> against the base URI of the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.1.p.2">This property is REQUIRED.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4">6.4.</a> Adjusting URI Template Resolution</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.1">The keywords in this section are used when resolving all URI Templates involved in hyper-schema: "base", "anchor", and "href".  See the <a href="#uriTemplating" class="xref">URI Templating</a> section for the complete template resolution algorithm.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.2">Note that when resolving a "base" template, the attachment point from which resolution begins is the attachment point of the "href" or "anchor" keyword being resolved which requires "base" templates to be resolved, not the attachment point of the "base" keyword itself.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4.1">6.4.1.</a> <a href="#templatePointers" id="templatePointers">templatePointers</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.1.p.1">The value of the "templatePointers" link description property MUST be an object.  Each property value in the object MUST be a valid <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">JSON Pointer</a>, or a valid <a href="#relative-json-pointer" class="xref">Relative JSON Pointer</a> which is evaluated relative to the attachment point of the link for which the template is being resolved.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.1.p.2">For each property name in the object that matches a variable name in the template being resolved, the value of that property adjusts the starting position of variable resolution for that variable.  Properties which do not match template variable names in the template being resolved MUST be ignored.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4.2">6.4.2.</a> <a href="#templateRequired" id="templateRequired">templateRequired</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.2.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be an array, and the elements MUST be unique.  Each element SHOULD match a variable in the link's URI Template, without percent-encoding.  After completing the entire URI Template resolution process, if any variable that is present in this array does not have a value, the link MUST NOT be used.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5">6.5.</a> <a href="#targetAttributes" id="targetAttributes">Link Target Attributes</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.p.1">All properties in this section are advisory only.  While keywords such as "title" and "description" are used primarily to present the link to users, those keywords that predict the nature of a link interaction or response MUST NOT be considered authoritative.  The runtime behavior of the target resource MUST be respected whenever it conflicts with the target attributes in the LDO.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5.1">6.5.1.</a> title</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.1.p.1">This property defines a title for the link.  The value MUST be a string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.1.p.2">User agents MAY use this title when presenting the link to the user.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5.2">6.5.2.</a> description</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.2.p.1">This property provides additional information beyond what is present in the title.  The value MUST be a string.  While a title is preferably short, a description can be used to go into more detail about the purpose and usage of the link.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.2.p.2">User agents MAY use this description when presenting the link to the user.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5.3">6.5.3.</a> targetMediaType</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.1">The value of this property represents the media type <a href="#RFC2046" class="xref">RFC 2046</a>, that is expected to be returned when fetching this resource.  This property value MAY be a media range instead, using the same pattern defined in <a href="#RFC7231" class="xref">RFC 7231, section 5.3.2 - HTTP "Accept" header</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.2">This property is analogous to the "type" property of other link serialization formats.  User agents MAY use this information to inform the interface they present to the user before the link is followed, but MUST NOT use this information in the interpretation of the resulting data.  Instead, a user agent MUST use the media type given by the response for run-time interpretation.  See the section on <a href="#security" class="xref">"Security Concerns"</a> for a detailed examination of mis-use of "targetMediaType".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.3">For protocols supporting content-negotiation, implementations MAY choose to describe possible target media types using protocol-specific information in <a href="#headerSchema" class="xref">"headerSchema"</a>.  If both protocol-specific information and "targetMediaType" are present, then the value of "targetMediaType" MUST be compatible with the protocol-specific information, and SHOULD indicate the media type that will be returned in the absence of content negotiation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.4">When no such protocol-specific information is available, or when the implementation does not recognize the protocol involved, then the value SHOULD be taken to be "application/json".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5.4">6.5.4.</a> <a href="#targetSchema" id="targetSchema">targetSchema</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.4.p.1">This property provides a schema that is expected to describe the link target's representation.  Depending on the protocol, the schema may or may not describe the request or response to any particular operation performed with the link.  See the <a href="#HTTP" class="xref">JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP</a> section for an in-depth discussion of how this keyword is used with HTTP.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5.5">6.5.5.</a> <a href="#targetHints" id="targetHints">targetHints</a>
+</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF1" class="info">[CREF1]<span class="info">This section attempts to strike a balance between comprehensiveness and flexibility by deferring most of its structure to the protocol indicated by the URI scheme.  Note that a resource can be identified by a URI with a dereferenceable scheme, yet not be accessible over that protocol.  While currently very loose, this section is expected to become more well-defined based on draft feedback, and may change significantly in future drafts.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.2">The value of this property is advisory only.  It represents information that is expected to be discoverable through interacting with the target resource, typically in the form of protocol-specific control information or meta-data such as headers returned in response to an HTTP HEAD or OPTIONS request.  The protocol is determined by the "href" URI scheme, although note that resources are not guaranteed to be accessible over such a protocol.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.3">The value of this property SHOULD be an object.  The keys to this object SHOULD be lower-cased forms of the control data field names.  Each value SHOULD be an array, in order to uniformly handle multi-valued fields.  Multiple values MUST be presented as an array, and not as a single string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.4">Protocols with control information not suitable for representation as a JSON object MAY be represented by another data type, such as an array.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.5">Values that cannot be understood as part of the indicated protocol MUST be ignored by a JSON Hyper-Schema implementation.  Applications MAY make use of such values, but MUST NOT assume interoperability with other implementations.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.6">Implementations MUST NOT assume that all discoverable information is accounted for in this object.  Client applications MUST properly handle run-time responses that contradict this property's values.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.7">Client applications MUST NOT assume that an implementation will automatically take any action based on the value of this property.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.5.p.8">See <a href="#HTTP" class="xref">"JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP"</a> for guidance on using this keyword with HTTP and analogous protocols.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.6">6.6.</a> <a href="#input" id="input">Link Input</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.p.1">There are four ways to use client input with a link, and each is addressed by a separate link description object keyword.  When performing operations, user agents SHOULD ignore schemas that are not relevant to their semantics.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.6.1">6.6.1.</a> <a href="#hrefSchema" id="hrefSchema">hrefSchema</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.1">The value of the "hrefSchema" link description property MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  This schema is used to validate user input or other user agent data for filling out the URI Template in <a href="#href" class="xref">"href"</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.2">Omitting "hrefSchema" or setting the entire schema to "false" prevents any user agent data from being accepted.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.3">Setting any subschema that applies to a particular variable to the JSON literal value "false" prevents any user agent data from being accepted for that single variable.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.4">For template variables that can be resolved from the instance data, if the instance data is valid against all applicable subschemas in "hrefSchema", then it MUST be used to pre-populate the input data set for that variable.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.5">Note that even when data is pre-populated from the instance, the validation schema for that variable in "hrefSchema" need not be identical to the validation schema(s) that apply to the instance data's location.  This allows for different validation rules for user agent data, such as supporting spelled-out months for date-time input, but using the standard date-time format for storage.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.1.p.6">After input is accepted, potentially overriding the pre-populated instance data, the resulting data set MUST successfully validate against the value of "hrefSchema".  If it does not then the link MUST NOT be used.  If it is valid, then the process given in the "URI Templating" section continues with this updated data set.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.6.2">6.6.2.</a> <a href="#headerSchema" id="headerSchema">headerSchema</a>
+</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF2" class="info">[CREF2]<span class="info">As with "targetHints", this keyword is somewhat under-specified to encourage experimentation and feedback as we try to balance flexibility and clarity.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.2">If present, this property is a schema for protocol-specific request headers or analogous control and meta-data.  The value of this object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  The protocol is determined by the "href" URI scheme, although note that resources are not guaranteed to be accessible over such a protocol.  The schema is advisory only; the target resource's behavior is not constrained by its presence.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.3">The purpose of this keyword is to advertise target resource interaction features, and indicate to user agents and client applications what headers and header values are likely to be useful.  User agents and client applications MAY use the schema to validate relevant headers, but MUST NOT assume that missing headers or values are forbidden from use.  While schema authors MAY set "additionalProperties" to false, this is NOT RECOMMENDED and MUST NOT prevent client applications or user agents from supplying additional headers when requests are made.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.4">The exact mapping of the JSON data model into the headers is protocol-dependent.  However, in most cases this schema SHOULD specify a type of "object", and the property names SHOULD be lower-cased forms of the control data field names.  As with "targetHints", the values SHOULD be described as arrays to allow for multiple values, even if only one value is expected.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.5">See the <a href="#HTTP" class="xref">"JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP"</a> section for detailed guidance on using this keyword with HTTP and analogous protocols.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.2.p.6">"headerSchema" is applicable to any request method or command that the protocol supports.  When generating a request, user agents and client applications SHOULD ignore schemas for headers that are not relevant to that request.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.6.3">6.6.3.</a> Manipulating the Target Resource Representation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.3.p.1">In JSON Hyper-Schema, <a href="#targetSchema" class="xref">"targetSchema"</a> supplies a non-authoritative description of the target resource's representation.  A client application can use "targetSchema" to structure input for replacing or modifying the representation, or as the base representation for building a patch document based on a patch media type.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.3.p.2">Alternatively, if "targetSchema" is absent or if the client application prefers to only use authoritative information, it can interact with the target resource to confirm or discover its representation structure.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.3.p.3">"targetSchema" is not intended to describe link operation responses, except when the response semantics indicate that it is a representation of the target resource.  In all cases, the schema indicated by the response itself is authoritative.  See <a href="#HTTP" class="xref">"JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP"</a> for detailed examples.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.6.4">6.6.4.</a> Submitting Data for Processing</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.p.1">The <a href="#submissionSchema" class="xref">"submissionSchema"</a> and <a href="#submissionMediaType" class="xref">"submissionMediaType"</a> keywords describe the domain of the processing function implemented by the target resource.  Otherwise, as noted above, the submission schema and media type are ignored for operations to which they are not relevant.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.4.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.6.4.1">6.6.4.1.</a> <a href="#submissionMediaType" id="submissionMediaType">submissionMediaType</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.1.p.1">If present, this property indicates the media type format the client application and user agent should use for the request payload described by <a href="#submissionSchema" class="xref">"submissionSchema"</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.1.p.2">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of application/json.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.1.p.3">Note that "submissionMediaType" and "submissionSchema" are not restricted to HTTP URIs.  <a id="CREF3" class="info">[CREF3]<span class="info">This statement might move to wherever the example ends up.</span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.6.4.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.6.4.2">6.6.4.2.</a> <a href="#submissionSchema" id="submissionSchema">submissionSchema</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.2.p.1">This property contains a schema which defines the acceptable structure of the document to be encoded according to the "submissionMediaType" property and sent to the target resource for processing.  This can be viewed as describing the domain of the processing function implemented by the target resource.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.2.p.2">This is a separate concept from the <a href="#targetSchema" class="xref">"targetSchema"</a> property, which describes the target information resource (including for replacing the contents of the resource in a PUT request), unlike "submissionSchema" which describes the user-submitted request data to be evaluated by the resource.  "submissionSchema" is intended for use with requests that have payloads that are not necessarily defined in terms of the target representation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.6.4.2.p.3">Omitting "submissionSchema" has the same behavior as a value of "true".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7">7.</a> <a href="#implementation" id="implementation">Implementation Requirements</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.1">At a high level, a conforming implementation will meet the following requirements.  Each of these requirements is covered in more detail in the individual keyword sections and keyword group overviews.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.2">Note that the requirements around how an implementation MUST recognize "self", "collection", and "item" links are thoroughly covered in the <a href="#relationType" class="xref">link relation type</a> section and are not repeated here.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.3">While it is not a mandatory format for implementations, the output format used in the test suite summarizes what needs to be computed for each link before it can be used: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>contextUri</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">The fully resolved URI (with scheme) of the context resource.  If the context is not the entire resource and there is a usable fragment identifier syntax, then the URI includes a fragment.  Note that there is no such syntax for application/json.  </dd>
+<dt>contextPointer</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">The JSON Pointer for the location within the instance of the context resource.  If the instance media type supports JSON Pointers as fragment identifiers, this pointer will be the same as the one encoded in the fragment of the "contextUri" field.  </dd>
+<dt>rel</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">The link relation type.  When multiple link relation types appear in the LDO, for the purpose of producing output, they are to be treated as multiple LDOs, each with a single link relation type but otherwise identical.  </dd>
+<dt>targetUri</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">The fully resolved URI (with a scheme) of the target resource.  If the link accepts input, this can only be produced once the input has been supplied.  </dd>
+<dt>hrefInputTemplates</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">The list of partially resolved URI references for a link that accepts input.  The first entry in the list is the partially resolved "href".  The additional entries, if any, are the partially resolved "base" values ordered from the most immediate out to the root of the schema.  Template variables that are pre-populated in the input are not resolved at this stage, as the pre-populated value can be overridden.  </dd>
+<dt>hrefPrepopulatedInput</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">The data set that the user agent should use to prepopulate any input mechanism before accepting client input.  If input is to be accepted but no fields are to be pre-populated, then this will be an empty object.  </dd>
+<dt>attachmentPointer</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">The JSON Pointer for the location within the instance to which the link is attached.  By default, "contextUri" and "attachmentPointer" are the same, but "contextUri" can be changed by LDO keywords, while "attachmentPointer" cannot.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> Other LDO keywords that are not involved in producing the above information are included exactly as they appear when producing output for the test suite.  Those fields will not be further discussed here unless specifically relevant.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.1">7.1.</a> Link Discovery and Look-Up</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.1">Before links can be used, they must be discovered by applying the hyper-schema to the instance and finding all applicable and valid links.  Note that in addition to collecting valid links, any <a href="#base" class="xref">"base"</a> values necessary to resolve each LDO's URI Templates must also be located and associated with the LDO through whatever mechanism is most useful for the implementation's URI Template resolution process.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.2">And implementation MUST support looking up links by either their attachment pointer or context pointer, either by performing the look-up or by providing the set of all links with both pointers determined so that user agents can implement the look-up themselves.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.3">When performing look-ups by context pointer, links that are attached to elements of the same array MUST be returned in the same order as the array elements to which they are attached.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.2">7.2.</a> <a href="#uriTemplating" id="uriTemplating">URI Templating</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.1">Three hyper-schema keywords are <a href="#RFC6570" class="xref">URI Templates</a>: "base", "anchor", and "href".  Each are resolved separately to URI-references, and then the anchor or href URI-reference is resolved against the base (which is itself resolved against earlier bases as needed, each of which was first resolved from a URI Template to a URI-reference).  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.2">All three keywords share the same algorithm for resolving variables from instance data, which makes use of the "templatePointers" and "templateRequired" keywords.  When resolving "href", both it and any "base" templates needed for resolution to an absolute URI, the algorithm is modified to optionally accept user input based on the "hrefSchema" keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.3">For each URI Template (T), the following pseudocode describes an algorithm for resolving T into a URI-reference (R).  For the purpose of this algorithm: </p>
+
+<ul>
+<li>"ldo.templatePointers" is an empty object if the keyword was not present and "ldo.templateRequired" is likewise an empty array.  </li>
+<li>"attachmentPointer" is the absolute JSON Pointer for the attachment location of the LDO.  </li>
+<li>"getApplicableSchemas()" returns an iterable set of all (sub)schemas that apply to the attachment point in the instance.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.4">This algorithm should be applied first to either "href" or "anchor", and then as needed to each successive "base".  The order is important, as it is not always possible to tell whether a template will resolve to a full URI or a URI-reference.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.5">In English, the high-level algorithm is: </p>
+
+<ol>
+<li>Populate template variable data from the instance</li>
+<li>If input is desired, accept input</li>
+<li>Check that all required variables have a value</li>
+<li>Encode values into strings and fill out the template</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p>This is the high-level algorithm as pseudocode.  "T" comes from either "href" or "anchor" within the LDO, or from "base" in a containing schema.  Pseudocode for each step follows.  "initialTemplateKeyword" indicates which of the two started the process (since "base" is always resolved in order to finish resolving one or the other of those keywords).  </p>
+<pre>
+
+templateData = populateDataFromInstance(T, ldo, instance)
+
+if initialTemplateKeyword == "href" and ldo.hrefSchema exists:
+    inputData = acceptInput(ldo, instance, templateData)
+    for varname in inputData:
+        templateData[varname] = inputData[varname]
+
+for varname in ldo.templateRequired:
+    if not exists templateData[varname]
+        fatal("Missing required variable(s)")
+
+templateData = stringEncode(templateData)
+R = rfc6570ResolutionAlgorithm(T, templateData)
+
+                    </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.2.1">7.2.1.</a> Populating Template Data From the Instance</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.1.p.1">This step looks at various locations in the instance for variable values.  For each variable: </p>
+
+<ol>
+<li>Use "templatePointers" to find a value if the variable appears in that keyword's value </li>
+<li>Otherwise, look for a property name matching the variable in the instance location to which the link is attached </li>
+<li>In either case, if there is a value at the location, put it in the template resolution data set </li>
+</ol>
+
+<p> </p>
+<pre>
+
+for varname in T:
+    varname = rfc3986PercentDecode(varname)
+    if varname in ldo.templatePointers:
+        valuePointer = templatePointers[varname]
+        if valuePointer is relative:
+            valuePointer = resolveRelative(attachmentPointer,
+                                           valuePointer)
+    else
+        valuePointer = attachmentPointer + "/" + varname
+
+    value = instance.valueAt(valuePointer)
+    if value is defined:
+        templateData[varname] = value
+
+                        </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.2.2">7.2.2.</a> Accepting Input for Template Data</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.2.p.1">This step is relatively complex, as there are several cases to support.  Some variables will forbid input and some will allow it.  Some will have initial values that need to be presented in the input interface, and some will not.  </p>
+<p></p>
+
+<ol>
+<li>Determine which variables can accept input </li>
+<li>Pre-populate the input data set if the template resolution data set has a value </li>
+<li>Accept input (present a web form, make a callback, etc.) </li>
+<li>Validate the input data set, (not the template resolution data set) </li>
+<li>Put the input in the template resolution data set, overriding any existing values </li>
+</ol>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p>"InputForm" represents whatever sort of input mechanism is appropriate.  This may be a literal web form, or may be a more programmatic construct such as a callback function accepting specific fields and data types, with the given initial values, if any.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+form = new InputForm()
+for varname in T:
+    useField = true
+    useInitialData = true
+    for schema in getApplicableSchemas(ldo.hrefSchema,
+                                       "/" + varname):
+        if schema is false:
+            useField = false
+            break
+
+        if varname in templateData and
+           not isValid(templateData[varname], schema)):
+            useInitialData = false
+            break
+
+    if useField:
+        if useInitialData:
+            form.addInputFieldFor(varname, ldo.hrefSchema,
+                                  templateData[varname])
+        else:
+            form.addInputFieldFor(varname, ldo.hrefSchema)
+
+inputData = form.acceptInput()
+
+if not isValid(inputData, hrefSchema):
+    fatal("Input invalid, link is not usable")
+
+return inputData:
+
+                        </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.2.3">7.2.3.</a> Encoding Data as Strings</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.3.p.1">This section is straightforward, converting literals to their names as strings, and converting numbers to strings in the most obvious manner, and percent-encoding as needed for use in the URI.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+for varname in templateData:
+    value = templateData[varname]
+    if value is true:
+        templateData[varname] = "true"
+    else if value is false:
+        templateData[varname] = "false"
+    else if value is null:
+        templateData[varname] = "null"
+    else if value is a number:
+        templateData[varname] =
+            bestEffortOriginalJsonString(value)
+    else:
+        templateData[varname] = rfc3986PercentEncode(value)
+
+                        </pre>
+<p>In some software environments the original JSON representation of a number will not be available (there is no way to tell the difference between 1.0 and 1), so any reasonable representation should be used.  Schema and API authors should bear this in mind, and use other types (such as string or boolean) if the exact representation is important.  If the number was provide as input in the form of a string, the string used as input SHOULD be used.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3">7.3.</a> Providing Access to LDO Keywords</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.1">For a given link, an implementation MUST make the values of all target attribute keywords directly available to the user agent.  Implementations MAY provide additional interfaces for using this information, as discussed in each keyword's section.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.2">For a given link, an implementation MUST make the value of each input schema keyword directly available to the user agent.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.3">To encourage encapsulation of the URI Template resolution process, implementations MAY omit the LDO keywords that are used only to construct URIs.  However, implementations MUST provide access to the link relation type.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.4">Unrecognized keywords SHOULD be made available to the user agent, and MUST otherwise be ignored.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.4">7.4.</a> Requests</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.1">A hyper-schema implementation SHOULD provide access to all information needed to construct any valid request to the target resource.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.2">The LDO can express all information needed to perform any operation on a link.  This section explains what hyper-schema fields a user agent should examine to build requests from any combination of instance data and client input.  A hyper-schema implementation is not itself expected to construct and send requests.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.3">Target URI construction rules, including "hrefSchema" for accepting input, are identical for all possible requests.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.4">Requests that do not carry a body payload do not require additional keyword support.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.5">Requests that take a target representation as a payload SHOULD use the "targetSchema" and "targetMediaType" keywords for input description and payload validation.  If a protocol allows an operation taking a payload that is based on the representation as modified by a media type (such as a patch media type), then such a media type SHOULD be indicated through "targetHints" in a protocol-specific manner.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.6">Requests that take a payload that is not derived from the target resource's representation SHOULD use the "submissionSchema" and "submissionMediaType" keywords for input description and payload validation.  Protocols used in hypermedia generally only support one such non-representation operation per link.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.7">RPC systems that pipe many application operations with arbitrarily different request structures through a single hypermedia protocol operation are outside of the scope of a hypermedia format such as JSON Hyper-Schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.5">7.5.</a> Responses</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.1">As a hypermedia format, JSON Hyper-Schema is concerned with describing a resource, including describing its links in sufficient detail to make all valid requests.  It is not concerned with directly describing all possible responses for those requests.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.2">As in any hypermedia system, responses are expected to be self-describing.  In the context of hyper-schema, this means that each response MUST link its own hyper-schema(s).  While responses that consist of a representation of the target resource are expected to be valid against "targetSchema" and "targetMediaType", those keywords are advisory only and MUST be ignored if contradicted by the response itself.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.3">Other responses, including error responses, complex redirections, and processing status representations SHOULD also link to their own schemas and use appropriate media types (e.g. <a href="#RFC7807" class="xref">"application/problem+json"</a> for errors).  Certain errors might not link a schema due to being generated by an intermediary that is not aware of hyper-schema, rather than by the origin.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.4">User agents are expected to understand protocol status codes and response media types well enough to handle common situations, and provide enough information to client applications to handle domain-specific responses.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.5">Statically mapping all possible responses and their schemas at design time is outside of the scope of JSON Hyper-Schema, but may be within the scope of other JSON Schema vocabularies which build on hyper-schema (see <a href="#staticAnalysis" class="xref">Appendix A.3</a>).  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.6">7.6.</a> <a href="#streaming" id="streaming">Streaming Parsers</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.p.1">The requirements around discovering links based on their context, or using the context of links to identify collections, present unique challenges when used with streaming parsers.  It is not possible to authoritatively fulfill these requirements without processing the entire schema and instance documents.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.p.2">Such implementations MAY choose to return non-authoritative answers based on data processed to date.  When offering this approach, implementations MUST be clear on the nature of the response, and MUST offer an option to block and wait until all data is processed and an authoritative answer can be returned.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8">8.</a> <a href="#HTTP" id="HTTP">JSON Hyper-Schema and HTTP</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.1">While JSON Hyper-Schema is a hypermedia format and therefore protocol-independent, it is expected that its most common use will be in HTTP systems, or systems using protocols such as CoAP that are explicitly analogous to HTTP.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.2">This section provides guidance on how to use each common HTTP method with a link, and how collection resources impose additional constraints on HTTP POST.  Additionally, guidance is provided on hinting at HTTP response header values and describing possible HTTP request headers that are relevant to the given resource.  </p>
+<p><a href="#json-schema" class="xref">Section 13 of the JSON Schema core specification</a> provides guidance on linking instances in a hypermedia system to their schemas.  This may be done with network-accessible schemas, or may simply identify schemas which were pre-packaged within the client application.  JSON Hyper-Schema intentionally does not constrain this mechanism, although it is RECOMMENDED that the techniques outlined in the core specification be used to whatever extent is possible.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1">8.1.</a> One Link Per Target and Relation Type</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.1">Link Description Objects do not directly indicate what operations, such as HTTP methods, are supported by the target resource.  Instead, operations should be inferred primarily from link <a href="#rel" class="xref">relation types</a> and URI schemes.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.2">This means that for each target resource and link relation type pair, schema authors SHOULD only define a single LDO.  While it is possible to use "allow" with "targetHints" to repeat a relation type and target pair with different HTTP methods marked as allowed, this is NOT RECOMMENDED and may not be well-supported by conforming implementations.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.3">All information necessary to use each HTTP method can be conveyed in a single LDO as explained in this section.  The "allow" field in "targetHints" is intended simply to hint at which operations are supported, not to separately define each operation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.4">Note, however, that a resource may always decline an operation at runtime, for instance due to authorization failure, or due to other application state that controls the operation's availability.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2">8.2.</a> <a href="#targetHTTP" id="targetHTTP">"targetSchema" and HTTP</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.1">"targetSchema" describes the resource on the target end of the link, while "targetMediaType" defines that resource's media type.  With HTTP links, "headerSchema" can also be used to describe valid values for use in an "Accept" request header, which can support multiple media types or media ranges.  When both ways of indicating the target media type are present, "targetMediaType" SHOULD indicate the default representation media type, while the schema for "accept" in "headerSchema" SHOULD include the default as well as any alternate media types or media ranges that can be requested.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.2">Since the semantics of many HTTP methods are defined in terms of the target resource, "targetSchema" is used for requests and/or responses for several HTTP methods.  In particular, "targetSchema" suggests what a client application can expect for the response to an HTTP GET or any response for which the "Content-Location" header is equal to the request URI, and what a client application should send if it creates or replaces the resource with an HTTP PUT request.  These correlations are defined by <a href="#RFC7231" class="xref">RFC 7231, section 4.3.1 - "GET", section 4.3.4 "PUT", and section 3.1.4.2, "Content-Location"</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.3">Per <a href="#RFC5789" class="xref">RFC 5789</a>, the request structure for an HTTP PATCH is determined by the combination of "targetSchema" and the request media type, which is conveyed by the "Accept-Patch" header, which may be included in "targetHints".  Media types that are suitable for PATCH-ing define a syntax for expressing changes to a document, which can be applied to the representation described by "targetSchema" to determine the set of syntactically valid request payloads.  Often, the simplest way to validate a PATCH request is to apply it and validate the result as a normal representation.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.3">8.3.</a> <a href="#post" id="post">HTTP POST and the "submission*" keywords</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema allows for resources that process arbitrary data in addition to or instead of working with the target's representation.  This arbitrary data is described by the "submissionSchema" and "submissionMediaType" keywords.  In the case of HTTP, the POST method is the only one that handles such data.  While there are certain conventions around using POST with collections, the semantics of a POST request are defined by the target resource, not HTTP.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.2">In addition to the protocol-neutral "submission*" keywords (see <a href="#mailto" class="xref">Section 9.3</a> for a non-HTTP example), the "Accept-Post" header can be used to specify the necessary media type, and MAY be advertised via the "targetHints" field.  <a id="CREF4" class="info">[CREF4]<span class="info">What happens if both are used?  Also, "submissionSchema" is a MUST to support, while "targetHints" are at most a SHOULD.  But forbidding the use of "Accept-Post" in "targetHints" seems incorrect.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.3">Successful responses to POST other than a 201 or a 200 with "Content-Location" set likewise have no HTTP-defined semantics.  As with all HTTP responses, any representation in the response should link to its own hyper-schema to indicate how it may be processed.  As noted in <a href="#responses" class="xref">Appendix A.2</a>, connecting hyperlinks with all possible operation responses is not within the scope of JSON Hyper-Schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.4">8.4.</a> Optimizing HTTP Discoverability With "targetHints"</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF5" class="info">[CREF5]<span class="info">It would be good to also include a section with CoAP examples.</span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.2">JSON serializations of HTTP response header information SHOULD follow the guidelines established by the work in progress <a href="#I-D.reschke-http-jfv" class="xref">"A JSON Encoding for HTTP Header Field Values"</a>.  Approaches shown in that document's examples SHOULD be applied to other similarly structured headers wherever possible.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.3">Headers for all possible HTTP method responses all share "headerSchema".  In particular, both headers that appear in a HEAD response and those that appear in an OPTIONS response can appear.  No distinction is made within "headerSchema" as to which method response contains which header.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.4">It is RECOMMENDED that schema authors provide hints for the values of the following types of HTTP headers whenever applicable: </p>
+
+<ul>
+<li>Method allowance</li>
+<li>Method-specific request media types</li>
+<li>Authentication challenges</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.5">In general, headers that are likely to have different values at different times SHOULD NOT be included in "targetHints".  </p>
+<p>As an example, an Allow header allowing HEAD, GET, and POST would be shown as follows: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "targetHints": {
+        "allow": ["HEAD", "GET", "POST"]
+    }
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Note that this is represented identically whether there is a single-line Allow header with comma-separated values, multiple Allow headers on separate lines, each with one value, or any combination of such arrangements.  As is generally true with HTTP headers, comma-separated values and multiple occurrences of the header are treated the same way.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.5">8.5.</a> Advertising HTTP Features With "headerSchema"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.5.p.1">Schemas SHOULD be written to describe JSON serializations that follow guidelines established by the work in progress <a href="#I-D.reschke-http-jfv" class="xref">"A JSON Encoding for HTTP Header Field Values"</a> Approaches shown in that document's examples SHOULD be applied to other similarly structured headers wherever possible.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.5.p.2">It is RECOMMENDED that schema authors describe the available usage of the following types of HTTP headers whenever applicable: </p>
+
+<ul>
+<li>Content negotiation</li>
+<li>Authentication and authorization</li>
+<li>Range requests</li>
+<li>The "Prefer" header</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.5.p.3">Headers such as cache control and conditional request headers are generally implemented by intermediaries rather than the resource, and are therefore not generally useful to describe.  While the resource must supply the information needed to use conditional requests, the runtime handling of such headers and related responses is not resource-specific.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.6">8.6.</a> Creating Resources Through Collections</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.6.p.1">When using HTTP, or a protocol such as CoAP that is explicitly analogous to HTTP, this is done by POST-ing a representation of the individual resource to be created to the collection resource.  The process for recognizing collection and item resources is described in <a href="#collectionAndItem" class="xref">Section 6.2.3</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.7">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.7">8.7.</a> Content Negotiation and Schema Evolution</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.7.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema facilitates HTTP content negotiation, and allows for a hybrid of the proactive and reactive strategies.  As mentioned above, a hyper-schema can include a schema for HTTP headers such as "Accept", "Accept-Charset", "Accept-Language", etc with the "headerSchema" keyword.  A user agent or client application can use information in this schema, such as an enumerated list of supported languages, in lieu of making an initial request to start the reactive negotiation process.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.7.p.2">In this way, the proactive content negotiation technique of setting these headers can be informed by server information about what values are possible, similar to examining a list of alternatives in reactive negotiation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.7.p.3">For media types that allow specifying a schema as a media type parameter, the "Accept" values sent in a request or advertised in "headerSchema" can include the URI(s) of the schema(s) to which the negotiated representation is expected to conform.  One possible use for schema parameters in content negotiation is if the resource has conformed to several different schema versions over time.  The client application can indicate what version(s) it understands in the "Accept" header in this way.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9">9.</a> <a href="#examples" id="examples">Examples</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.1">This section shows how the keywords that construct URIs and JSON Pointers are used.  The results are shown in the format used by the test suite.  <a id="CREF6" class="info">[CREF6]<span class="info">Need to post that and link it, but it should be pretty self-explanatory to those of you reviewing things at this stage.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.2">Most other keywords are either straightforward ("title" and "description"), apply validation to specific sorts of input, requests, or responses, or have protocol-specific behavior.  Examples demonstrating HTTP usage are available in <a href="#HTTP" class="xref">an Appendix</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.1">9.1.</a> <a href="#entryPoint" id="entryPoint">Entry Point Links, No Templates</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.1">For this example, we will assume an example API with a documented entry point URI of https://example.com/api, which is an empty JSON object with a link to a schema.  Here, the entry point has no data of its own and exists only to provide an initial set of links: </p>
+<pre>
+
+GET https://example.com/api HTTP/1.1
+
+200 OK
+Content-Type: application/json
+Link: &lt;https://schema.example.com/entry&gt;; rel="describedBy"
+{}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.2">The linked hyper-schema defines the API's base URI and provides two links:  an "about" link to API documentation, and a "self" link indicating that this is a schema for the base URI.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/entry",
+    "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/hyper-schema",
+    "base": "https://example.com/api/",
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "../api",
+        }, {
+            "rel": "about",
+            "href": "docs"
+        }
+    ]
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.3">These are the simplest possible links, with only a relation type and an "href" with no template variables.  They resolve as follows: </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.4">The duplication of "api" in both the base and the "../api" href in the "self" link is due to quirks of the RFC 3986 URI-reference resolution algorithm.  In order for relative URI-references to work well in general, the base URI needs to include a trailing slash.  The "about" link with its "docs" href shows the common case of relative references, which is used in the other examples in this document.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.5">However, if an API uses URIs without trailing slashes for its resources, there is no way to provide a relative reference that just removes a trailing slash without duplicating the path component above it.  Which makes the case of the entry point resource, which differs from the base URI only in terms of the trailing slash, somewhat awkward.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.6">Resource URIs, of course, may have trailing slashes, but this example is intended to highlight this frequently confusing special case.  </p>
+<pre>
+[
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://example.com/api",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "self",
+        "targetUri": "https://example.com/api",
+        "attachmentPointer": ""
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://example.com/api",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "about",
+        "targetUri": "https://example.com/api/docs",
+        "attachmentPointer": ""
+    }
+]
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.7">The attachment pointer is the root pointer (the only possibility with an empty object for the instance).  The context URI is the default, which is the requested document.  Since application/json does not allow for fragments, the context pointer is necessary to fully describe the context.  Its default behavior is to be the same as the attachment pointer.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2">9.2.</a> Individually Identified Resources</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.1">Let's add "things" to our system, starting with an individual thing: </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/thing",
+    "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/hyper-schema",
+    "base": "https://example.com/api/",
+    "type": "object",
+    "required": ["data"],
+    "properties": {
+        "id": {"$ref": "#/$defs/id"},
+        "data": true
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "things/{id}",
+            "templateRequired": ["id"],
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }
+    ],
+    "$defs": {
+        "id": {
+            "type": "integer",
+            "minimum": 1,
+            "readOnly": true
+        }
+    }
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.2">Our "thing" has a server-assigned id, which is required in order to construct the "self" link.  It also has a "data" field which can be of any type.  The reason for the "$defs" section will be clear in the next example.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.3">Note that "id" is not required by the validation schema, but is required by the self link.  This makes sense: a "thing" only has a URI if it has been created, and the server has assigned an id.  However, you can use this schema with an instance containing only the data field, which allows you to validate "thing" instances that you are about to create.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.4">Let's add a link to our entry point schema that lets you jump directly to a particular thing if you can supply it's id as input.  To save space, only the new LDO is shown.  Unlike "self" and "about", there is no IANA-registered relationship about hypothetical things, so an extension relationship is defined using the <a href="#RFC4151" class="xref">"tag:" URI scheme</a>: </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "rel": "tag:rel.example.com,2017:thing",
+    "href": "things/{id}",
+    "hrefSchema": {
+        "required": ["id"],
+        "properties": {
+            "id": {"$ref": "thing#/$defs/id"}
+        }
+    },
+    "targetSchema": {"$ref": "thing#"}
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.5">The "href" value here is the same, but everything else is different.  Recall that the instance is an empty object, so "id" cannot be resolved from instance data.  Instead it is required as client input.  This LDO could also have used "templateRequired" but with "required" in "hrefSchema" it is not strictly necessary.  Providing "templateRequired" without marking "id" as required in "hrefSchema" would lead to errors, as client input is the only possible source for resolving this link.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3">9.3.</a> <a href="#mailto" id="mailto">Submitting a Payload and Accepting URI Input</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.1">This example covers using the "submission" fields for non-representation input, as well as using them alongside of resolving the URI Template with input.  Unlike HTML forms, which require either constructing a URI or sending a payload, but do not allow not both at once, JSON Hyper-Schema can describe both sorts of input for the same operation on the same link.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.2">The "submissionSchema" and "submissionMediaType" fields are for describing payloads that are not representations of the target resource.  When used with "http(s)://" URIs, they generally refer to a POST request payload, as seen in the <a href="#HTTP" class="xref">appendix on HTTP usage</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.3">In this case, we use a "mailto:" URI, which, per <a href="#RFC6068" class="xref">RFC 6068, Section 3"</a>, does not provide any operation for retrieving a resource.  It can only be used to construct a message for sending.  Since there is no concept of a retrievable, replaceable, or deletable target resource, "targetSchema" and "targetMediaType" are not used.  Non-representation payloads are described by "submissionSchema" and "submissionMediaType".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.4">We use "submissionMediaType" to indicate a multipart/alternative payload format, providing two representations of the same data (HTML and plain text).  Since a multipart/alternative message is an ordered sequence (the last part is the most preferred alternative), we model the sequence as an array in "submissionSchema".  Since each part is itself a document with a media type, we model each item in the array as a string, using "contentMediaType" to indicate the format within the string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.5">Note that media types such as multipart/form-data, which associate a name with each part and are not ordered, should be modeled as JSON objects rather than arrays.  </p>
+<p>Note that some lines are wrapped to fit this document's width restrictions.  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/interesting-stuff",
+    "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/hyper-schema",
+    "required": ["stuffWorthEmailingAbout", "email", "title"],
+    "properties": {
+        "title": {
+            "type": "string"
+        },
+        "stuffWorthEmailingAbout": {
+            "type": "string"
+        },
+        "email": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "format": "email"
+        },
+        "cc": false
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "author",
+            "href": "mailto:{email}?subject={title}{&amp;cc}",
+            "templateRequired": ["email"],
+            "hrefSchema": {
+                "required": ["title"],
+                "properties": {
+                    "title": {
+                        "type": "string"
+                    },
+                    "cc": {
+                        "type": "string",
+                        "format": "email"
+                    },
+                    "email": false
+                }
+            },
+            "submissionMediaType":
+                    "multipart/alternative; boundary=ab2",
+            "submissionSchema": {
+                "type": "array",
+                "items": [
+                    {
+                        "type": "string",
+                        "contentMediaType":
+                                "text/plain; charset=utf8"
+                    },
+                    {
+                        "type": "string",
+                        "contentMediaType": "text/html"
+                    }
+                ],
+                "minItems": 2
+            }
+        }
+    ]
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.6">For the URI parameters, each of the three demonstrates a different way of resolving the input: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>email:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">This variable's presence in "templateRequired" means that it must be resolved for the template to be used.  Since the "false" schema assigned to it in "hrefSchema" excludes it from the input data set, it must be resolved from the instance.  </dd>
+<dt>title:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">The instance field matching this variable is required, and it is also allowed in the input data.  So its instance value is used to pre-populate the input data set before accepting client input.  The client application can opt to leave the instance value in place.  Since this field is required in "hrefSchema", the client application cannot delete it (although it could set it to an empty string).  </dd>
+<dt>cc:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">The "false" schema set for this in the main schema prevents this field from having an instance value.  If it is present at all, it must come from client input.  As it is not required in "hrefSchema", it may not be used at all.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.7">So, given the following instance retrieved from "https://example.com/api/stuff": </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "title": "The Awesome Thing",
+    "stuffWorthEmailingAbout": "Lots of text here...",
+    "email": "someone@example.com"
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.8">We can partially resolve the link as follows, before asking the client application for input.  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "contextUri": "https://example.com/api/stuff",
+    "contextPointer": "",
+    "rel": "author",
+    "hrefInputTemplates": [
+      "mailto:someone@example.com?subject={title}{&amp;cc}"
+    ],
+    "hrefPrepopulatedInput": {
+        "title": "The Awesome Thing"
+    },
+    "attachmentPointer": ""
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.9">Notice the "href*" keywords in place of "targetUri".  These are three possible kinds of "targetUri" values covering different sorts of input.  Here are examples of each: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>No additional or changed input:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">"mailto:someone@example.com?subject=The%20Awesome%20Thing" </dd>
+<dt>Change "title" to "your work":</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">"mailto:someone@example.com?subject=your%20work" </dd>
+<dt>Change title and add a "cc" of "other@elsewhere.org":</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">"mailto:someone@example.com?subject=your%20work&amp;cc=other@elsewhere.org" </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.4">9.4.</a> "anchor", "base" and URI Template Resolution</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.1">A link is a typed connection from a context resource to a target resource.  Older link serializations support a "rev" keyword that takes a link relation type as "rel" does, but reverses the semantics.  This has long been deprecated, so JSON Hyper-Schema does not support it.  Instead, "anchor"'s ability to change the context URI can be used to reverse the direction of a link.  It can also be used to describe a link between two resources, neither of which is the current resource.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.2">As an example, there is an IANA-registered "up" relation, but there is no "down".  In an HTTP Link header, you could implement "down" as <samp>"rev": "up"</samp>.  </p>
+<p>First let's look at how this could be done in HTTP, showing a "self" link and two semantically identical links, one with "rev": "up" and the other using "anchor" with "rel": "up" (line wrapped due to formatting limitations).  </p>
+<pre>
+
+GET https://example.com/api/trees/1/nodes/123 HTTP/1.1
+
+200 OK
+Content-Type: application/json
+Link: &lt;https://example.com/api/trees/1/nodes/123&gt;; rel="self"
+Link: &lt;https://example.com/api/trees/1/nodes/123&gt;; rel="up";
+        anchor="https://example.com/api/trees/1/nodes/456"
+Link: &lt;https://example.com/api/trees/1/nodes/456&gt;; rev="up"
+{
+    "id": 123,
+    "treeId": 1,
+    "childIds": [456]
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Note that the "rel=up" link has a target URI identical to the "rel=self" link, and sets "anchor" (which identifies the link's context) to the child's URI.  This sort of reversed link is easily detectable by tools when a "self" link is also present.  </p>
+<p>The following hyper-schema, applied to the instance in the response above, would produce the same "self" link and "up" link with "anchor".  It also shows the use of a templated "base" URI, plus both absolute and relative JSON Pointers in "templatePointers".  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/tree-node",
+    "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/hyper-schema",
+    "base": "trees/{treeId}/",
+    "properties": {
+        "id": {"type": "integer"},
+        "treeId": {"type": "integer"},
+        "childIds": {
+            "type": "array",
+            "items": {
+                "type": "integer",
+                "links": [
+                    {
+                        "anchor": "nodes/{thisNodeId}",
+                        "rel": "up",
+                        "href": "nodes/{childId}",
+                        "templatePointers": {
+                            "thisNodeId": "/id",
+                            "childId": "0"
+                        }
+                    }
+                ]
+            }
+        }
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "nodes/{id}"
+        }
+    ]
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p>The "base" template is evaluated identically for both the target ("href") and context ("anchor") URIs.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.3">Note the two different sorts of templatePointers used.  "thisNodeId" is mapped to an absolute JSON Pointer, "/id", while "childId" is mapped to a relative pointer, "0", which indicates the value of the current item.  Absolute JSON Pointers do not support any kind of wildcarding, so there is no way to specify a concept like "current item" without a relative JSON Pointer.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.5">9.5.</a> Collections</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.1">In many systems, individual resources are grouped into collections.  Those collections also often provide a way to create individual item resources with server-assigned identifiers.  </p>
+<p>For this example, we will re-use the individual thing schema as shown in an earlier section.  It is repeated here for convenience, with an added "collection" link with a "targetSchema" reference pointing to the collection schema we will introduce next.  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/thing",
+    "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/hyper-schema",
+    "base": "https://example.com/api/",
+    "type": "object",
+    "required": ["data"],
+    "properties": {
+        "id": {"$ref": "#/$defs/id"},
+        "data": true
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "things/{id}",
+            "templateRequired": ["id"],
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }, {
+            "rel": "collection",
+            "href": "/things",
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "thing-collection#"},
+            "submissionSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }
+    ],
+    "$defs": {
+        "id": {
+            "type": "integer",
+            "minimum": 1,
+            "readOnly": true
+        }
+    }
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p>The "collection" link is the same for all items, so there are no URI Template variables.  The "submissionSchema" is that of the item itself.  As described in <a href="#collectionAndItem" class="xref">Section 6.2.3</a>, if a "collection" link supports a submission mechanism (POST in HTTP) then it MUST implement item creation semantics.  Therefore "submissionSchema" is the schema for creating a "thing" via this link.  </p>
+<p>Now we want to describe collections of "thing"s.  This schema describes a collection where each item representation is identical to the individual "thing" representation.  While many collection representations only include subset of the item representations, this example uses the entirety to minimize the number of schemas involved.  The actual collection items appear as an array within an object, as we will add more fields to the object in the next example.  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "$id": "https://schema.example.com/thing-collection",
+    "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/hyper-schema",
+    "base": "https://example.com/api/",
+    "type": "object",
+    "required": ["elements"],
+    "properties": {
+        "elements": {
+            "type": "array",
+            "items": {
+                "allOf": [{"$ref": "thing#"}],
+                "links": [
+                    {
+                        "anchorPointer": "",
+                        "rel": "item",
+                        "href": "things/{id}",
+                        "templateRequired": ["id"],
+                        "targetSchema": {"$ref": "thing#"}
+                    }
+                ]
+            }
+        }
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "things",
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"},
+            "submissionSchema": {"$ref": "thing"}
+        }
+    ]
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p>Here is a simple two-element collection instance: </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "elements": [
+        {"id": 12345, "data": {}},
+        {"id": 67890, "data": {}}
+    ]
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p>Here are all of the links that apply to this instance, including those that are defined in the referenced individual "thing" schema: </p>
+<pre>
+[
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://example.com/api/things",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "self",
+        "targetUri": "https://example.com/api/things",
+        "attachmentPointer": ""
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://example.com/api/things",
+        "contextPointer": "/elements/0",
+        "rel": "self",
+        "targetUri": "https://example.com/api/things/12345",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/0"
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://example.com/api/things",
+        "contextPointer": "/elements/1",
+        "rel": "self",
+        "targetUri": "https://example.com/api/things/67890",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/1"
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://example.com/api/things",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "item",
+        "targetUri": "https://example.com/api/things/12345",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/0"
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://example.com/api/things",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "item",
+        "targetUri": "https://example.com/api/things/67890",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/1"
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://example.com/api/things",
+        "contextPointer": "/elements/0",
+        "rel": "collection",
+        "targetUri": "https://example.com/api/things",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/0"
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://example.com/api/things",
+        "contextPointer": "/elements/1",
+        "rel": "collection",
+        "targetUri": "https://example.com/api/things",
+        "attachmentPointer": "/elements/1"
+    }
+]
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>In all cases, the context URI is shown for an instance of media type application/json, which does not support fragments.  If the instance media type was application/instance+json, which supports JSON Pointer fragments, then the context URIs would contain fragments identical to the context pointer field.  For application/json and other media types without fragments, it is critically important to consider the context pointer as well as the context URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.2">There are three "self" links, one for the collection, and one for each item in the "elements" array.  The item "self" links are defined in the individual "thing" schema which is referenced with "$ref".  The three links can be distinguished by their context or attachment pointers.  We will revisit the "submissionSchema" of the collection's "self" link in <a href="#firstItem" class="xref">Section 9.5.2</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.3">There are two "item" links, one for each item in the "elements" array.  Unlike the "self" links, these are defined only in the collection schema.  Each of them have the same target URI as the corresponding "self" link that shares the same attachment pointer.  However, each has a different context pointer.  The context of the "self" link is the entry in "elements", while the context of the "item" link is always the entire collection regardless of the specific item.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.4">Finally, there are two "collection" links, one for each item in "elements".  In the individual item schema, these produce links with the item resource as the context.  When referenced from the collection schema, the context is the location in the "elements" array of the relevant "thing", rather than that "thing"'s own separate resource URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.5">The collection links have identical target URIs as there is only one relevant collection URI.  While calculating both links as part of a full set of constructed links may not seem useful, when constructing links on an as-needed basis, this arrangement means that there is a "collection" link definition close at hand no matter which "elements" entry you are processing.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.5.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.5.1">9.5.1.</a> Pagination</h1>
+<p>Here we add pagination to our collection.  There is a "meta" section to hold the information about current, next, and previous pages.  Most of the schema is the same as in the previous section and has been omitted.  Only new fields and new or (in the case of the main "self" link) changed links are shown in full.  </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "properties": {
+        "elements": {
+            ...
+        },
+        "meta": {
+            "type": "object",
+            "properties": {
+                "prev": {"$ref": "#/$defs/pagination"},
+                "current": {"$ref": "#/$defs/pagination"},
+                "next": {"$ref": "#/$defs/pagination"}
+            }
+        }
+    },
+    "links": [
+        {
+            "rel": "self",
+            "href": "things{?offset,limit}",
+            "templateRequired": ["offset", "limit"],
+            "templatePointers": {
+                "offset": "/meta/current/offset",
+                "limit": "/meta/current/limit"
+            },
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }, {
+            "rel": "prev",
+            "href": "things{?offset,limit}",
+            "templateRequired": ["offset", "limit"],
+            "templatePointers": {
+                "offset": "/meta/prev/offset",
+                "limit": "/meta/prev/limit"
+            },
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }, {
+            "rel": "next",
+            "href": "things{?offset,limit}",
+            "templateRequired": ["offset", "limit"],
+            "templatePointers": {
+                "offset": "/meta/next/offset",
+                "limit": "/meta/next/limit"
+            },
+            "targetSchema": {"$ref": "#"}
+        }
+    ],
+    "$defs": {
+        "pagination": {
+            "type": "object",
+            "properties": {
+                "offset": {
+                    "type": "integer",
+                    "minimum": 0,
+                    "default": 0
+                },
+                "limit": {
+                    "type": "integer",
+                    "minimum": 1,
+                    "maximum": 100,
+                    "default": 10
+                }
+            }
+        }
+    }
+}
+                        </pre>
+<p>Notice that the "self" link includes the pagination query that produced the exact representation, rather than being a generic link to the collection allowing selecting the page via input.  </p>
+<p>Given this instance: </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "elements": [
+        {"id": 12345, "data": {}},
+        {"id": 67890, "data": {}}
+    ],
+    "meta": {
+        "current": {
+            "offset": 0,
+            "limit": 2
+        },
+        "next": {
+            "offset": 3,
+            "limit": 2
+        }
+    }
+}
+                        </pre>
+<p>Here are all of the links that apply to this instance that either did not appear in the previous example or have been changed with pagination added.  </p>
+<pre>
+[
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://example.com/api/things",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "self",
+        "targetUri":
+            "https://example.com/api/things?offset=0&amp;limit=2",
+        "attachmentPointer": ""
+    },
+    {
+        "contextUri": "https://example.com/api/things",
+        "contextPointer": "",
+        "rel": "next",
+        "targetUri":
+            "https://example.com/api/things?offset=3&amp;limit=2",
+        "attachmentPointer": ""
+    }
+]
+                        </pre>
+<p>Note that there is no "prev" link in the output, as we are looking at the first page.  The lack of a "prev" field under "meta", together with the "prev" link's "templateRequired" values, means that the link is not usable with this particular instance.  </p>
+<p><a id="CREF7" class="info">[CREF7]<span class="info">It's not clear how pagination should work with the link from the "collection" links in the individual "thing" schema.  Technically, a link from an item to a paginated or filtered collection should go to a page/filter that contains the item (in this case the "thing") that is the link context.  See GitHub issue #421 for more discussion.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.1.p.2">Let's add a link for this collection to the entry point schema (<a href="#entryPoint" class="xref">Section 9.1</a>), including pagination input in order to allow client applications to jump directly to a specific page.  Recall that the entry point schema consists only of links, therefore we only show the newly added link: </p>
+<pre>
+{
+    "rel": "tag:rel.example.com,2017:thing-collection",
+    "href": "/things{?offset,limit}",
+    "hrefSchema": {
+        "$ref": "thing-collection#/$defs/pagination"
+    },
+    "submissionSchema": {
+        "$ref": "thing#"
+    },
+    "targetSchema": {
+        "$ref": "thing-collection#"
+    }
+}
+                        </pre>
+<p>Now we see the pagination parameters being accepted as input, so we can jump to any page within the collection.  The link relation type is a custom one as the generic "collection" link can only be used with an item as its context, not an entry point or other resource.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.5.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.5.2">9.5.2.</a> <a href="#firstItem" id="firstItem">Creating the First Item</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.2.p.1">When we do not have any "thing"s, we do not have any resources with a relevant "collection" link.  Therefore we cannot use a "collection" link's submission keywords to create the first "thing"; hyper-schemas must be evaluated with respect to an instance.  Since the "elements" array in the collection instance would be empty, it cannot provide us with a collection link either.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.2.p.2">However, our entry point link can take us to the empty collection, and we can use the presence of "item" links in the hyper-schema to recognize that it is a collection.  Since the context of the "item" link is the collection, we simply look for a "self" link with the same context, which we can then treat as collection for the purposes of a creation operation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.2.p.3">Presumably, our custom link relation type in the entry point schema was sufficient to ensure that we have found the right collection.  A client application that recognizes that custom link relation type may know that it can immediately assume that the target is a collection, but a generic user agent cannot do so.  Despite the presence of a "-collection" suffix in our example, a generic user agent would have no way of knowing whether that substring indicates a hypermedia resource collection, or some other sort of collection.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.2.p.4">Once we have recognized the "self" link as being for the correct collection, we can use its "submissionSchema" and/or "submissionMediaType" keywords to perform an item creation operation.  <a id="CREF8" class="info">[CREF8]<span class="info">This works perfectly if the collection is unfiltered and unpaginated.  However, one should generally POST to a collection that will contain the created resource, and a "self" link MUST include any filters, pagination, or other query parameters.  Is it still valid to POST to such a "self" link even if the resulting item would not match the filter or appear within that page?  See GitHub issue #421 for further discussion.  </span></a> <a id="CREF9" class="info">[CREF9]<span class="info">Draft-04 of Hyper-Schema defined a "create" link relation that had the schema, rather than the instance, as its context.  This did not fit into the instance-based link model, and incorrectly used an operation name for a link relation type.  However, defining a more correctly designed link from the schema to the collection instance may be one possible approach to solving this.  Again, see GitHub issue #421 for more details.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10">10.</a> <a href="#security" id="security">Security Considerations</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.1">JSON Hyper-Schema defines a vocabulary for JSON Schema core and concerns all the security considerations listed there.  As a link serialization format, the security considerations of <a href="#RFC8288" class="xref">RFC 8288 Web Linking</a> also apply, with appropriate adjustments (e.g. "anchor" as an LDO keyword rather than an HTTP Link header attribute).  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.1">10.1.</a> Target Attributes</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.1">As stated in <a href="#targetAttributes" class="xref">Section 6.5</a>, all LDO keywords describing the target resource are advisory and MUST NOT be used in place of the authoritative information supplied by the target resource in response to an operation.  Target resource responses SHOULD indicate their own hyper-schema, which is authoritative.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.2">If the hyper-schema in the target response matches (by "$id") the hyper-schema in which the current LDO was found, then the target attributes MAY be considered authoritative.  <a id="CREF10" class="info">[CREF10]<span class="info">Need to add something about the risks of spoofing by "$id", but given that other parts of the specification discourage always re-downloading the linked schema, the risk mitigation options are unclear.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.3">User agents or client applications MUST NOT use the value of "targetSchema" to aid in the interpretation of the data received in response to following the link, as this leaves "safe" data open to re-interpretation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.4">When choosing how to interpret data, the type information provided by the server (or inferred from the filename, or any other usual method) MUST be the only consideration, and the "targetMediaType" property of the link MUST NOT be used.  User agents MAY use this information to determine how they represent the link or where to display it (for example hover-text, opening in a new tab).  If user agents decide to pass the link to an external program, they SHOULD first verify that the data is of a type that would normally be passed to that external program.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.5">This is to guard against re-interpretation of "safe" data, similar to the precautions for "targetSchema".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.6">Protocol meta-data values conveyed in "targetHints" MUST NOT be considered authoritative.  Any security considerations defined by the protocol that may apply based on incorrect assumptions about meta-data values apply.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.7">Even when no protocol security considerations are directly applicable, implementations MUST be prepared to handle responses that do not match the link's "targetHints" values.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.2">10.2.</a> "self" Links</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.p.1">When link relation of "self" is used to denote a full representation of an object, the user agent SHOULD NOT consider the representation to be the authoritative representation of the resource denoted by the target URI if the target URI is not equivalent to or a sub-path of the URI used to request the resource representation which contains the target URI with the "self" link.  <a id="CREF11" class="info">[CREF11]<span class="info">It is no longer entirely clear what was intended by the "sub-path" option in this paragraph.  It may have been intended to allow "self" links for embedded item representations in a collection, which usually have target URIs that are sub-paths of that collection's URI, to be considered authoritative.  However, this is simply a common design convention and does not appear to be based in RFC 3986 or any other guidance on URI usage.  See GitHub issue #485 for further discussion.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.11">
+<a href="#rfc.section.11">11.</a> Acknowledgments</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.1">Thanks to Gary Court, Francis Galiegue, Kris Zyp, and Geraint Luff for their work on the initial drafts of JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.2">Thanks to Jason Desrosiers, Daniel Perrett, Erik Wilde, Ben Hutton, Evgeny Poberezkin, Brad Bowman, Gowry Sankar, Donald Pipowitch, Dave Finlay, and Denis Laxalde for their submissions and patches to the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.references">
+<a href="#rfc.references">12.</a> References</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.1">
+<a href="#rfc.references.1">12.1.</a> Normative References</h1>
+<table><tbody>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="json-schema">[json-schema]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Wright, A.</a> and <a>H. Andrews</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-02">JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-json-schema-02, November 2017.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="json-schema-validation">[json-schema-validation]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Wright, A.</a>, <a>Andrews, H.</a> and <a>G. Luff</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-02">JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-02, November 2017.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="relative-json-pointer">[relative-json-pointer]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Luff, G.</a> and <a>H. Andrews</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-02">Relative JSON Pointers</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-02, January 2018.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bradner, S.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</a>", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC3986">[RFC3986]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Berners-Lee, T.</a>, <a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>L. Masinter</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986">Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax</a>", STD 66, RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC4287">[RFC4287]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Nottingham, M.</a> and <a>R. Sayre</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287">The Atom Syndication Format</a>", RFC 4287, DOI 10.17487/RFC4287, December 2005.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6570">[RFC6570]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Gregorio, J.</a>, <a>Fielding, R.</a>, <a>Hadley, M.</a>, <a>Nottingham, M.</a> and <a>D. Orchard</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6570">URI Template</a>", RFC 6570, DOI 10.17487/RFC6570, March 2012.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6573">[RFC6573]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Amundsen, M.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6573">The Item and Collection Link Relations</a>", RFC 6573, DOI 10.17487/RFC6573, April 2012.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6901">[RFC6901]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bryan, P.</a>, <a>Zyp, K.</a> and <a>M. Nottingham</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6901">JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Pointer</a>", RFC 6901, DOI 10.17487/RFC6901, April 2013.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC8288">[RFC8288]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Nottingham, M.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8288">Web Linking</a>", RFC 8288, DOI 10.17487/RFC8288, October 2017.</td>
+</tr>
+</tbody></table>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.2">
+<a href="#rfc.references.2">12.2.</a> Informative References</h1>
+<table><tbody>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="I-D.reschke-http-jfv">[I-D.reschke-http-jfv]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Reschke, J.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-reschke-http-jfv-06">A JSON Encoding for HTTP Header Field Values</a>", Internet-Draft draft-reschke-http-jfv-06, June 2017.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC2046">[RFC2046]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Freed, N.</a> and <a>N. Borenstein</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2046">Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types</a>", RFC 2046, DOI 10.17487/RFC2046, November 1996.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC4151">[RFC4151]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Kindberg, T.</a> and <a>S. Hawke</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4151">The 'tag' URI Scheme</a>", RFC 4151, DOI 10.17487/RFC4151, October 2005.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC5789">[RFC5789]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Dusseault, L.</a> and <a>J. Snell</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5789">PATCH Method for HTTP</a>", RFC 5789, DOI 10.17487/RFC5789, March 2010.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6068">[RFC6068]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Duerst, M.</a>, <a>Masinter, L.</a> and <a>J. Zawinski</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6068">The 'mailto' URI Scheme</a>", RFC 6068, DOI 10.17487/RFC6068, October 2010.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC7230">[RFC7230]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>J. Reschke</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230">Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing</a>", RFC 7230, DOI 10.17487/RFC7230, June 2014.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC7231">[RFC7231]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>J. Reschke</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231">Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content</a>", RFC 7231, DOI 10.17487/RFC7231, June 2014.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC7807">[RFC7807]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Nottingham, M.</a> and <a>E. Wilde</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7807">Problem Details for HTTP APIs</a>", RFC 7807, DOI 10.17487/RFC7807, March 2016.</td>
+</tr>
+</tbody></table>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Appendix A.</a> <a href="#apis" id="apis">Using JSON Hyper-Schema in APIs</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.1">Hypermedia APIs, which follow the constraints of the REST architectural style, enable the creation of generic user agents.  Such a user agent has no application-specific knowledge.  Rather, it understands pre-defined media types, URI schemes, protocols, and link relations, often by recognizing these and coordinating the use of existing software that implements support for them.  Client applications can then be built on top of such a user agent, focusing on their own semantics and logic rather than the mechanics of the interactions.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.2">Hyper-schema is only concerned with one resource and set of associated links at a time.  Just as a web browser works with only one HTML page at a time, with no concept of whether or how that page functions as part of a "site", a hyper-schema-aware user agent works with one resource at a time, without any concept of whether or how that resource fits into an API.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.3">Therefore, hyper-schema is suitable for use within an API, but is not suitable for the description of APIs as complete entities in their own right.  There is no way to describe concepts at the API scope, rather than the resource and link scope, and such descriptions are outside of the boundaries of JSON Hyper-Schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A.1">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.A.1">A.1.</a> Resource Evolution With Hyper-Schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.1.p.1">Since a given JSON Hyper-Schema is used with a single resource at a single point in time, it has no inherent notion of versioning.  However, a given resource can change which schema or schemas it uses over time, and the URIs of these schemas can be used to indicate versioning information.  When used with a media type that supports indicating a schema with a media type parameter, these versioned schema URIs can be used in content negotiation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.1.p.2">A resource can indicate that it is an instance of multiple schemas, which allows supporting multiple compatible versions simultaneously.  A client application can then make use of the hyper-schema that it recognizes, and ignore newer or older versions.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A.2">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.A.2">A.2.</a> <a href="#responses" id="responses">Responses and Errors</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.2.p.1">Because a hyper-schema represents a single resource at a time, it does not provide for an enumeration of all possible responses to protocol operations performed with links.  Each response, including errors, is considered its own (possibly anonymous) resource, and should identify its own hyper-schema, and optionally use an appropriate media type such as <a href="#RFC7807" class="xref">RFC 7807's "application/problem+json"</a>, to allow the user agent or client application to interpret any information that is provided beyond the protocol's own status reporting.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A.3">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.A.3">A.3.</a> <a href="#staticAnalysis" id="staticAnalysis">Static Analysis of an API's Hyper-Schemas</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.3.p.1">It is possible to statically analyze a set of hyper-schemas without instance data in order to generate output such as documentation or code.  However, the full feature set of both validation and hyper-schema cannot be accessed without runtime instance data.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.3.p.2">This is an intentional design choice to provide the maximum runtime flexibility for hypermedia systems.  JSON Schema as a media type allows for establishing additional vocabularies for static analysis and content generation, which are not addressed in this specification.  Additionally, individual systems may restrict their usage to subsets that can be analyzed statically if full design-time description is a goal.  <a id="CREF12" class="info">[CREF12]<span class="info">Vocabularies for API documentation and other purposes have been proposed, and contributions are welcome at https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-vocabularies </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.B">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.B">Appendix B.</a> ChangeLog</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF13" class="info">[CREF13]<span class="info">This section to be removed before leaving Internet-Draft status.</span></a> </p>
+<p></p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-02</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Allow multiple values for "rel"</li>
+<li>Clarify that "headerSchema", like "targetHints", should use array values</li>
+<li>Clarified link behavior with conditional applicator keywords such as "if"</li>
+<li>Added and clarified various examples</li>
+<li>Avoid accidentally implying that only POST can be used to create in HTTP</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-01</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>This draft is purely a bug fix with no functional changes</li>
+<li>Fixed erroneous meta-schema URI (draft-07, not draft-07-wip)</li>
+<li>Removed stray "work in progress" language left over from review period</li>
+<li>Fixed missing trailing "/" in various "base" examples</li>
+<li>Fixed incorrect draft name in changelog (luff-*-00, not -01)</li>
+<li>Update relative pointer ref to handrews-*-01, also purely a bug fix</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Top to bottom reorganization and rewrite</li>
+<li>Group keywords per RFC 8288 context/relation/target/target attributes</li>
+<li>Additional keyword groups for template resolution and describing input</li>
+<li>Clarify implementation requirements with a suggested output format</li>
+<li>Expanded overview to provide context</li>
+<li>Consolidated examples into their own section, illustrate real-world patterns</li>
+<li>Consolidated HTTP guidance in its own section</li>
+<li>Added a subsection on static analysis of hyper-schemas</li>
+<li>Consolidated security concerns in their own section</li>
+<li>Added an appendix on usage in APIs</li>
+<li>Moved "readOnly" to the validation specification</li>
+<li>Moved "media" to validation as "contentMediaType"/"contentEncoding"</li>
+<li>Renamed "submissionEncType" to "submissionMediaType"</li>
+<li>Renamed "mediaType" to "targetMediaType"</li>
+<li>Added "anchor" and "anchorPointer"</li>
+<li>Added "templatePointers" and "templateRequired"</li>
+<li>Clarified how "hrefSchema" is used</li>
+<li>Added "targetHints" and "headerSchema"</li>
+<li>Added guidance on "self", "collection" and "item" link usage</li>
+<li>Added "description" as an LDO keyword</li>
+<li>Added "$comment" in LDOs to match the schema keyword</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-01</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Fixed examples</li>
+<li>Added "hrefSchema" for user input to "href" URI Templates</li>
+<li>Removed URI Template pre-processing</li>
+<li>Clarified how links and data submission work</li>
+<li>Clarified how validation keywords apply hyper-schema keywords and links</li>
+<li>Clarified HTTP use with "targetSchema"</li>
+<li>Renamed "schema" to "submissionSchema"</li>
+<li>Renamed "encType" to "submissionEncType"</li>
+<li>Removed "method"</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>"rel" is now optional</li>
+<li>rel="self" no longer changes URI base</li>
+<li>Added "base" keyword to change instance URI base</li>
+<li>Removed "root" link relation</li>
+<li>Removed "create" link relation</li>
+<li>Removed "full" link relation</li>
+<li>Removed "instances" link relation</li>
+<li>Removed special behavior for "describedBy" link relation</li>
+<li>Removed "pathStart" keyword</li>
+<li>Removed "fragmentResolution" keyword</li>
+<li>Updated references to JSON Pointer, HTML</li>
+<li>Changed behavior of "method" property to align with hypermedia best current practices</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-luff-json-hyper-schema-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul><li>Split from main specification.</li></ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.authors"><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a></h1>
+<div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Henry Andrews</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Andrews</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:andrews_henry@yahoo.com">andrews_henry@yahoo.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Austin Wright</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Wright</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:aaa@bzfx.net">aaa@bzfx.net</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html b/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..4635b1f6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html
@@ -0,0 +1,1397 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
+  "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
+<head profile="http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/">
+  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" />
+
+  <title>JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON </title>
+
+  <style type="text/css" title="Xml2Rfc (sans serif)">
+  /*<![CDATA[*/
+	  a {
+	  text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+      /* info code from SantaKlauss at http://www.madaboutstyle.com/tooltip2.html */
+      a.info {
+          /* This is the key. */
+          position: relative;
+          z-index: 24;
+          text-decoration: none;
+      }
+      a.info:hover {
+          z-index: 25;
+          color: #FFF; background-color: #900;
+      }
+      a.info span { display: none; }
+      a.info:hover span.info {
+          /* The span will display just on :hover state. */
+          display: block;
+          position: absolute;
+          font-size: smaller;
+          top: 2em; left: -5em; width: 15em;
+          padding: 2px; border: 1px solid #333;
+          color: #900; background-color: #EEE;
+          text-align: left;
+      }
+	  a.smpl {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  a:hover {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  a:active {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  address {
+	  margin-top: 1em;
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  body {
+	  color: black;
+	  font-family: verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  max-width: 55em;
+	  
+	  }
+	  cite {
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  dd {
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  dl {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.empty {
+	  list-style-type: none;
+	  }
+	  ul.empty li {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  dl p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  dt {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  h1 {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h1.np {
+	  page-break-before: always;
+	  }
+	  h1 a {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  }
+	  h2 {
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 15pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h2 a, h3 a, h4 a, h5 a, h6 a {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  img {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  }
+	  li {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  p {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  pre {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  background-color: lightyellow;
+	  padding: .25em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text2 {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f0f0f0;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.inline {
+	  background-color: white;
+	  padding: 0em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.drawing {
+	  border-style: solid;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  padding: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table.tt {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt td {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full td {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt th {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full th {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers th {
+	  border-style: none none inset none;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.left {
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.right {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.center {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  caption {
+	  caption-side: bottom;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+	  border-spacing: 1px;
+	  width: 95%;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.top {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  td.topnowrap {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap; 
+	  }
+	  table.header td {
+	  background-color: gray;
+	  width: 50%;
+	  }
+	  table.header a {
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.reference {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap;
+	  padding-right: 1em;
+	  }
+	  thead {
+	  display:table-header-group;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc, ul.toc ul {
+	  list-style: none;
+	  margin-left: 1.5em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  padding-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li {
+	  line-height: 150%;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li li {
+	  line-height: normal;
+	  font-weight: normal;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  li.excluded {
+	  font-size: 0pt;
+	  }
+	  ul p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	
+	  .comment {
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	  .center {
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .error {
+	  color: red;
+	  font-style: italic;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .figure {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  }
+	  .filename {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .fn {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .hidden {
+	  display: none;
+	  }
+	  .left {
+	  text-align: left;
+	  }
+	  .right {
+	  text-align: right;
+	  }
+	  .title {
+	  color: #990000;
+	  font-size: 18pt;
+	  line-height: 18pt;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  margin-top: 36pt;
+	  }
+	  .vcardline {
+	  display: block;
+	  }
+	  .warning {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	
+	
+	  @media print {
+	  .noprint {
+		display: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  a {
+		color: black;
+		text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+		width: 90%;
+	  }
+	
+	  td.header {
+		width: 50%;
+		color: black;
+		background-color: white;
+		vertical-align: top;
+		font-size: 12pt;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.toc a::after {
+		content: leader('.') target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.ind li li a {
+		content: target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  .print2col {
+		column-count: 2;
+		-moz-column-count: 2;
+		column-fill: auto;
+	  }
+	  }
+	
+	  @page {
+	  @top-left {
+		   content: "Internet-Draft"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-right {
+		   content: "December 2010"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-center {
+		   content: "Abbreviated Title";
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-left {
+		   content: "Doe"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-center {
+		   content: "Expires June 2011"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-right {
+		   content: "[Page " counter(page) "]"; 
+	  } 
+	  }
+	
+	  @page:first { 
+		@top-left {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-right {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-center {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+	  }
+  /*]]>*/
+  </style>
+
+  <link href="#rfc.toc" rel="Contents">
+<link href="#rfc.section.1" rel="Chapter" title="1 Introduction">
+<link href="#rfc.section.2" rel="Chapter" title="2 Conventions and Terminology">
+<link href="#rfc.section.3" rel="Chapter" title="3 Overview">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4" rel="Chapter" title="4 Interoperability Considerations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.1" rel="Chapter" title="4.1 Validation of String Instances">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.2" rel="Chapter" title="4.2 Validation of Numeric Instances">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3" rel="Chapter" title="4.3 Regular Expressions">
+<link href="#rfc.section.5" rel="Chapter" title="5 Meta-Schema">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6" rel="Chapter" title="6 A Vocabulary for Structural Validation">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.1 Validation Keywords for Any Instance Type">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.1.1 type">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.1.2 enum">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.1.3 const">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.2 Validation Keywords for Numeric Instances (number and integer)">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.1 multipleOf">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.2 maximum">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.3 exclusiveMaximum">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.4 minimum">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.5 exclusiveMinimum">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.3 Validation Keywords for Strings">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.3.1 maxLength">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.3.2 minLength">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.3.3 pattern">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.4 Validation Keywords for Arrays">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.1 maxItems">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.2 minItems">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.3 uniqueItems">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.4 maxContains">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.5 minContains">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.5 Validation Keywords for Objects">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.1 maxProperties">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.2 minProperties">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.3 required">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.4 dependentRequired">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7" rel="Chapter" title='7 A Vocabulary for Semantic Content With "format"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.1 Foreword">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.2 Implementation Requirements">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.2.1 As an annotation">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.2.2 As an assertion">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.2.3 Custom format attributes">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.3 Defined Formats">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.1 Dates, Times, and Duration">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.2 Email Addresses">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.3 Hostnames">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.4" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.4 IP Addresses">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.5" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.5 Resource Identifiers">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.6" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.6 uri-template">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.7" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.7 JSON Pointers">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.8" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.8 regex">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8" rel="Chapter" title="8 A Vocabulary for the Contents of String-Encoded Data">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1" rel="Chapter" title="8.1 Foreword">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2" rel="Chapter" title="8.2 Implementation Requirements">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.3" rel="Chapter" title="8.3 contentEncoding">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.4" rel="Chapter" title="8.4 contentMediaType">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.5" rel="Chapter" title="8.5 contentSchema">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.6" rel="Chapter" title="8.6 Example">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9" rel="Chapter" title="9 A Vocabulary for Basic Meta-Data Annotations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.1" rel="Chapter" title='9.1 "title" and "description"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.2" rel="Chapter" title='9.2 "default"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.3" rel="Chapter" title='9.3 "deprecated"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.4" rel="Chapter" title='9.4 "readOnly" and "writeOnly"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.5" rel="Chapter" title='9.5 "examples"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10" rel="Chapter" title="10 Security Considerations">
+<link href="#rfc.references" rel="Chapter" title="11 References">
+<link href="#rfc.references.1" rel="Chapter" title="11.1 Normative References">
+<link href="#rfc.references.2" rel="Chapter" title="11.2 Informative References">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A" rel="Chapter" title="A Keywords Moved from Validation to Core">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.B" rel="Chapter" title="B Acknowledgments">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.C" rel="Chapter" title="C ChangeLog">
+<link href="#rfc.authors" rel="Chapter">
+
+
+  <meta name="generator" content="xml2rfc version 2.20.1 - https://tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc" />
+  <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" />
+
+  <meta name="dct.creator" content="Wright, A., Ed., Andrews, H., Ed., and B. Hutton, Ed." />
+  <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-02" />
+  <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2019-17" />
+  <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Schema (application/schema+json) has several purposes, one of which is JSON instance validation.  This document specifies a vocabulary for JSON Schema to describe the meaning of JSON documents, provide hints for user interfaces working with JSON data, and to make assertions about what a valid document must look like.  " />
+  <meta name="description" content="JSON Schema (application/schema+json) has several purposes, one of which is JSON instance validation.  This document specifies a vocabulary for JSON Schema to describe the meaning of JSON documents, provide hints for user interfaces working with JSON data, and to make assertions about what a valid document must look like.  " />
+
+</head>
+
+<body>
+
+  <table class="header">
+    <tbody>
+    
+    	<tr>
+<td class="left">Internet Engineering Task Force</td>
+<td class="right">A. Wright, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
+<td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Intended status: Informational</td>
+<td class="right">H. Andrews, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Expires: March 20, 2020</td>
+<td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left"></td>
+<td class="right">B. Hutton, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left"></td>
+<td class="right">Wellcome Sanger Institute</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left"></td>
+<td class="right">September 17, 2019</td>
+</tr>
+
+    	
+    </tbody>
+  </table>
+
+  <p class="title">JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON <br />
+  <span class="filename">draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-02</span></p>
+  
+  <h1 id="rfc.abstract"><a href="#rfc.abstract">Abstract</a></h1>
+<p>JSON Schema (application/schema+json) has several purposes, one of which is JSON instance validation.  This document specifies a vocabulary for JSON Schema to describe the meaning of JSON documents, provide hints for user interfaces working with JSON data, and to make assertions about what a valid document must look like.  </p>
+<h1><a>Note to Readers</a></h1>
+<p>The issues list for this draft can be found at <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues">https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>For additional information, see <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/">https://json-schema.org/</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>To provide feedback, use this issue tracker, the communication methods listed on the homepage, or email the document editors.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.status"><a href="#rfc.status">Status of This Memo</a></h1>
+<p>This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.</p>
+<p>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/.</p>
+<p>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."</p>
+<p>This Internet-Draft will expire on March 20, 2020.</p>
+<h1 id="rfc.copyrightnotice"><a href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a></h1>
+<p>Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors.  All rights reserved.</p>
+<p>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.</p>
+
+  
+  <hr class="noprint" />
+  <h1 class="np" id="rfc.toc"><a href="#rfc.toc">Table of Contents</a></h1>
+  <ul class="toc">
+
+  	<li>1.   <a href="#rfc.section.1">Introduction</a>
+</li>
+<li>2.   <a href="#rfc.section.2">Conventions and Terminology</a>
+</li>
+<li>3.   <a href="#rfc.section.3">Overview</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.   <a href="#rfc.section.4">Interoperability Considerations</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>4.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.1">Validation of String Instances</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.2">Validation of Numeric Instances</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3">Regular Expressions</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>5.   <a href="#rfc.section.5">Meta-Schema</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6">A Vocabulary for Structural Validation</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1">Validation Keywords for Any Instance Type</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.1.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1.1">type</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.1.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1.2">enum</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.1.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1.3">const</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2">Validation Keywords for Numeric Instances (number and integer)</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.1">multipleOf</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.2">maximum</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.3">exclusiveMaximum</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.2.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.4">minimum</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.2.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.5">exclusiveMinimum</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3">Validation Keywords for Strings</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3.1">maxLength</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3.2">minLength</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.3.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3.3">pattern</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4">Validation Keywords for Arrays</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.4.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.1">maxItems</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.4.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.2">minItems</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.4.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.3">uniqueItems</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.4.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.4">maxContains</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.4.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.5">minContains</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5">Validation Keywords for Objects</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.1">maxProperties</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.5.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.2">minProperties</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.5.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.3">required</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.5.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.4">dependentRequired</a>
+</li>
+</ul></ul><li>7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7">A Vocabulary for Semantic Content With "format"</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.1">Foreword</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2">Implementation Requirements</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2.1">As an annotation</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2.2">As an assertion</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2.3">Custom format attributes</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>7.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3">Defined Formats</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.1">Dates, Times, and Duration</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.2">Email Addresses</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.3">Hostnames</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.4">IP Addresses</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.5">Resource Identifiers</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.6">uri-template</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.7">JSON Pointers</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.8.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.8">regex</a>
+</li>
+</ul></ul><li>8.   <a href="#rfc.section.8">A Vocabulary for the Contents of String-Encoded Data</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>8.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1">Foreword</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2">Implementation Requirements</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.3">contentEncoding</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.4">contentMediaType</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.5">contentSchema</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.6">Example</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>9.   <a href="#rfc.section.9">A Vocabulary for Basic Meta-Data Annotations</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>9.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.1">"title" and "description"</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.2">"default"</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.3">"deprecated"</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.4">"readOnly" and "writeOnly"</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.5">"examples"</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>10.   <a href="#rfc.section.10">Security Considerations</a>
+</li>
+<li>11.   <a href="#rfc.references">References</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>11.1.   <a href="#rfc.references.1">Normative References</a>
+</li>
+<li>11.2.   <a href="#rfc.references.2">Informative References</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>Appendix A.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Keywords Moved from Validation to Core</a>
+</li>
+<li>Appendix B.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.B">Acknowledgments</a>
+</li>
+<li>Appendix C.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.C">ChangeLog</a>
+</li>
+<li><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a>
+</li>
+
+
+  </ul>
+
+  <h1 id="rfc.section.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.1">1.</a> Introduction</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.1">JSON Schema can be used to require that a given JSON document (an instance) satisfies a certain number of criteria. These criteria are asserted by using keywords described in this specification. In addition, a set of keywords is also defined to assist in interactive user interface instance generation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.2">This specification will use the concepts, syntax, and terminology defined by the <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">JSON Schema core</a> specification.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.2">2.</a> Conventions and Terminology</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.1">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 <a href="#RFC2119" class="xref">RFC 2119</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.2">This specification uses the term "container instance" to refer to both array and object instances. It uses the term "children instances" to refer to array elements or object member values.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.3">Elements in an array value are said to be unique if no two elements of this array are <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">equal</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.3">3.</a> Overview</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.1">JSON Schema validation asserts constraints on the structure of instance data.  An instance location that satisfies all asserted constraints is then annotated with any keywords that contain non-assertion information, such as descriptive metadata and usage hints.  If all locations within the instance satisfy all asserted constraints, then the instance is said to be valid against the schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.2">Each schema object is independently evaluated against each instance location to which it applies.  This greatly simplifies the implementation requirements for validators by ensuring that they do not need to maintain state across the document-wide validation process.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.3">This specification defines a set of assertion keywords, as well as a small vocabulary of metadata keywords that can be used to annotate the JSON instance with useful information.  The <a href="#format" class="xref">Section 7</a> keyword is intended primarily as an annotation, but can optionally be used as an assertion.  The <a href="#content" class="xref">Section 8</a> keywords are annotations for working with documents embedded as JSON strings.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4">4.</a> Interoperability Considerations</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.1">4.1.</a> Validation of String Instances</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.1">It should be noted that the nul character (\u0000) is valid in a JSON string. An instance to validate may contain a string value with this character, regardless of the ability of the underlying programming language to deal with such data.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.2">4.2.</a> Validation of Numeric Instances</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.p.1">The JSON specification allows numbers with arbitrary precision, and JSON Schema does not add any such bounds.  This means that numeric instances processed by JSON Schema can be arbitrarily large and/or have an arbitrarily long decimal part, regardless of the ability of the underlying programming language to deal with such data.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.3">4.3.</a> <a href="#regexInterop" id="regexInterop">Regular Expressions</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.p.1">Keywords that use regular expressions, or constrain the instance value to be a regular expression, are subject to the interoperability considerations for regular expressions in the <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">JSON Schema Core</a> specification.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.5">5.</a> <a href="#meta-schema" id="meta-schema">Meta-Schema</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.1">The current URI for the default JSON Schema meta-schema is <span>&lt;</span><a href="http://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/schema">http://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/schema</a><span>&gt;</span>.  For schema author convenience, this meta-schema describes all vocabularies defined in this specification and the JSON Schema Core specification, as well as two former keywords which are reserved for a transitional period.  Individual vocabulary and vocabulary meta-schema URIs are given for each section below.  Certain vocabularies are optional to support, which is explained in detail in the relevant sections.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.2">Updated vocabulary and meta-schema URIs MAY be published between specification drafts in order to correct errors.  Implementations SHOULD consider URIs dated after this specification draft and before the next to indicate the same syntax and semantics as those listed here.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6">6.</a> A Vocabulary for Structural Validation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.1">Validation keywords in a schema impose requirements for successful validation of an instance.  These keywords are all assertions without any annotation behavior.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.2">Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" SHOULD be considered to require this vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.3">The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Validation vocabulary, is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/validation">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/validation</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.4">The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/validation">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/validation</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.1">6.1.</a> <a href="#general" id="general">Validation Keywords for Any Instance Type</a>
+</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.1.1">6.1.1.</a> type</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.1.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be either a string or an array. If it is an array, elements of the array MUST be strings and MUST be unique.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.1.p.2">String values MUST be one of the six primitive types ("null", "boolean", "object", "array", "number", or "string"), or "integer" which matches any number with a zero fractional part.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.1.p.3">An instance validates if and only if the instance is in any of the sets listed for this keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.1.2">6.1.2.</a> <a href="#enum" id="enum">enum</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be an array. This array SHOULD have at least one element. Elements in the array SHOULD be unique.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.2">An instance validates successfully against this keyword if its value is equal to one of the elements in this keyword's array value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.3">Elements in the array might be of any type, including null.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.1.3">6.1.3.</a> const</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.3.p.1">The value of this keyword MAY be of any type, including null.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.3.p.2">Use of this keyword is functionally equivalent to an <a href="#enum" class="xref">"enum"</a> with a single value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.3.p.3">An instance validates successfully against this keyword if its value is equal to the value of the keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2">6.2.</a> <a href="#numeric" id="numeric">Validation Keywords for Numeric Instances (number and integer)</a>
+</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2.1">6.2.1.</a> multipleOf</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.1.p.1">The value of "multipleOf" MUST be a number, strictly greater than 0.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.1.p.2">A numeric instance is valid only if division by this keyword's value results in an integer.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2.2">6.2.2.</a> maximum</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.2.p.1">The value of "maximum" MUST be a number, representing an inclusive upper limit for a numeric instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.2.p.2">If the instance is a number, then this keyword validates only if the instance is less than or exactly equal to "maximum".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2.3">6.2.3.</a> exclusiveMaximum</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.3.p.1">The value of "exclusiveMaximum" MUST be number, representing an exclusive upper limit for a numeric instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.3.p.2">If the instance is a number, then the instance is valid only if it has a value strictly less than (not equal to) "exclusiveMaximum".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2.4">6.2.4.</a> minimum</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.4.p.1">The value of "minimum" MUST be a number, representing an inclusive lower limit for a numeric instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.4.p.2">If the instance is a number, then this keyword validates only if the instance is greater than or exactly equal to "minimum".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2.5">6.2.5.</a> exclusiveMinimum</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.5.p.1">The value of "exclusiveMinimum" MUST be number, representing an exclusive lower limit for a numeric instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.5.p.2">If the instance is a number, then the instance is valid only if it has a value strictly greater than (not equal to) "exclusiveMinimum".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.3">6.3.</a> <a href="#string" id="string">Validation Keywords for Strings</a>
+</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.3.1">6.3.1.</a> maxLength</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.1.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.</p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.1.p.2">A string instance is valid against this keyword if its length is less than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.1.p.3">The length of a string instance is defined as the number of its characters as defined by <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC 8259</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.3.2">6.3.2.</a> minLength</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.2.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.2.p.2">A string instance is valid against this keyword if its length is greater than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.2.p.3">The length of a string instance is defined as the number of its characters as defined by <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC 8259</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.2.p.4">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of 0.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.3.3">6.3.3.</a> <a href="#pattern" id="pattern">pattern</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.3.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a string. This string SHOULD be a valid regular expression, according to the ECMA 262 regular expression dialect.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.3.p.2">A string instance is considered valid if the regular expression matches the instance successfully. Recall: regular expressions are not implicitly anchored.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4">6.4.</a> Validation Keywords for Arrays</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4.1">6.4.1.</a> maxItems</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.1.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.1.p.2">An array instance is valid against "maxItems" if its size is less than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4.2">6.4.2.</a> minItems</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.2.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.2.p.2">An array instance is valid against "minItems" if its size is greater than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.2.p.3">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of 0.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4.3">6.4.3.</a> uniqueItems</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.3.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a boolean.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.3.p.2">If this keyword has boolean value false, the instance validates successfully. If it has boolean value true, the instance validates successfully if all of its elements are unique.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.3.p.3">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of false.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4.4">6.4.4.</a> maxContains</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.4.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.4.p.2">An array instance is valid against "maxContains" if the number of elements that are valid against the schema for <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">"contains"</a> is less than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.4.p.3">If "contains" is not present within the same schema object, then this keyword has no effect.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4.5">6.4.5.</a> minContains</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.5.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.5.p.2">An array instance is valid against "minContains" if the number of elements that are valid against the schema for <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">"contains"</a> is greater than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.5.p.3">A value of 0 is allowed, but is only useful for setting a range of occurrences from 0 to the value of "maxContains".  A value of 0 with no "maxContains" causes "contains" to always pass validation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.5.p.4">If "contains" is not present within the same schema object, then this keyword has no effect.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.5.p.5">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of 1.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5">6.5.</a> Validation Keywords for Objects</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5.1">6.5.1.</a> maxProperties</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.1.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.1.p.2">An object instance is valid against "maxProperties" if its number of properties is less than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5.2">6.5.2.</a> minProperties</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.2.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.2.p.2">An object instance is valid against "minProperties" if its number of properties is greater than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.2.p.3">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of 0.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5.3">6.5.3.</a> required</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be an array.  Elements of this array, if any, MUST be strings, and MUST be unique.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.2">An object instance is valid against this keyword if every item in the array is the name of a property in the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.3">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty array.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5.4">6.5.4.</a> dependentRequired</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.4.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be an object.  Properties in this object, if any, MUST be arrays.  Elements in each array, if any, MUST be strings, and MUST be unique.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.4.p.2">This keyword specifies properties that are required if a specific other property is present.  Their requirement is dependent on the presence of the other property.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.4.p.3">Validation succeeds if, for each name that appears in both the instance and as a name within this keyword's value, every item in the corresponding array is also the name of a property in the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.4.p.4">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty object.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7">7.</a> <a href="#format" id="format">A Vocabulary for Semantic Content With "format"</a>
+</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.1">7.1.</a> Foreword</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.1">Structural validation alone may be insufficient to allow an application to correctly utilize certain values.  The "format" annotation keyword is defined to allow schema authors to convey semantic information for a fixed subset of values which are accurately described by authoritative resources, be they RFCs or other external specifications.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.2">Implementations MAY treat "format" as an assertion in addition to an annotation, and attempt to validate the value's conformance to the specified semantics.  See the Implementation Requirements below for details.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.3">The value of this keyword is called a format attribute. It MUST be a string. A format attribute can generally only validate a given set of instance types. If the type of the instance to validate is not in this set, validation for this format attribute and instance SHOULD succeed.  All format attributes defined in this section apply to strings, but a format attribute can be specified to apply to any instance types defined in the data model defined in the <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">core JSON Schema.</a> <a id="CREF1" class="info">[CREF1]<span class="info">Note that the "type" keyword in this specification defines an "integer" type which is not part of the data model.  Therefore a format attribute can be limited to numbers, but not specifically to integers.  However, a numeric format can be used alongside the "type" keyword with a value of "integer", or could be explicitly defined to always pass if the number is not an integer, which produces essentially the same behavior as only applying to integers.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.4">Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" SHOULD be considered to utilize this vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of false.  See the Implementation Requirements below for details.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.5">The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Format vocabulary, is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/format">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/format</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.6">The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/format">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/format</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.2">7.2.</a> Implementation Requirements</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.1">The "format" keyword functions as an annotation, and optionally as an assertion.  <a id="CREF2" class="info">[CREF2]<span class="info">This is due to the keyword's history, and is not in line with current keyword design principles.</span></a>  In order to manage this ambiguity, the "format" keyword is defined in its own separate vocabulary, as noted above.  The true or false value of the vocabulary declaration governs the implementation requirements necessary to process a schema that uses "format", and the behaviors on which schema authors can rely.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.2.1">7.2.1.</a> As an annotation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.1.p.1">The value of format MUST be collected as an annotation, if the implementation supports annotation collection.  This enables application-level validation when schema validation is unavailable or inadequate.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.1.p.2">This requirement is not affected by the boolean value of the vocabulary declaration, nor by the configuration of "format"'s assertion behavior described in the next section.  <a id="CREF3" class="info">[CREF3]<span class="info">Requiring annotation collection even when the vocabulary is declared with a value of false is atypical, but necessary to ensure that the best practice of performing application-level validation is possible even when assertion evaluation is not implemented.  Since "format" has always been a part of this specification, requiring implementations to be aware of it even with a false vocabulary declaration is deemed to not be a burden.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.2.2">7.2.2.</a> As an assertion</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.2.p.1">Regardless of the boolean value of the vocabulary declaration, an implementation that can evaluate "format" as an assertion MUST provide options to enable and disable such evaluation.  The assertion evaluation behavior when the option is not explicitly specified depends on the vocabulary declaration's boolean value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.2.p.2">When implementing this entire specification, this vocabulary MUST be supported with a value of false (but see details below), and MAY be supported with a value of true.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.2.p.3">When the vocabulary is declared with a value of false, an implementation: <a id="CREF4" class="info">[CREF4]<span class="info">This matches the current reality of implementations, which provide widely varying levels of validation, including no validation at all, for some or all format attributes.  It is also designed to encourage relying only on the annotation behavior and performing semantic validation in the application, which is the recommended best practice.  </span></a> </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>MUST NOT evaluate "format" as an assertion unless it is explicitly configured to do so; </li>
+<li>SHOULD provide an implementation-specific best effort validation for each format attribute defined below; </li>
+<li>MAY choose to implement validation of any or all format attributes as a no-op by always producing a validation result of true; </li>
+<li>SHOULD document its level of support for validation.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.2.p.4">When the vocabulary is declared with a value of true, an implementation that supports this form of the vocabulary: <a id="CREF5" class="info">[CREF5]<span class="info">The expectation is that for simple formats such as date-time, syntactic validation will be thorough.  For a complex format such as email addresses, which are the amalgamation of various standards and numerous adjustments over time, with obscure and/or obsolete rules that may or may not be restricted by other applications making use of the value, a minimal validation is sufficient.  For example, an instance string that does not contain an "@" is clearly not a valid email address, and an "email" or "hostname" containing characters outside of 7-bit ASCII is likewise clearly invalid.  </span></a> </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>MUST evaluate "format" as an assertion unless it is explicitly configured not to do so; </li>
+<li>MUST implement syntactic validation for all format attributes defined in this specification, and for any additional format attributes that it recognizes, such that there exist possible instance values of the correct type that will fail validation.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> The requirement for minimal validation of format attributes is intentionally vague and permissive, due to the complexity involved in many of the attributes.  Note in particular that the requirement is limited to syntactic checking; it is not to be expected that an implementation would send an email, attempt to connect to a URL, or otherwise check the existence of an entity identified by a format instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.2.p.5">It is RECOMMENDED that implementations use a common parsing library for each format, or a well-known regular expression.  Implementations SHOULD clearly document how and to what degree each format attribute is validated.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.2.p.6">The <a href="#meta-schema" class="xref">standard core and validation meta-schema</a> includes this vocabulary in its "$vocabulary" keyword with a value of false, since by default implementations are not required to support this keyword as an assertion.  Supporting the format vocabulary with a value of true is understood to greatly increase code size and in some cases execution time, and will not be appropriate for all implementations.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.2.3">7.2.3.</a> Custom format attributes</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.3.p.1">Implementations MAY support custom format attributes. Save for agreement between parties, schema authors SHALL NOT expect a peer implementation to support such custom format attributes.  An implementation MUST NOT fail validation or cease processing due to an unknown format attribute.  When treating "format" as an annotation, implementations SHOULD collect both known and unknown format attribute values.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.3.p.2">Vocabularies do not support specifically declaring different value sets for keywords.  Due to this limitation, and the historically uneven implementation of this keyword, it is RECOMMENDED to define additional keywords in a custom vocabulary rather than additional format attributes if interoperability is desired.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3">7.3.</a> Defined Formats</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.1">7.3.1.</a> Dates, Times, and Duration</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.1.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.1.p.2">Date and time format names are derived from <a href="#RFC3339" class="xref">RFC 3339, section 5.6</a>.  The duration format is from the ISO 8601 ABNF as given in Appendix A of RFC 3339.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.1.p.3">Implementations supporting formats SHOULD implement support for the following attributes: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>date-time:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid representation according to the "date-time" production.  </dd>
+<dt>date:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid representation according to the "full-date" production.  </dd>
+<dt>time:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid representation according to the "full-time" production.  </dd>
+<dt>duration:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid representation according to the "duration" production.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.1.p.4">Implementations MAY support additional attributes using the other production names defined in that section.  If "full-date" or "full-time" are implemented, the corresponding short form ("date" or "time" respectively) MUST be implemented, and MUST behave identically.  Implementations SHOULD NOT define extension attributes with any name matching an RFC 3339 production unless it validates according to the rules of that production.  <a id="CREF6" class="info">[CREF6]<span class="info">There is not currently consensus on the need for supporting all RFC 3339 formats, so this approach of reserving the namespace will encourage experimentation without committing to the entire set.  Either the format implementation requirements will become more flexible in general, or these will likely either be promoted to fully specified attributes or dropped.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.2">7.3.2.</a> Email Addresses</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.2.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.2.p.2">A string instance is valid against these attributes if it is a valid Internet email address as follows: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>email:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">As defined by <a href="#RFC5322" class="xref">RFC 5322, section 3.4.1</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>idn-email:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">As defined by <a href="#RFC6531" class="xref">RFC 6531</a> </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> Note that all strings valid against the "email" attribute are also valid against the "idn-email" attribute.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.3">7.3.3.</a> Hostnames</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.3.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.3.p.2">A string instance is valid against these attributes if it is a valid representation for an Internet hostname as follows: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>hostname:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">As defined by <a href="#RFC1123" class="xref">RFC 1123, section 2.1</a>, including host names produced using the Punycode algorithm specified in <a href="#RFC5891" class="xref">RFC 5891, section 4.4</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>idn-hostname:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">As defined by either RFC 1123 as for hostname, or an internationalized hostname as defined by <a href="#RFC5890" class="xref">RFC 5890, section 2.3.2.3</a>.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> Note that all strings valid against the "hostname" attribute are also valid against the "idn-hostname" attribute.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.4">7.3.4.</a> IP Addresses</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.4.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.4.p.2">A string instance is valid against these attributes if it is a valid representation of an IP address as follows: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>ipv4:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">An IPv4 address according to the "dotted-quad" ABNF syntax as defined in <a href="#RFC2673" class="xref">RFC 2673, section 3.2</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>ipv6:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">An IPv6 address as defined in <a href="#RFC4291" class="xref">RFC 4291, section 2.2</a>.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.5">7.3.5.</a> Resource Identifiers</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.5.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p></p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>uri:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid URI, according to <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">[RFC3986]</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>uri-reference:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid URI Reference (either a URI or a relative-reference), according to <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">[RFC3986]</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>iri:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid IRI, according to <a href="#RFC3987" class="xref">[RFC3987]</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>iri-reference:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid IRI Reference (either an IRI or a relative-reference), according to <a href="#RFC3987" class="xref">[RFC3987]</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>uuid:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid string representation of a UUID, according to <a href="#RFC4122" class="xref">[RFC4122]</a>.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.5.p.3">Note that all valid URIs are valid IRIs, and all valid URI References are also valid IRI References.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.5.p.4">Note also that the "uuid" format is for plain UUIDs, not UUIDs in URNs.  An example is "f81d4fae-7dec-11d0-a765-00a0c91e6bf6".  For UUIDs as URNs, use the "uri" format, with a "pattern" regular expression of "^urn:uuid:" to indicate the URI scheme and URN namespace.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.6">7.3.6.</a> uri-template</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.6.p.1">This attribute applies to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.6.p.2">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid URI Template (of any level), according to <a href="#RFC6570" class="xref">[RFC6570]</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.6.p.3">Note that URI Templates may be used for IRIs; there is no separate IRI Template specification.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.7">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.7">7.3.7.</a> JSON Pointers</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.7.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p></p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>json-pointer:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid JSON string representation of a JSON Pointer, according to <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901, section 5</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>relative-json-pointer:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid <a href="#relative-json-pointer" class="xref">Relative JSON Pointer</a>.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> To allow for both absolute and relative JSON Pointers, use "anyOf" or "oneOf" to indicate support for either format.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.8">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.8">7.3.8.</a> regex</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.8.p.1">This attribute applies to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.8.p.2">A regular expression, which SHOULD be valid according to the <a href="#ecma262" class="xref">ECMA 262</a> regular expression dialect.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.8.p.3">Implementations that validate formats MUST accept at least the subset of ECMA 262 defined in the <a href="#regexInterop" class="xref">Regular Expressions</a> section of this specification, and SHOULD accept all valid ECMA 262 expressions.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8">8.</a> <a href="#content" id="content">A Vocabulary for the Contents of String-Encoded Data</a>
+</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1">8.1.</a> Foreword</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.1">Annotations defined in this section indicate that an instance contains non-JSON data encoded in a JSON string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.2">These properties provide additional information required to interpret JSON data as rich multimedia documents.  They describe the type of content, how it is encoded, and/or how it may be validated.  They do not function as validation assertions; a malformed string-encoded document MUST NOT cause the containing instance to be considered invalid.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.3">Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" SHOULD be considered to require this vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.4">The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Content vocabulary, is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/content">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/content</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.5">The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/content">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/content</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2">8.2.</a> Implementation Requirements</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.1">Due to security and performance concerns, as well as the open-ended nature of possible content types, implementations MUST NOT automatically decode, parse, and/or validate the string contents by default.  This additionally supports the use case of embedded documents intended for processing by a different consumer than that which processed the containing document.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.2">All keywords in this section apply only to strings, and have no effect on other data types.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.3">Implementations MAY offer the ability to decode, parse, and/or validate the string contents automatically.  However, it MUST NOT perform these operations by default, and MUST provide the validation result of each string-encoded document separately from the enclosing document.  This process SHOULD be equivalent to fully evaluating the instance against the original schema, followed by using the annotations to decode, parse, and/or validate each string-encoded document.  <a id="CREF7" class="info">[CREF7]<span class="info">For now, the exact mechanism of performing and returning parsed data and/or validation results from such an automatic decoding, parsing, and validating feature is left unspecified.  Should such a feature prove popular, it may be specified more thoroughly in a future draft.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.4">See also the <a href="#security" class="xref">Security Considerations</a> sections for possible vulnerabilities introduced by automatically processing the instance string according to these keywords.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.3">8.3.</a> contentEncoding</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.1">If the instance value is a string, this property defines that the string SHOULD be interpreted as binary data and decoded using the encoding named by this property.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.2">Possible values for this property are listed in <a href="#RFC2045" class="xref">RFC 2045, Sec 6.1</a> and <a href="#RFC4648" class="xref">RFC 4648</a>.  For "base64", which is defined in both RFCs, the definition in RFC 4648, which removes line length limitations, SHOULD be used, as various other specifications have mandated different lengths.  Note that line lengths within a string can be constrained using the <a href="#pattern" class="xref">"pattern"</a> keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.3">If this keyword is absent, but "contentMediaType" is present, this indicates that the media type could be encoded into UTF-8 like any other JSON string value, and does not require additional decoding.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.4">The value of this property MUST be a string.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.4">8.4.</a> contentMediaType</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.1">If the instance is a string, this property indicates the media type of the contents of the string.  If "contentEncoding" is present, this property describes the decoded string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.2">The value of this property MUST be a string, which MUST be a media type, as defined by <a href="#RFC2046" class="xref">RFC 2046</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.5">8.5.</a> contentSchema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.5.p.1">If the instance is a string, and if "contentMediaType" is present, this property contains a schema which describes the structure of the string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.5.p.2">This keyword MAY be used with any media type that can be mapped into JSON Schema's data model.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.5.p.3">The value of this property SHOULD be ignored if "contentMediaType" is not present.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.6">8.6.</a> Example</h1>
+<p>Here is an example schema, illustrating the use of "contentEncoding" and "contentMediaType": </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": "string",
+    "contentEncoding": "base64",
+    "contentMediaType": "image/png"
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Instances described by this schema are expected to be strings, and their values should be interpretable as base64-encoded PNG images.  </p>
+<p>Another example: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": "string",
+    "contentMediaType": "text/html"
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Instances described by this schema are expected to be strings containing HTML, using whatever character set the JSON string was decoded into.  Per section 8.1 of <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC 8259</a>, outside of an entirely closed system, this MUST be UTF-8.  </p>
+<p>This example describes a JWT that is MACed using the HMAC SHA-256 algorithm, and requires the "iss" and "exp" fields in its claim set.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": "string",
+    "contentMediaType": "application/jwt",
+    "contentSchema": {
+        "type": "array",
+        "minItems": 2,
+        "items": [
+            {
+                "const": {
+                    "typ": "JWT",
+                    "alg": "HS256"
+                }
+            },
+            {
+                "type": "object",
+                "required": ["iss", "exp"],
+                "properties": {
+                    "iss": {"type": "string"},
+                    "exp": {"type": "integer"}
+                }
+            }
+        ]
+    }
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p>Note that "contentEncoding" does not appear.  While the "application/jwt" media type makes use of base64url encoding, that is defined by the media type, which determines how the JWT string is decoded into a list of two JSON data structures: first the header, and then the payload.  Since the JWT media type ensures that the JWT can be represented in a JSON string, there is no need for further encoding or decoding.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9">9.</a> A Vocabulary for Basic Meta-Data Annotations</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.1">These general-purpose annotation keywords provide commonly used information for documentation and user interface display purposes.  They are not intended to form a comprehensive set of features.  Rather, additional vocabularies can be defined for more complex annotation-based applications.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.2">Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" SHOULD be considered to require this vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.3">The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Meta-Data vocabulary, is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/meta-data">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/vocab/meta-data</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.4">The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/meta-data">https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/meta-data</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.1">9.1.</a> "title" and "description"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.1">The value of both of these keywords MUST be a string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.2">Both of these keywords can be used to decorate a user interface with information about the data produced by this user interface. A title will preferably be short, whereas a description will provide explanation about the purpose of the instance described by this schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2">9.2.</a> "default"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.1">There are no restrictions placed on the value of this keyword.  When multiple occurrences of this keyword are applicable to a single sub-instance, implementations SHOULD remove duplicates.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.2">This keyword can be used to supply a default JSON value associated with a particular schema. It is RECOMMENDED that a default value be valid against the associated schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3">9.3.</a> "deprecated"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a boolean.  When multiple occurrences of this keyword are applicable to a single sub-instance, applications SHOULD consider the instance location to be deprecated if any occurrence specifies a true value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.2">If "deprecated" has a value of boolean true, it indicates that applications SHOULD refrain from usage of the declared property. It MAY mean the property is going to be removed in the future.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.3">A root schema containing "deprecated" with a value of true indicates that the entire resource being described MAY be removed in the future.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.4">When the "deprecated" keyword is applied to an item in an array by means of "items", if "items" is a single schema, the deprecation relates to the whole array, while if "items" is an array of schemas, the deprecation relates to the corrosponding item according to the subschemas position.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.5">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of false.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.4">9.4.</a> "readOnly" and "writeOnly"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.1">The value of these keywords MUST be a boolean.  When multiple occurrences of these keywords are applicable to a single sub-instance, the resulting behavior SHOULD be as for a true value if any occurrence specifies a true value, and SHOULD be as for a false value otherwise.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.2">If "readOnly" has a value of boolean true, it indicates that the value of the instance is managed exclusively by the owning authority, and attempts by an application to modify the value of this property are expected to be ignored or rejected by that owning authority.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.3">An instance document that is marked as "readOnly for the entire document MAY be ignored if sent to the owning authority, or MAY result in an error, at the authority's discretion.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.4">If "writeOnly" has a value of boolean true, it indicates that the value is never present when the instance is retrieved from the owning authority.  It can be present when sent to the owning authority to update or create the document (or the resource it represents), but it will not be included in any updated or newly created version of the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.5">An instance document that is marked as "writeOnly" for the entire document MAY be returned as a blank document of some sort, or MAY produce an error upon retrieval, or have the retrieval request ignored, at the authority's discretion.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.6">For example, "readOnly" would be used to mark a database-generated serial number as read-only, while "writeOnly" would be used to mark a password input field.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.7">These keywords can be used to assist in user interface instance generation.  In particular, an application MAY choose to use a widget that hides input values as they are typed for write-only fields.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.8">Omitting these keywords has the same behavior as values of false.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.5">9.5.</a> "examples"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be an array.  There are no restrictions placed on the values within the array.  When multiple occurrences of this keyword are applicable to a single sub-instance, implementations MUST provide a flat array of all values rather than an array of arrays.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.2">This keyword can be used to provide sample JSON values associated with a particular schema, for the purpose of illustrating usage.  It is RECOMMENDED that these values be valid against the associated schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.3">Implementations MAY use the value(s) of "default", if present, as an additional example.  If "examples" is absent, "default" MAY still be used in this manner.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10">10.</a> <a href="#security" id="security">Security Considerations</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.1">JSON Schema validation defines a vocabulary for JSON Schema core and concerns all the security considerations listed there.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.2">JSON Schema validation allows the use of Regular Expressions, which have numerous different (often incompatible) implementations.  Some implementations allow the embedding of arbitrary code, which is outside the scope of JSON Schema and MUST NOT be permitted.  Regular expressions can often also be crafted to be extremely expensive to compute (with so-called "catastrophic backtracking"), resulting in a denial-of-service attack.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.3">Implementations that support validating or otherwise evaluating instance string data based on "contentEncoding" and/or "contentMediaType" are at risk of evaluating data in an unsafe way based on misleading information.  Applications can mitigate this risk by only performing such processing when a relationship between the schema and instance is established (e.g., they share the same authority).  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.4">Processing a media type or encoding is subject to the security considerations of that media type or encoding.  For example, the security considerations of <a href="#RFC4329" class="xref">RFC 4329 Scripting Media Types</a> apply when processing JavaScript or ECMAScript encoded within a JSON string.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.references">
+<a href="#rfc.references">11.</a> References</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.1">
+<a href="#rfc.references.1">11.1.</a> Normative References</h1>
+<table><tbody>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="ecma262">[ecma262]</b></td>
+<td class="top">"<a href="http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/Ecma-262.pdf">ECMA 262 specification</a>"</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="json-schema">[json-schema]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Wright, A.</a> and <a>H. Andrews</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-02">JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-json-schema-02, November 2017.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="relative-json-pointer">[relative-json-pointer]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Luff, G.</a> and <a title="Cloudflare, Inc.">H. Andrews</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01">Relative JSON Pointers</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01, November 2017.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC1123">[RFC1123]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Braden, R.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1123">Requirements for Internet Hosts - Application and Support</a>", STD 3, RFC 1123, DOI 10.17487/RFC1123, October 1989.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC2045">[RFC2045]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Freed, N.</a> and <a>N. Borenstein</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2045">Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies</a>", RFC 2045, DOI 10.17487/RFC2045, November 1996.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC2046">[RFC2046]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Freed, N.</a> and <a>N. Borenstein</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2046">Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types</a>", RFC 2046, DOI 10.17487/RFC2046, November 1996.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bradner, S.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</a>", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC2673">[RFC2673]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Crawford, M.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2673">Binary Labels in the Domain Name System</a>", RFC 2673, DOI 10.17487/RFC2673, August 1999.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC3339">[RFC3339]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Klyne, G.</a> and <a>C. Newman</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3339">Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps</a>", RFC 3339, DOI 10.17487/RFC3339, July 2002.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC3986">[RFC3986]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Berners-Lee, T.</a>, <a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>L. Masinter</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986">Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax</a>", STD 66, RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC3987">[RFC3987]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Duerst, M.</a> and <a>M. Suignard</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3987">Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs)</a>", RFC 3987, DOI 10.17487/RFC3987, January 2005.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC4122">[RFC4122]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Leach, P.</a>, <a>Mealling, M.</a> and <a>R. Salz</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4122">A Universally Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace</a>", RFC 4122, DOI 10.17487/RFC4122, July 2005.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC4291">[RFC4291]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Hinden, R.</a> and <a>S. Deering</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4291">IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture</a>", RFC 4291, DOI 10.17487/RFC4291, February 2006.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC4648">[RFC4648]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Josefsson, S.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4648">The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data Encodings</a>", RFC 4648, DOI 10.17487/RFC4648, October 2006.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC5322">[RFC5322]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Resnick, P.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322">Internet Message Format</a>", RFC 5322, DOI 10.17487/RFC5322, October 2008.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC5890">[RFC5890]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Klensin, J.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5890">Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework</a>", RFC 5890, DOI 10.17487/RFC5890, August 2010.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC5891">[RFC5891]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Klensin, J.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5891">Internationalized Domain Names in Applications (IDNA): Protocol</a>", RFC 5891, DOI 10.17487/RFC5891, August 2010.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6531">[RFC6531]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Yao, J.</a> and <a>W. Mao</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6531">SMTP Extension for Internationalized Email</a>", RFC 6531, DOI 10.17487/RFC6531, February 2012.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6570">[RFC6570]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Gregorio, J.</a>, <a>Fielding, R.</a>, <a>Hadley, M.</a>, <a>Nottingham, M.</a> and <a>D. Orchard</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6570">URI Template</a>", RFC 6570, DOI 10.17487/RFC6570, March 2012.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6901">[RFC6901]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bryan, P.</a>, <a>Zyp, K.</a> and <a>M. Nottingham</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6901">JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Pointer</a>", RFC 6901, DOI 10.17487/RFC6901, April 2013.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC8259">[RFC8259]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bray, T.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8259">The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format</a>", STD 90, RFC 8259, DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017.</td>
+</tr>
+</tbody></table>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.2">
+<a href="#rfc.references.2">11.2.</a> Informative References</h1>
+<table><tbody><tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC4329">[RFC4329]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Hoehrmann, B.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4329">Scripting Media Types</a>", RFC 4329, DOI 10.17487/RFC4329, April 2006.</td>
+</tr></tbody></table>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Appendix A.</a> Keywords Moved from Validation to Core</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.1">Several keywords have been moved from this document into the <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">Core Specification</a> as of this draft, in some cases with re-naming or other changes.  This affects the following former validation keywords: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>"definitions"</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">Renamed to "$defs" to match "$ref" and be shorter to type.  Schema vocabulary authors SHOULD NOT define a "definitions" keyword with different behavior in order to avoid invalidating schemas that still use the older name.  While "definitions" is absent in the single-vocabulary meta-schemas referenced by this document, it remains present in the default meta-schema, and implementations SHOULD assume that "$defs" and "definitions" have the same behavior when that meta-schema is used.  </dd>
+<dt>"allOf", "anyOf", "oneOf", "not", "if", "then", "else",                                  "items", "additionalItems", "contains", "propertyNames",                                  "properties", "patternProperties", "additionalProperties"</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">All of these keywords apply subschemas to the instance and combine their results, without asserting any conditions of their own.  Without assertion keywords, these applicators can only cause assertion failures by using the false boolean schema, or by inverting the result of the true boolean schema (or equivalent schema objects).  For this reason, they are better defined as a generic mechanism on which validation, hyper-schema, and extension vocabularies can all be based.  </dd>
+<dt>"dependencies"</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">This keyword had two different modes of behavior, which made it relatively challenging to implement and reason about.  The schema form has been moved to Core and renamed to "dependentSchemas", as part of the applicator vocabulary.  It is analogous to "properties", except that instead of applying its subschema to the property value, it applies it to the object containing the property.  The property name array form is retained here and renamed to "dependentRequired", as it is an assertion which is a shortcut for the conditional use of the "required" assertion keyword.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.B">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.B">Appendix B.</a> Acknowledgments</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.p.1">Thanks to Gary Court, Francis Galiegue, Kris Zyp, and Geraint Luff for their work on the initial drafts of JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.p.2">Thanks to Jason Desrosiers, Daniel Perrett, Erik Wilde, Ben Hutton, Evgeny Poberezkin, Brad Bowman, Gowry Sankar, Donald Pipowitch, Dave Finlay, and Denis Laxalde for their submissions and patches to the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.C">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.C">Appendix C.</a> ChangeLog</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF8" class="info">[CREF8]<span class="info">This section to be removed before leaving Internet-Draft status.</span></a> </p>
+<p></p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-02</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Grouped keywords into formal vocabuarlies</li>
+<li>Update "format" implementation requirements in terms of vocabularies</li>
+<li>By default, "format" MUST NOT be validated, although validation can be enabled</li>
+<li>A vocabulary declaration can be used to require "format" validation</li>
+<li>Moved "definitions" to the core spec as "$defs"</li>
+<li>Moved applicator keywords to the core spec</li>
+<li>Renamed the array form of "dependencies" to "dependentRequired", moved the schema form to the core spec</li>
+<li>Specified all "content*" keywords as annotations, not assertions</li>
+<li>Added "contentSchema" to allow applying a schema to a string-encoded document</li>
+<li>Also allow RFC 4648 encodings in "contentEncoding"</li>
+<li>Added "minContains" and "maxContains"</li>
+<li>Update RFC reference for "hostname" and "idn-hostname"</li>
+<li>Add "uuid" and "duration" formats</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>This draft is purely a clarification with no functional changes</li>
+<li>Provided the general principle behind ignoring annotations under "not" and similar cases</li>
+<li>Clarified "if"/"then"/"else" validation interactions</li>
+<li>Clarified "if"/"then"/"else" behavior for annotation</li>
+<li>Minor formatting and cross-referencing improvements</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Added "if"/"then"/"else"</li>
+<li>Classify keywords as assertions or annotations per the core spec</li>
+<li>Warn of possibly removing "dependencies" in the future</li>
+<li>Grouped validation keywords into sub-sections for readability</li>
+<li>Moved "readOnly" from hyper-schema to validation meta-data</li>
+<li>Added "writeOnly"</li>
+<li>Added string-encoded media section, with former hyper-schema "media" keywords</li>
+<li>Restored "regex" format (removal was unintentional)</li>
+<li>Added "date" and "time" formats, and reserved additional RFC 3339 format names</li>
+<li>I18N formats: "iri", "iri-reference", "idn-hostname", "idn-email"</li>
+<li>Clarify that "json-pointer" format means string encoding, not URI fragment</li>
+<li>Fixed typo that inverted the meaning of "minimum" and "exclusiveMinimum"</li>
+<li>Move format syntax references into Normative References</li>
+<li>JSON is a normative requirement</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-wright-json-schema-validation-01</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Standardized on hyphenated format names with full words ("uriref" becomes "uri-reference")</li>
+<li>Add the formats "uri-template" and "json-pointer"</li>
+<li>Changed "exclusiveMaximum"/"exclusiveMinimum" from boolean modifiers of "maximum"/"minimum" to independent numeric fields.</li>
+<li>Split the additionalItems/items into two sections</li>
+<li>Reworked properties/patternProperties/additionalProperties definition</li>
+<li>Added "examples" keyword</li>
+<li>Added "contains" keyword</li>
+<li>Allow empty "required" and "dependencies" arrays</li>
+<li>Fixed "type" reference to primitive types</li>
+<li>Added "const" keyword</li>
+<li>Added "propertyNames" keyword</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-wright-json-schema-validation-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Added additional security considerations</li>
+<li>Removed reference to "latest version" meta-schema, use numbered version instead</li>
+<li>Rephrased many keyword definitions for brevity</li>
+<li>Added "uriref" format that also allows relative URI references</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-fge-json-schema-validation-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Initial draft.</li>
+<li>Salvaged from draft v3.</li>
+<li>Redefine the "required" keyword.</li>
+<li>Remove "extends", "disallow"</li>
+<li>Add "anyOf", "allOf", "oneOf", "not", "definitions", "minProperties", "maxProperties".</li>
+<li>"dependencies" member values can no longer be single strings; at least one element is required in a property dependency array.</li>
+<li>Rename "divisibleBy" to "multipleOf".</li>
+<li>"type" arrays can no longer have schemas; remove "any" as a possible value.</li>
+<li>Rework the "format" section; make support optional.</li>
+<li>"format": remove attributes "phone", "style", "color"; rename "ip-address" to "ipv4"; add references for all attributes.</li>
+<li>Provide algorithms to calculate schema(s) for array/object instances.</li>
+<li>Add interoperability considerations.</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.authors"><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a></h1>
+<div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Austin Wright</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Wright</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:aaa@bzfx.net">aaa@bzfx.net</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Henry Andrews</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Andrews</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:andrews_henry@yahoo.com">andrews_henry@yahoo.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Ben Hutton</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Hutton</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline">Wellcome Sanger Institute</span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:bh7@sanger.ac.uk">bh7@sanger.ac.uk</a></span>
+
+<span class="vcardline">URI: <a href="https://jsonschema.dev">https://jsonschema.dev</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/links b/draft/2019-09/links
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..aacc1535
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/links
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../_includes/draft/2019-09/links.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/meta/applicator b/draft/2019-09/meta/applicator
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..5702a1ae
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/meta/applicator
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2019-09/meta/applicator.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/meta/content b/draft/2019-09/meta/content
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..04968fb0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/meta/content
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2019-09/meta/content.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/meta/core b/draft/2019-09/meta/core
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..5ca6d983
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/meta/core
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2019-09/meta/core.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/meta/format b/draft/2019-09/meta/format
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..be19503e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/meta/format
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2019-09/meta/format.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/meta/hyper-schema b/draft/2019-09/meta/hyper-schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..72aea96a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/meta/hyper-schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2019-09/meta/hyper-schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/meta/meta-data b/draft/2019-09/meta/meta-data
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..1165b3a3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/meta/meta-data
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2019-09/meta/meta-data.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/meta/validation b/draft/2019-09/meta/validation
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..810c056b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/meta/validation
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2019-09/meta/validation.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/output/hyper-schema b/draft/2019-09/output/hyper-schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..9a06f839
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/output/hyper-schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2019-09/output/hyper-schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/output/schema b/draft/2019-09/output/schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..0c2f2725
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/output/schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2019-09/output/schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/output/verbose-example b/draft/2019-09/output/verbose-example
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..36757e1e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/output/verbose-example
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2019-09/output/verbose-example.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/relative-json-pointer.html b/draft/2019-09/relative-json-pointer.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..5710a004
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/relative-json-pointer.html
@@ -0,0 +1,687 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
+  "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
+<head profile="http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/">
+  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" />
+
+  <title>Relative JSON Pointers</title>
+
+  <style type="text/css" title="Xml2Rfc (sans serif)">
+  /*<![CDATA[*/
+	  a {
+	  text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+      /* info code from SantaKlauss at http://www.madaboutstyle.com/tooltip2.html */
+      a.info {
+          /* This is the key. */
+          position: relative;
+          z-index: 24;
+          text-decoration: none;
+      }
+      a.info:hover {
+          z-index: 25;
+          color: #FFF; background-color: #900;
+      }
+      a.info span { display: none; }
+      a.info:hover span.info {
+          /* The span will display just on :hover state. */
+          display: block;
+          position: absolute;
+          font-size: smaller;
+          top: 2em; left: -5em; width: 15em;
+          padding: 2px; border: 1px solid #333;
+          color: #900; background-color: #EEE;
+          text-align: left;
+      }
+	  a.smpl {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  a:hover {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  a:active {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  address {
+	  margin-top: 1em;
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  body {
+	  color: black;
+	  font-family: verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  max-width: 55em;
+	  
+	  }
+	  cite {
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  dd {
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  dl {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.empty {
+	  list-style-type: none;
+	  }
+	  ul.empty li {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  dl p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  dt {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  h1 {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h1.np {
+	  page-break-before: always;
+	  }
+	  h1 a {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  }
+	  h2 {
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 15pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h2 a, h3 a, h4 a, h5 a, h6 a {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  img {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  }
+	  li {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  p {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  pre {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  background-color: lightyellow;
+	  padding: .25em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text2 {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f0f0f0;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.inline {
+	  background-color: white;
+	  padding: 0em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.drawing {
+	  border-style: solid;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  padding: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table.tt {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt td {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full td {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt th {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full th {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers th {
+	  border-style: none none inset none;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.left {
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.right {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.center {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  caption {
+	  caption-side: bottom;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+	  border-spacing: 1px;
+	  width: 95%;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.top {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  td.topnowrap {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap; 
+	  }
+	  table.header td {
+	  background-color: gray;
+	  width: 50%;
+	  }
+	  table.header a {
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.reference {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap;
+	  padding-right: 1em;
+	  }
+	  thead {
+	  display:table-header-group;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc, ul.toc ul {
+	  list-style: none;
+	  margin-left: 1.5em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  padding-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li {
+	  line-height: 150%;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li li {
+	  line-height: normal;
+	  font-weight: normal;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  li.excluded {
+	  font-size: 0pt;
+	  }
+	  ul p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	
+	  .comment {
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	  .center {
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .error {
+	  color: red;
+	  font-style: italic;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .figure {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  }
+	  .filename {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .fn {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .hidden {
+	  display: none;
+	  }
+	  .left {
+	  text-align: left;
+	  }
+	  .right {
+	  text-align: right;
+	  }
+	  .title {
+	  color: #990000;
+	  font-size: 18pt;
+	  line-height: 18pt;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  margin-top: 36pt;
+	  }
+	  .vcardline {
+	  display: block;
+	  }
+	  .warning {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	
+	
+	  @media print {
+	  .noprint {
+		display: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  a {
+		color: black;
+		text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+		width: 90%;
+	  }
+	
+	  td.header {
+		width: 50%;
+		color: black;
+		background-color: white;
+		vertical-align: top;
+		font-size: 12pt;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.toc a::after {
+		content: leader('.') target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.ind li li a {
+		content: target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  .print2col {
+		column-count: 2;
+		-moz-column-count: 2;
+		column-fill: auto;
+	  }
+	  }
+	
+	  @page {
+	  @top-left {
+		   content: "Internet-Draft"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-right {
+		   content: "December 2010"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-center {
+		   content: "Abbreviated Title";
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-left {
+		   content: "Doe"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-center {
+		   content: "Expires June 2011"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-right {
+		   content: "[Page " counter(page) "]"; 
+	  } 
+	  }
+	
+	  @page:first { 
+		@top-left {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-right {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-center {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+	  }
+  /*]]>*/
+  </style>
+
+  <link href="#rfc.toc" rel="Contents">
+<link href="#rfc.section.1" rel="Chapter" title="1 Introduction">
+<link href="#rfc.section.2" rel="Chapter" title="2 Conventions and Terminology">
+<link href="#rfc.section.3" rel="Chapter" title="3 Syntax">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4" rel="Chapter" title="4 Evaluation">
+<link href="#rfc.section.5" rel="Chapter" title="5 JSON String Representation">
+<link href="#rfc.section.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="5.1 Examples">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6" rel="Chapter" title="6 Non-use in URI Fragment Identifiers">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7" rel="Chapter" title="7 Error Handling">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8" rel="Chapter" title="8 Relationship to JSON Pointer">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9" rel="Chapter" title="9 Acknowledgements">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10" rel="Chapter" title="10 Security Considerations">
+<link href="#rfc.references" rel="Chapter" title="11 References">
+<link href="#rfc.references.1" rel="Chapter" title="11.1 Normative References">
+<link href="#rfc.references.2" rel="Chapter" title="11.2 Informative References">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A" rel="Chapter" title="A ChangeLog">
+<link href="#rfc.authors" rel="Chapter">
+
+
+  <meta name="generator" content="xml2rfc version 2.20.1 - https://tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc" />
+  <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" />
+
+  <meta name="dct.creator" content="Luff, G. and H. Andrews, Ed." />
+  <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-02" />
+  <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2019-17" />
+  <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Pointer is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines an extension to the JSON Pointer syntax, allowing relative locations from within the document.  " />
+  <meta name="description" content="JSON Pointer is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines an extension to the JSON Pointer syntax, allowing relative locations from within the document.  " />
+
+</head>
+
+<body>
+
+  <table class="header">
+    <tbody>
+    
+    	<tr>
+<td class="left">Internet Engineering Task Force</td>
+<td class="right">G. Luff</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
+<td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Intended status: Informational</td>
+<td class="right">H. Andrews, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Expires: March 20, 2020</td>
+<td class="right">September 17, 2019</td>
+</tr>
+
+    	
+    </tbody>
+  </table>
+
+  <p class="title">Relative JSON Pointers<br />
+  <span class="filename">draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-02</span></p>
+  
+  <h1 id="rfc.abstract"><a href="#rfc.abstract">Abstract</a></h1>
+<p>JSON Pointer is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines an extension to the JSON Pointer syntax, allowing relative locations from within the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.status"><a href="#rfc.status">Status of This Memo</a></h1>
+<p>This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.</p>
+<p>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/.</p>
+<p>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."</p>
+<p>This Internet-Draft will expire on March 20, 2020.</p>
+<h1 id="rfc.copyrightnotice"><a href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a></h1>
+<p>Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors.  All rights reserved.</p>
+<p>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.</p>
+
+  
+  <hr class="noprint" />
+  <h1 class="np" id="rfc.toc"><a href="#rfc.toc">Table of Contents</a></h1>
+  <ul class="toc">
+
+  	<li>1.   <a href="#rfc.section.1">Introduction</a>
+</li>
+<li>2.   <a href="#rfc.section.2">Conventions and Terminology</a>
+</li>
+<li>3.   <a href="#rfc.section.3">Syntax</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.   <a href="#rfc.section.4">Evaluation</a>
+</li>
+<li>5.   <a href="#rfc.section.5">JSON String Representation</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.5.1">Examples</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6">Non-use in URI Fragment Identifiers</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7">Error Handling</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.   <a href="#rfc.section.8">Relationship to JSON Pointer</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.   <a href="#rfc.section.9">Acknowledgements</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.   <a href="#rfc.section.10">Security Considerations</a>
+</li>
+<li>11.   <a href="#rfc.references">References</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>11.1.   <a href="#rfc.references.1">Normative References</a>
+</li>
+<li>11.2.   <a href="#rfc.references.2">Informative References</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>Appendix A.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A">ChangeLog</a>
+</li>
+<li><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a>
+</li>
+
+
+  </ul>
+
+  <h1 id="rfc.section.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.1">1.</a> Introduction</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.1">JSON Pointer (<a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901</a>) is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines a related syntax allowing identification of relative locations from within the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.2">2.</a> Conventions and Terminology</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.1">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 <a href="#RFC2119" class="xref">RFC 2119</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.3">3.</a> Syntax</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.1">A Relative JSON Pointer is a Unicode string in UTF-8 encoding (see RFC 8259, <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">Section 8</a>), comprising a non-negative integer, followed by either a '#' (%x23) character or a JSON Pointer (<a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901</a>).  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.2">The separation between the integer prefix and the JSON Pointer will always be unambiguous, because a JSON Pointer must be either zero- length or start with a '/' (%x2F).  Similarly, a JSON Pointer will never be ambiguous with the '#'.  </p>
+<p>The ABNF syntax of a Relative JSON Pointer is: </p>
+<pre>
+
+   relative-json-pointer =  non-negative-integer &amp;lt;json-pointer&amp;gt;
+   relative-json-pointer =/ non-negative-integer "#"
+   non-negative-integer      =  %x30 / %x31-39 *( %x30-39 )
+           ; "0", or digits without a leading "0"
+
+                </pre>
+<p>where &lt;json-pointer&gt; follows the production defined in <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901, Section&#160;3</a> ("Syntax").  </p>
+<p></p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4">4.</a> Evaluation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.1">Evaluation of a Relative JSON Pointer begins with a reference to a value within a JSON document, and completes with either a value within that document, a string corresponding to an object member, or integer value representing an array index.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.2">Evaluation begins by processing the non-negative-integer prefix.  This can be found by taking the longest continuous sequence of decimal digits available, starting from the beginning of the string, taking the decimal numerical value.  If this value is more than zero, then the following steps are repeated that number of times: <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901, Section 4</a> ("Evaluation"), with the modification that the initial reference being used is the reference currently being held (which may not be root of the document).  </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>If the current referenced value is the root of the document, then evaluation fails (see below).  </li>
+<li>If the referenced value is an item within an array, then the new referenced value is that array.  </li>
+<li>If the referenced value is an object member within an object, then the new referenced value is that object.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> If the remainder of the Relative JSON Pointer is a JSON Pointer, then evaluation proceeds as per </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.3">Otherwise (when the remainder of the Relative JSON Pointer is the character '#'), the final result is determined as follows: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>If the current referenced value is the root of the document, then evaluation fails (see below).  </li>
+<li>If the referenced value is an item within an array, then the final evaluation result is the value's index position within the array.  </li>
+<li>If the referenced value is an object member within an object, then the new referenced value is the corresponding member name.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.5">5.</a> JSON String Representation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.1">The concerns surrounding JSON String representation of a Relative JSON Pointer are identical to those laid out in <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901, Section 5</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.5.1">5.1.</a> Examples</h1>
+<p>For example, given the JSON document: </p>
+<pre>
+
+                      {
+                         "foo": ["bar", "baz"],
+                         "highly": {
+                            "nested": {
+                               "objects": true
+                            }
+                         }
+                      }
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Starting from the value "baz" (inside "foo"), the following JSON strings evaluate to the accompanying values: </p>
+<pre>
+
+                  "0"                         "baz"
+                  "1/0"                       "bar"
+                  "2/highly/nested/objects"   true
+                  "0#"                        1
+                  "1#"                        "foo"
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Starting from the value {"objects":true} (corresponding to the member key "nested"), the following JSON strings evaluate to the accompanying values: </p>
+<pre>
+
+                "0/objects"                 true
+                "1/nested/objects"          true
+                "2/foo/0"                   "bar"
+                "0#"                        "nested"
+                "1#"                        "highly"
+
+                    </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6">6.</a> Non-use in URI Fragment Identifiers</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.1">Unlike a JSON Pointer, a Relative JSON Pointer can not be used in a URI fragment identifier.  Such fragments specify exact positions within a document, and therefore Relative JSON Pointers are not suitable.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7">7.</a> Error Handling</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.1">In the event of an error condition, evaluation of the JSON Pointer fails to complete.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.2">Evaluation may fail due to invalid syntax, or referencing a non- existent value.  This specification does not define how errors are handled.  An application of JSON Relative Pointer SHOULD specify the impact and handling of each type of error.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8">8.</a> Relationship to JSON Pointer</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.1">Relative JSON Pointers are intended as a companion to JSON Pointers.  Applications MUST specify the use of each syntax separately.  Defining either JSON Pointer or Relative JSON Pointer as an acceptable syntax does not imply that the other syntax is also acceptable.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9">9.</a> Acknowledgements</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.1">The language and structure of this specification are based heavily on <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">[RFC6901]</a>, sometimes quoting it outright.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.2">This draft remains primarily as written and published by Geraint Luff, with only minor subsequent alterations under new editorship.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10">10.</a> Security Considerations</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.1">Evaluation of a given Relative JSON Pointer is not guaranteed to reference an actual JSON value.  Applications using Relative JSON Pointer should anticipate this situation by defining how a pointer that does not resolve ought to be handled.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.2">As part of processing, a composite data structure may be assembled from multiple JSON documents (in part or in full).  In such cases, applications SHOULD ensure that a Relative JSON Pointer does not evaluate to a value outside the document for which is was written.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.3">Note that JSON pointers can contain the NUL (Unicode U+0000) character.  Care is needed not to misinterpret this character in programming languages that use NUL to mark the end of a string.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.references">
+<a href="#rfc.references">11.</a> References</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.1">
+<a href="#rfc.references.1">11.1.</a> Normative References</h1>
+<table><tbody>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bradner, S.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</a>", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6901">[RFC6901]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bryan, P.</a>, <a>Zyp, K.</a> and <a>M. Nottingham</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6901">JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Pointer</a>", RFC 6901, DOI 10.17487/RFC6901, April 2013.</td>
+</tr>
+</tbody></table>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.2">
+<a href="#rfc.references.2">11.2.</a> Informative References</h1>
+<table><tbody><tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC8259">[RFC8259]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bray, T.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8259">The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format</a>", STD 90, RFC 8259, DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017.</td>
+</tr></tbody></table>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Appendix A.</a> ChangeLog</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF1" class="info">[CREF1]<span class="info">This section to be removed before leaving Internet-Draft status.</span></a> </p>
+<p></p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-02</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul><li>Update to the latest JSON RFC</li></ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul><li>The initial number is "non-negative", not "positive"</li></ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Revived draft with identical wording and structure.</li>
+<li>Clarified how to use alongside JSON Pointer.</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-luff-relative-json-pointer-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul><li>Initial draft.</li></ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.authors"><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a></h1>
+<div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Geraint Luff</span> 
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Luff</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality">Cambridge</span>,  
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline">UK</span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:luffgd@gmail.com">luffgd@gmail.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Henry Andrews</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Andrews</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:andrews_henry@yahoo.com">andrews_henry@yahoo.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/release-notes.md b/draft/2019-09/release-notes.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..0583b94f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/release-notes.md
@@ -0,0 +1,164 @@
+---
+title: JSON Schema 2019-09 Release Notes
+layout: page
+---
+
+For the vast majority of schema authors, we hope that these changes are minimally disruptive.
+
+The most likely to be frustrating is that `format` is no longer treated as a validation assertion _by default_ (although it is still possible for an application or user to configure a validator to treat it as one).  We decided this was acceptable because many schema authors are already extremely frustrated by its inconsistent behavior.
+
+For implementors, there is a lot more to consider, and further guidance on implementation topics will be forthcoming.
+
+* TOC
+{:toc}
+
+For a basic list of changes to each document, see their change logs:
+* [Core](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.appendix.G)
+* [Validation](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.appendix.C)
+* [Hyper-Schema](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-hypermedia.html#rfc.appendix.B)
+
+### Incompatible Changes
+
+* By default, `format` is no longer an assertion.  This has been done because the inconsistent implementation of `format` as an assertion has been an endless source of surprising problems for schema authors.  The default behavior will now be predictable, if not ideal.  There are several ways to turn on assertion functionality, as explained below.  However, we recommend doing semantic validation in the application layer.
+* Plain name fragments are no longer defined with `$id`, but instead with the new keyword `$anchor` (which has a different syntax).
+* `$id` cannot contain a fragment anymore (except possibly an empty fragment, although that is discouraged).
+* In cases where multiple URIs could be used for the same schema, some are now discouraged.  These are believed to have rarely been used, as the behavior involved was fairly confusing and not well explained until the updated version of draft-07 (draft-handrews-json-schema-01).  If this doesn't mean much to you, you are probably safe.
+
+### Semi-incompatible Changes
+
+The old syntax for these keywords is not an error (and the default meta-schema still validates them), so implementations can therefore offer a compatibility mode.  However, migrating to the new keywords is straightforward and should be preferred.
+
+* `definitions` is now `$defs`
+* `dependencies` has been split into `dependentSchemas` and `dependentRequired`
+
+### Annotations, Errors, and Outputs
+
+[Annotation keywords](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.7.7) such as `title`, `readOnly`, and `default` have always been a part of JSON Schema, but without any guidance on how to make use of them.  This draft formalizes how implementations can make annotation information available to applications.
+
+Similarly, there has not previously been guidance on what constitutes useful error reporting when validation fails.
+
+To solve both of these problems, we now recommend that implementations support one or more of standardized [output formats](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.10).
+
+### Keyword Changes
+
+All keywords have now been organized into [vocabularies](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.8.1), with the Core and Validation specifications containing multiple vocabularies.  In this process, some keywords have moved from Validation into Core.
+
+#### Core Vocabulary
+
+[Core Specification, Section 8](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.8)
+
+keyword | change | notes
+---- | ---- | ----
+[`$anchor`](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.8.2.3) | **new** | Replaces the `#plain-name` form of `$id`, with a different syntax and approach
+[`$defs` (renamed from `definitions`)](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.8.2.5) | **renamed** | Note that the standard meta-schema still reserves `definitions` for backwards compatibility
+[`$id`](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.8.2.2) | **changed** | Only URI-references without fragments are allowed; see `$anchor` for a replacement for plain-name fragments; all other fragments in `$id` had undefined behavior previously
+[`$recursiveAnchor` and `$recursiveRef`](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.8.2.4.2) | **new** | Used for extending recursive schemas such as meta-schemas
+[`$ref`](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.8.2.4) | **changed** | Other keywords are now allowed alongside of it
+[`$vocabulary`](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.8.1) | **new** | Has effects only in meta-schemas, and is used to control what keywords an implementation must or can support in order to process a schema using that meta-schema
+
+#### Applicator Vocabulary
+
+[Core Specification, Section 9](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.9)
+
+These keywords were formerly found in the Validation Specification.
+
+keyword | change | notes
+---- | ---- | ----
+[`dependentSchemas` (split from `dependencies`)](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.9.2.2.4) | **split** | This is the schema form of `dependencies`; note that the standard meta-schema still reserves `dependencies` for backwards compatibility
+[`unevaluatedItems`](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.9.3.1.3) | **new** | Similar to `additionalItems`, but can "see" into subschemas and across references
+[`unevaluatedProperties`](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.9.3.2.4) | **new** | Similar to `additionalProperties`, but can "see" into subschemas and across references
+
+The other applicator vocabulary keywords are `items`, `additionalItems`, `properties`, `patternProperties`, `additionalProperties`, `anyOf`, `allOf`, `oneOf`, `not`, `if`, `then`, `else`.
+
+#### Validation Vocabulary
+
+[Validation Specification, Section 6](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.6)
+
+keyword | change | notes
+---- | ---- | ----
+[`dependentRequired` (split from `dependencies`)](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.6.5.4) | **split** | This is the string array form of `dependencies`; note that the standard meta-schema still reserves `dependencies` for backwards compatibility
+[`maxContains` and `minContains`](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.6.4.4) | **new** | Assertion for controlling how many times a subschema must be matched within an array
+
+
+#### Format Vocabulary
+
+[Validation Specification, Section 7](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7)
+
+The `format` keywords has always been problematic due to its optional nature.  There has never been a way to ensure that the implementation processing your schema supports `format` at all, or if it does, to what degree it validates each type of format.  In theory, since each format references a standard specification, if a format is supported, it should behave consistently.  In practice, this is not the case.
+
+There are two ways for an application to validate formats: It can rely on a JSON Schema implementation to validate them (which may or may not have the expected results), or it can note where the `format` keyword has been used and perform its own validation based on that.  This second approach is supported by treating `format` as an [annotation keyword](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.7.7) and supporting the [basic, detailed, or verbose output formats](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.10.4.2).
+
+To impose some predictability on this system, the behavior has changed in several ways, as illustrated below.  The key difference here is that `format` validation is now predictably off by default, but can be configured to be turned on.  In draft-07, it was on (but possibly unimplemented) by default and could be configured to be turned off.
+
+In the following charts, the "supported" column refers to whether and (for `2019-09`) to what degree the implementation claims to support the `format` keyword.  The "configuration" column refers to whether some non-default behavior for `format` is configured somehow (in a configuration file, or through a command-line option, or whatever).
+
+**Summary of draft-07 behavior**
+
+supported   | configuration | outcome 
+----------- | ------------- | -------------
+no          | n/a           | not validated
+yes         | _default_ (on)| inconsistently validated
+yes         | off           | not validated
+
+Obviously, each implementation will behave consistently from schema to schema, although some formats may be supported more thoroughly than others despite the wording in the specification.  However, complex formats are, in practice, supported to different degrees in each implementation.  If they are supported at all.
+
+**Summary of 2019-09 behavior**
+
+The goal with this draft is to make the default behavior predictable, with the inconsistent behavior as an opt-in feature.  This is not entirely satisfactory, but we feel that it is a good first step to reduce the number of complaints seen around surprising results.  This way, there should at least be fewer surprises.
+
+* "best effort" validation is a fairly weak requirement, which matches how things work in practice today.  Simple formats are probably fully valid, complex formats may be minimally validated or even not validated at all.
+
+* "full syntax" validation means that you can expect a reasonably thorough syntactic validation, probably corresponding to whatever commonly available libraries can do in the implementation language.  For formats such as IP addresses and dates, this is expected to be complete validation.  For more complex formats such as email addresses, support will probably still vary significantly.  It's unclear how many implementations have ever provided this level of support.
+
+* An outcome of _vocabulary error_ means that the implementation will refuse to process the schema as it cannot satisfy the vocabulary requirement.
+
+supported   | configuration  | vocabulary    | outcome 
+----------- | -------------- | ------------- | -------------
+no          | n/a            | false         | not validated
+no          | n/a            | true          | _vocabulary error_
+best effort | _default_ (off)| false         | not validated
+best effort | _default_ (off)| true          | _vocabulary error_
+best effort | on             | false         | best effort validation
+best effort | on             | true          | _vocabulary error_
+full syntax | _default_ (off)| false         | not validated
+full syntax | _default_ (off)| true          | full syntax validation
+full syntax | on             | false         | full syntax validation
+full syntax | on             | true          | full syntax validation
+
+Note that, given that almost no draft-07 or earlier implementations have offered strict and complete validation of every single format, it seems unlikely that any implementations will support option 3 option in practice.  
+
+Additionally, two new formats were added, and a specification reference was updated:
+
+format | change | notes
+---- | ---- | ----
+[`"duration"`](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7.3.1) | **added** | The duration format is from the ISO 8601 ABNF as given in Appendix A of RFC 3339
+[`"hostname"` and `"idn-hostname"`](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7.3.3) | **updated** | Use RFC 1123 instead of RFC 1034; this allows for a leading digit
+[`"uuid"`](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7.3.5) | **added** | A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid string representation of a UUID, according to RFC4122
+
+
+#### Content Vocabulary
+
+[Validation Specification, Section 8](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.8)
+
+These keywords are now specified purely as annotations, and never assertions.  Some guidance is provided around how an implementation can optionally offer further automatic processing of this information outside of the validation process.
+
+keyword | change | notes
+---- | ---- | ----
+[`contentEncoding`](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.8.3) | **updated** | Encodings from RFC 4648 are now allowed, and take precedence over RFC 2045 when there is a difference
+[`contentSchema`](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.8.5) | **added** | Schema for use with the decoded content string; note that it is _not_ automatically applied as not all content media types can be understood in advance
+
+#### Meta-Data Vocabulary
+
+[Validation Specification, Section 9](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.9)
+
+keyword | change | notes
+---- | ---- | ----
+[`deprecated`](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.9.3) | **added** | Used to indicate that a field is deprecated in some application-specific manner
+
+#### Hyper-Schema Vocabulary
+
+[Hyper-Schema Specification, Sections 5 and 6](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-hypermedia.html#rfc.section.5)
+
+keyword | change | notes
+---- | ---- | ----
+[`rel`](/draft/2019-09/json-schema-hypermedia.html#rfc.section.6.2.1) | **changed** | Can now be an array of values instead of just a string
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/schema b/draft/2019-09/schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..7a80adf4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../_includes/draft/2019-09/schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/vocab/applicator.md b/draft/2019-09/vocab/applicator.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..805aab89
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/vocab/applicator.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.9
+title: A Vocabulary for Applying Subschemas
+---
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/vocab/content.md b/draft/2019-09/vocab/content.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..804bf910
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/vocab/content.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.8
+title: A Vocabulary for the Contents of String-Encoded Data
+---
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/vocab/core.md b/draft/2019-09/vocab/core.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..f850b759
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/vocab/core.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.8
+title: The JSON Schema Core Vocabulary
+---
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/vocab/format.md b/draft/2019-09/vocab/format.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..b54f986b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/vocab/format.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7
+title: A Vocabulary for Semantic Content with "format"
+---
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/vocab/hyper-schema.md b/draft/2019-09/vocab/hyper-schema.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..e32c8bfd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/vocab/hyper-schema.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2019-09/json-schema-hypermedia.html
+title: "JSON Hyper-Schema: A Vocabulary for Hypermedia Annotation of JSON"
+---
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/vocab/meta-data.md b/draft/2019-09/vocab/meta-data.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..5531a5cf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/vocab/meta-data.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.9
+title: A Vocabulary for Basic Meta-Data Annotations
+---
diff --git a/draft/2019-09/vocab/validation.md b/draft/2019-09/vocab/validation.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..24e3df3f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2019-09/vocab/validation.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.6
+title: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation
+---
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/hyper-schema b/draft/2020-12/hyper-schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..efe89864
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/hyper-schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../_includes/draft/2020-12/hyper-schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html b/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..e8bd04bf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html
@@ -0,0 +1,5822 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html>
+<html lang="en" class="Internet-Draft">
+<head>
+<meta charset="utf-8">
+<meta content="Common,Latin" name="scripts">
+<meta content="initial-scale=1.0" name="viewport">
+<title>JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents</title>
+<meta content="Austin Wright" name="author">
+<meta content="Henry Andrews" name="author">
+<meta content="Ben Hutton" name="author">
+<meta content="Greg Dennis" name="author">
+<meta content='
+       
+                JSON Schema defines the media type "application/schema+json", a JSON-based format
+                for describing the structure of JSON data.
+                JSON Schema asserts what a JSON document must look like,
+                ways to extract information from it,
+                and how to interact with it.
+                The "application/schema-instance+json" media type provides additional
+                feature-rich integration with "application/schema+json" beyond what can be offered
+                for "application/json" documents.
+       
+    ' name="description">
+<meta content="xml2rfc 3.12.2" name="generator">
+<meta content="JSON" name="keyword">
+<meta content="Schema" name="keyword">
+<meta content="Hyper Schema" name="keyword">
+<meta content="Hypermedia" name="keyword">
+<meta content="draft-bhutton-json-schema-01" name="ietf.draft">
+<!-- Generator version information:
+  xml2rfc 3.12.2
+    Python 3.9.4
+    appdirs 1.4.4
+    ConfigArgParse 1.5.3
+    google-i18n-address 2.5.0
+    html5lib 1.1
+    intervaltree 3.1.0
+    Jinja2 2.11.3
+    kitchen 1.2.6
+    lxml 4.8.0
+    pycountry 22.1.10
+    pyflakes 2.4.0
+    PyYAML 6.0
+    requests 2.25.1
+    setuptools 49.2.1
+    six 1.15.0
+-->
+<link href="jsonschema-core.xml" rel="alternate" type="application/rfc+xml">
+<link href="#copyright" rel="license">
+<style type="text/css">/*
+
+  NOTE: Changes at the bottom of this file overrides some earlier settings.
+
+  Once the style has stabilized and has been adopted as an official RFC style,
+  this can be consolidated so that style settings occur only in one place, but
+  for now the contents of this file consists first of the initial CSS work as
+  provided to the RFC Formatter (xml2rfc) work, followed by itemized and
+  commented changes found necssary during the development of the v3
+  formatters.
+
+*/
+
+/* fonts */
+@import url('https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Noto+Sans'); /* Sans-serif */
+@import url('https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Noto+Serif'); /* Serif (print) */
+@import url('https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Roboto+Mono'); /* Monospace */
+
+@viewport {
+  zoom: 1.0;
+  width: extend-to-zoom;
+}
+@-ms-viewport {
+  width: extend-to-zoom;
+  zoom: 1.0;
+}
+/* general and mobile first */
+html {
+}
+body {
+  max-width: 90%;
+  margin: 1.5em auto;
+  color: #222;
+  background-color: #fff;
+  font-size: 14px;
+  font-family: 'Noto Sans', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
+  line-height: 1.6;
+  scroll-behavior: smooth;
+}
+.ears {
+  display: none;
+}
+
+/* headings */
+#title, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+  margin: 1em 0 0.5em;
+  font-weight: bold;
+  line-height: 1.3;
+}
+#title {
+  clear: both;
+  border-bottom: 1px solid #ddd;
+  margin: 0 0 0.5em 0;
+  padding: 1em 0 0.5em;
+}
+.author {
+  padding-bottom: 4px;
+}
+h1 {
+  font-size: 26px;
+  margin: 1em 0;
+}
+h2 {
+  font-size: 22px;
+  margin-top: -20px;  /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
+  padding-top: 33px;
+}
+h3 {
+  font-size: 18px;
+  margin-top: -36px;  /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
+  padding-top: 42px;
+}
+h4 {
+  font-size: 16px;
+  margin-top: -36px;  /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
+  padding-top: 42px;
+}
+h5, h6 {
+  font-size: 14px;
+}
+#n-copyright-notice {
+  border-bottom: 1px solid #ddd;
+  padding-bottom: 1em;
+  margin-bottom: 1em;
+}
+/* general structure */
+p {
+  padding: 0;
+  margin: 0 0 1em 0;
+  text-align: left;
+}
+div, span {
+  position: relative;
+}
+div {
+  margin: 0;
+}
+.alignRight.art-text {
+  background-color: #f9f9f9;
+  border: 1px solid #eee;
+  border-radius: 3px;
+  padding: 1em 1em 0;
+  margin-bottom: 1.5em;
+}
+.alignRight.art-text pre {
+  padding: 0;
+}
+.alignRight {
+  margin: 1em 0;
+}
+.alignRight > *:first-child {
+  border: none;
+  margin: 0;
+  float: right;
+  clear: both;
+}
+.alignRight > *:nth-child(2) {
+  clear: both;
+  display: block;
+  border: none;
+}
+svg {
+  display: block;
+}
+.alignCenter.art-text {
+  background-color: #f9f9f9;
+  border: 1px solid #eee;
+  border-radius: 3px;
+  padding: 1em 1em 0;
+  margin-bottom: 1.5em;
+}
+.alignCenter.art-text pre {
+  padding: 0;
+}
+.alignCenter {
+  margin: 1em 0;
+}
+.alignCenter > *:first-child {
+  border: none;
+  /* this isn't optimal, but it's an existence proof.  PrinceXML doesn't
+     support flexbox yet.
+  */
+  display: table;
+  margin: 0 auto;
+}
+
+/* lists */
+ol, ul {
+  padding: 0;
+  margin: 0 0 1em 2em;
+}
+ol ol, ul ul, ol ul, ul ol {
+  margin-left: 1em;
+}
+li {
+  margin: 0 0 0.25em 0;
+}
+.ulCompact li {
+  margin: 0;
+}
+ul.empty, .ulEmpty {
+  list-style-type: none;
+}
+ul.empty li, .ulEmpty li {
+  margin-top: 0.5em;
+}
+ul.ulBare, li.ulBare {
+  margin-left: 0em !important;
+}
+ul.compact, .ulCompact,
+ol.compact, .olCompact {
+  line-height: 100%;
+  margin: 0 0 0 2em;
+}
+
+/* definition lists */
+dl {
+}
+dl > dt {
+  float: left;
+  margin-right: 1em;
+}
+/* 
+dl.nohang > dt {
+  float: none;
+}
+*/
+dl > dd {
+  margin-bottom: .8em;
+  min-height: 1.3em;
+}
+dl.compact > dd, .dlCompact > dd {
+  margin-bottom: 0em;
+}
+dl > dd > dl {
+  margin-top: 0.5em;
+  margin-bottom: 0em;
+}
+
+/* links */
+a {
+  text-decoration: none;
+}
+a[href] {
+  color: #22e; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
+}
+a[href]:hover {
+  background-color: #f2f2f2;
+}
+figcaption a[href],
+a[href].selfRef {
+  color: #222;
+}
+/* XXX probably not this:
+a.selfRef:hover {
+  background-color: transparent;
+  cursor: default;
+} */
+
+/* Figures */
+tt, code, pre, code {
+  background-color: #f9f9f9;
+  font-family: 'Roboto Mono', monospace;
+}
+pre {
+  border: 1px solid #eee;
+  margin: 0;
+  padding: 1em;
+}
+img {
+  max-width: 100%;
+}
+figure {
+  margin: 0;
+}
+figure blockquote {
+  margin: 0.8em 0.4em 0.4em;
+}
+figcaption {
+  font-style: italic;
+  margin: 0 0 1em 0;
+}
+@media screen {
+  pre {
+    overflow-x: auto;
+    max-width: 100%;
+    max-width: calc(100% - 22px);
+  }
+}
+
+/* aside, blockquote */
+aside, blockquote {
+  margin-left: 0;
+  padding: 1.2em 2em;
+}
+blockquote {
+  background-color: #f9f9f9;
+  color: #111; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
+  border: 1px solid #ddd;
+  border-radius: 3px;
+  margin: 1em 0;
+}
+cite {
+  display: block;
+  text-align: right;
+  font-style: italic;
+}
+
+/* tables */
+table {
+  width: 100%;
+  margin: 0 0 1em;
+  border-collapse: collapse;
+  border: 1px solid #eee;
+}
+th, td {
+  text-align: left;
+  vertical-align: top;
+  padding: 0.5em 0.75em;
+}
+th {
+  text-align: left;
+  background-color: #e9e9e9;
+}
+tr:nth-child(2n+1) > td {
+  background-color: #f5f5f5;
+}
+table caption {
+  font-style: italic;
+  margin: 0;
+  padding: 0;
+  text-align: left;
+}
+table p {
+  /* XXX to avoid bottom margin on table row signifiers. If paragraphs should
+     be allowed within tables more generally, it would be far better to select on a class. */
+  margin: 0;
+}
+
+/* pilcrow */
+a.pilcrow {
+  color: #666; /* Arlen: AHDJ 2019 */
+  text-decoration: none;
+  visibility: hidden;
+  user-select: none;
+  -ms-user-select: none;
+  -o-user-select:none;
+  -moz-user-select: none;
+  -khtml-user-select: none;
+  -webkit-user-select: none;
+  -webkit-touch-callout: none;
+}
+@media screen {
+  aside:hover > a.pilcrow,
+  p:hover > a.pilcrow,
+  blockquote:hover > a.pilcrow,
+  div:hover > a.pilcrow,
+  li:hover > a.pilcrow,
+  pre:hover > a.pilcrow {
+    visibility: visible;
+  }
+  a.pilcrow:hover {
+    background-color: transparent;
+  }
+}
+
+/* misc */
+hr {
+  border: 0;
+  border-top: 1px solid #eee;
+}
+.bcp14 {
+  font-variant: small-caps;
+}
+
+.role {
+  font-variant: all-small-caps;
+}
+
+/* info block */
+#identifiers {
+  margin: 0;
+  font-size: 0.9em;
+}
+#identifiers dt {
+  width: 3em;
+  clear: left;
+}
+#identifiers dd {
+  float: left;
+  margin-bottom: 0;
+}
+/* Fix PDF info block run off issue */
+@media print {
+  #identifiers dd {
+    float: none;
+  }
+}
+#identifiers .authors .author {
+  display: inline-block;
+  margin-right: 1.5em;
+}
+#identifiers .authors .org {
+  font-style: italic;
+}
+
+/* The prepared/rendered info at the very bottom of the page */
+.docInfo {
+  color: #666; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
+  font-size: 0.9em;
+  font-style: italic;
+  margin-top: 2em;
+}
+.docInfo .prepared {
+  float: left;
+}
+.docInfo .prepared {
+  float: right;
+}
+
+/* table of contents */
+#toc  {
+  padding: 0.75em 0 2em 0;
+  margin-bottom: 1em;
+}
+nav.toc ul {
+  margin: 0 0.5em 0 0;
+  padding: 0;
+  list-style: none;
+}
+nav.toc li {
+  line-height: 1.3em;
+  margin: 0.75em 0;
+  padding-left: 1.2em;
+  text-indent: -1.2em;
+}
+/* references */
+.references dt {
+  text-align: right;
+  font-weight: bold;
+  min-width: 7em;
+}
+.references dd {
+  margin-left: 8em;
+  overflow: auto;
+}
+
+.refInstance {
+  margin-bottom: 1.25em;
+}
+
+.references .ascii {
+  margin-bottom: 0.25em;
+}
+
+/* index */
+.index ul {
+  margin: 0 0 0 1em;
+  padding: 0;
+  list-style: none;
+}
+.index ul ul {
+  margin: 0;
+}
+.index li {
+  margin: 0;
+  text-indent: -2em;
+  padding-left: 2em;
+  padding-bottom: 5px;
+}
+.indexIndex {
+  margin: 0.5em 0 1em;
+}
+.index a {
+  font-weight: 700;
+}
+/* make the index two-column on all but the smallest screens */
+@media (min-width: 600px) {
+  .index ul {
+    -moz-column-count: 2;
+    -moz-column-gap: 20px;
+  }
+  .index ul ul {
+    -moz-column-count: 1;
+    -moz-column-gap: 0;
+  }
+}
+
+/* authors */
+address.vcard {
+  font-style: normal;
+  margin: 1em 0;
+}
+
+address.vcard .nameRole {
+  font-weight: 700;
+  margin-left: 0;
+}
+address.vcard .label {
+  font-family: "Noto Sans",Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;
+  margin: 0.5em 0;
+}
+address.vcard .type {
+  display: none;
+}
+.alternative-contact {
+  margin: 1.5em 0 1em;
+}
+hr.addr {
+  border-top: 1px dashed;
+  margin: 0;
+  color: #ddd;
+  max-width: calc(100% - 16px);
+}
+
+/* temporary notes */
+.rfcEditorRemove::before {
+  position: absolute;
+  top: 0.2em;
+  right: 0.2em;
+  padding: 0.2em;
+  content: "The RFC Editor will remove this note";
+  color: #9e2a00; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
+  background-color: #ffd; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
+}
+.rfcEditorRemove {
+  position: relative;
+  padding-top: 1.8em;
+  background-color: #ffd; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
+  border-radius: 3px;
+}
+.cref {
+  background-color: #ffd; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
+  padding: 2px 4px;
+}
+.crefSource {
+  font-style: italic;
+}
+/* alternative layout for smaller screens */
+@media screen and (max-width: 1023px) {
+  body {
+    padding-top: 2em;
+  }
+  #title {
+    padding: 1em 0;
+  }
+  h1 {
+    font-size: 24px;
+  }
+  h2 {
+    font-size: 20px;
+    margin-top: -18px;  /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
+    padding-top: 38px;
+  }
+  #identifiers dd {
+    max-width: 60%;
+  }
+  #toc {
+    position: fixed;
+    z-index: 2;
+    top: 0;
+    right: 0;
+    padding: 0;
+    margin: 0;
+    background-color: inherit;
+    border-bottom: 1px solid #ccc;
+  }
+  #toc h2 {
+    margin: -1px 0 0 0;
+    padding: 4px 0 4px 6px;
+    padding-right: 1em;
+    min-width: 190px;
+    font-size: 1.1em;
+    text-align: right;
+    background-color: #444;
+    color: white;
+    cursor: pointer;
+  }
+  #toc h2::before { /* css hamburger */
+    float: right;
+    position: relative;
+    width: 1em;
+    height: 1px;
+    left: -164px;
+    margin: 6px 0 0 0;
+    background: white none repeat scroll 0 0;
+    box-shadow: 0 4px 0 0 white, 0 8px 0 0 white;
+    content: "";
+  }
+  #toc nav {
+    display: none;
+    padding: 0.5em 1em 1em;
+    overflow: auto;
+    height: calc(100vh - 48px);
+    border-left: 1px solid #ddd;
+  }
+}
+
+/* alternative layout for wide screens */
+@media screen and (min-width: 1024px) {
+  body {
+    max-width: 724px;
+    margin: 42px auto;
+    padding-left: 1.5em;
+    padding-right: 29em;
+  }
+  #toc {
+    position: fixed;
+    top: 42px;
+    right: 42px;
+    width: 25%;
+    margin: 0;
+    padding: 0 1em;
+    z-index: 1;
+  }
+  #toc h2 {
+    border-top: none;
+    border-bottom: 1px solid #ddd;
+    font-size: 1em;
+    font-weight: normal;
+    margin: 0;
+    padding: 0.25em 1em 1em 0;
+  }
+  #toc nav {
+    display: block;
+    height: calc(90vh - 84px);
+    bottom: 0;
+    padding: 0.5em 0 0;
+    overflow: auto;
+  }
+  img { /* future proofing */
+    max-width: 100%;
+    height: auto;
+  }
+}
+
+/* pagination */
+@media print {
+  body {
+
+    width: 100%;
+  }
+  p {
+    orphans: 3;
+    widows: 3;
+  }
+  #n-copyright-notice {
+    border-bottom: none;
+  }
+  #toc, #n-introduction {
+    page-break-before: always;
+  }
+  #toc {
+    border-top: none;
+    padding-top: 0;
+  }
+  figure, pre {
+    page-break-inside: avoid;
+  }
+  figure {
+    overflow: scroll;
+  }
+  h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+    page-break-after: avoid;
+  }
+  h2+*, h3+*, h4+*, h5+*, h6+* {
+    page-break-before: avoid;
+  }
+  pre {
+    white-space: pre-wrap;
+    word-wrap: break-word;
+    font-size: 10pt;
+  }
+  table {
+    border: 1px solid #ddd;
+  }
+  td {
+    border-top: 1px solid #ddd;
+  }
+}
+
+/* This is commented out here, as the string-set: doesn't
+   pass W3C validation currently */
+/*
+.ears thead .left {
+  string-set: ears-top-left content();
+}
+
+.ears thead .center {
+  string-set: ears-top-center content();
+}
+
+.ears thead .right {
+  string-set: ears-top-right content();
+}
+
+.ears tfoot .left {
+  string-set: ears-bottom-left content();
+}
+
+.ears tfoot .center {
+  string-set: ears-bottom-center content();
+}
+
+.ears tfoot .right {
+  string-set: ears-bottom-right content();
+}
+*/
+
+@page :first {
+  padding-top: 0;
+  @top-left {
+    content: normal;
+    border: none;
+  }
+  @top-center {
+    content: normal;
+    border: none;
+  }
+  @top-right {
+    content: normal;
+    border: none;
+  }
+}
+
+@page {
+  size: A4;
+  margin-bottom: 45mm;
+  padding-top: 20px;
+  /* The follwing is commented out here, but set appropriately by in code, as
+     the content depends on the document */
+  /*
+  @top-left {
+    content: 'Internet-Draft';
+    vertical-align: bottom;
+    border-bottom: solid 1px #ccc;
+  }
+  @top-left {
+    content: string(ears-top-left);
+    vertical-align: bottom;
+    border-bottom: solid 1px #ccc;
+  }
+  @top-center {
+    content: string(ears-top-center);
+    vertical-align: bottom;
+    border-bottom: solid 1px #ccc;
+  }
+  @top-right {
+    content: string(ears-top-right);
+    vertical-align: bottom;
+    border-bottom: solid 1px #ccc;
+  }
+  @bottom-left {
+    content: string(ears-bottom-left);
+    vertical-align: top;
+    border-top: solid 1px #ccc;
+  }
+  @bottom-center {
+    content: string(ears-bottom-center);
+    vertical-align: top;
+    border-top: solid 1px #ccc;
+  }
+  @bottom-right {
+      content: '[Page ' counter(page) ']';
+      vertical-align: top;
+      border-top: solid 1px #ccc;
+  }
+  */
+
+}
+
+/* Changes introduced to fix issues found during implementation */
+/* Make sure links are clickable even if overlapped by following H* */
+a {
+  z-index: 2;
+}
+/* Separate body from document info even without intervening H1 */
+section {
+  clear: both;
+}
+
+
+/* Top align author divs, to avoid names without organization dropping level with org names */
+.author {
+  vertical-align: top;
+}
+
+/* Leave room in document info to show Internet-Draft on one line */
+#identifiers dt {
+  width: 8em;
+}
+
+/* Don't waste quite as much whitespace between label and value in doc info */
+#identifiers dd {
+  margin-left: 1em;
+}
+
+/* Give floating toc a background color (needed when it's a div inside section */
+#toc {
+  background-color: white;
+}
+
+/* Make the collapsed ToC header render white on gray also when it's a link */
+@media screen and (max-width: 1023px) {
+  #toc h2 a,
+  #toc h2 a:link,
+  #toc h2 a:focus,
+  #toc h2 a:hover,
+  #toc a.toplink,
+  #toc a.toplink:hover {
+    color: white;
+    background-color: #444;
+    text-decoration: none;
+  }
+}
+
+/* Give the bottom of the ToC some whitespace */
+@media screen and (min-width: 1024px) {
+  #toc {
+    padding: 0 0 1em 1em;
+  }
+}
+
+/* Style section numbers with more space between number and title */
+.section-number {
+  padding-right: 0.5em;
+}
+
+/* prevent monospace from becoming overly large */
+tt, code, pre, code {
+  font-size: 95%;
+}
+
+/* Fix the height/width aspect for ascii art*/
+pre.sourcecode,
+.art-text pre {
+  line-height: 1.12;
+}
+
+
+/* Add styling for a link in the ToC that points to the top of the document */
+a.toplink {
+  float: right;
+  margin-right: 0.5em;
+}
+
+/* Fix the dl styling to match the RFC 7992 attributes */
+dl > dt,
+dl.dlParallel > dt {
+  float: left;
+  margin-right: 1em;
+}
+dl.dlNewline > dt {
+  float: none;
+}
+
+/* Provide styling for table cell text alignment */
+table td.text-left,
+table th.text-left {
+  text-align: left;
+}
+table td.text-center,
+table th.text-center {
+  text-align: center;
+}
+table td.text-right,
+table th.text-right {
+  text-align: right;
+}
+
+/* Make the alternative author contact informatio look less like just another
+   author, and group it closer with the primary author contact information */
+.alternative-contact {
+  margin: 0.5em 0 0.25em 0;
+}
+address .non-ascii {
+  margin: 0 0 0 2em;
+}
+
+/* With it being possible to set tables with alignment
+  left, center, and right, { width: 100%; } does not make sense */
+table {
+  width: auto;
+}
+
+/* Avoid reference text that sits in a block with very wide left margin,
+   because of a long floating dt label.*/
+.references dd {
+  overflow: visible;
+}
+
+/* Control caption placement */
+caption {
+  caption-side: bottom;
+}
+
+/* Limit the width of the author address vcard, so names in right-to-left
+   script don't end up on the other side of the page. */
+
+address.vcard {
+  max-width: 30em;
+  margin-right: auto;
+}
+
+/* For address alignment dependent on LTR or RTL scripts */
+address div.left {
+  text-align: left;
+}
+address div.right {
+  text-align: right;
+}
+
+/* Provide table alignment support.  We can't use the alignX classes above
+   since they do unwanted things with caption and other styling. */
+table.right {
+ margin-left: auto;
+ margin-right: 0;
+}
+table.center {
+ margin-left: auto;
+ margin-right: auto;
+}
+table.left {
+ margin-left: 0;
+ margin-right: auto;
+}
+
+/* Give the table caption label the same styling as the figcaption */
+caption a[href] {
+  color: #222;
+}
+
+@media print {
+  .toplink {
+    display: none;
+  }
+
+  /* avoid overwriting the top border line with the ToC header */
+  #toc {
+    padding-top: 1px;
+  }
+
+  /* Avoid page breaks inside dl and author address entries */
+  .vcard {
+    page-break-inside: avoid;
+  }
+
+}
+/* Tweak the bcp14 keyword presentation */
+.bcp14 {
+  font-variant: small-caps;
+  font-weight: bold;
+  font-size: 0.9em;
+}
+/* Tweak the invisible space above H* in order not to overlay links in text above */
+ h2 {
+  margin-top: -18px;  /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
+  padding-top: 31px;
+ }
+ h3 {
+  margin-top: -18px;  /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
+  padding-top: 24px;
+ }
+ h4 {
+  margin-top: -18px;  /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
+  padding-top: 24px;
+ }
+/* Float artwork pilcrow to the right */
+@media screen {
+  .artwork a.pilcrow {
+    display: block;
+    line-height: 0.7;
+    margin-top: 0.15em;
+  }
+}
+/* Make pilcrows on dd visible */
+@media screen {
+  dd:hover > a.pilcrow {
+    visibility: visible;
+  }
+}
+/* Make the placement of figcaption match that of a table's caption
+   by removing the figure's added bottom margin */
+.alignLeft.art-text,
+.alignCenter.art-text,
+.alignRight.art-text {
+   margin-bottom: 0;
+}
+.alignLeft,
+.alignCenter,
+.alignRight {
+  margin: 1em 0 0 0;
+}
+/* In print, the pilcrow won't show on hover, so prevent it from taking up space,
+   possibly even requiring a new line */
+@media print {
+  a.pilcrow {
+    display: none;
+  }
+}
+/* Styling for the external metadata */
+div#external-metadata {
+  background-color: #eee;
+  padding: 0.5em;
+  margin-bottom: 0.5em;
+  display: none;
+}
+div#internal-metadata {
+  padding: 0.5em;                       /* to match the external-metadata padding */
+}
+/* Styling for title RFC Number */
+h1#rfcnum {
+  clear: both;
+  margin: 0 0 -1em;
+  padding: 1em 0 0 0;
+}
+/* Make .olPercent look the same as <ol><li> */
+dl.olPercent > dd {
+  margin-bottom: 0.25em;
+  min-height: initial;
+}
+/* Give aside some styling to set it apart */
+aside {
+  border-left: 1px solid #ddd;
+  margin: 1em 0 1em 2em;
+  padding: 0.2em 2em;
+}
+aside > dl,
+aside > ol,
+aside > ul,
+aside > table,
+aside > p {
+  margin-bottom: 0.5em;
+}
+/* Additional page break settings */
+@media print {
+  figcaption, table caption {
+    page-break-before: avoid;
+  }
+}
+/* Font size adjustments for print */
+@media print {
+  body  { font-size: 10pt;      line-height: normal; max-width: 96%; }
+  h1    { font-size: 1.72em;    padding-top: 1.5em; } /* 1*1.2*1.2*1.2 */
+  h2    { font-size: 1.44em;    padding-top: 1.5em; } /* 1*1.2*1.2 */
+  h3    { font-size: 1.2em;     padding-top: 1.5em; } /* 1*1.2 */
+  h4    { font-size: 1em;       padding-top: 1.5em; }
+  h5, h6 { font-size: 1em;      margin: initial; padding: 0.5em 0 0.3em; }
+}
+/* Sourcecode margin in print, when there's no pilcrow */
+@media print {
+  .artwork,
+  .sourcecode {
+    margin-bottom: 1em;
+  }
+}
+/* Avoid narrow tables forcing too narrow table captions, which may render badly */
+table {
+  min-width: 20em;
+}
+/* ol type a */
+ol.type-a { list-style-type: lower-alpha; }
+ol.type-A { list-style-type: upper-alpha; }
+ol.type-i { list-style-type: lower-roman; }
+ol.type-I { list-style-type: lower-roman; }
+/* Apply the print table and row borders in general, on request from the RPC,
+and increase the contrast between border and odd row background sligthtly */
+table {
+  border: 1px solid #ddd;
+}
+td {
+  border-top: 1px solid #ddd;
+}
+tr:nth-child(2n+1) > td {
+  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+}
+/* Use style rules to govern display of the TOC. */
+@media screen and (max-width: 1023px) {
+  #toc nav { display: none; }
+  #toc.active nav { display: block; }
+}
+/* Add support for keepWithNext */
+.keepWithNext {
+  break-after: avoid-page;
+  break-after: avoid-page;
+}
+/* Add support for keepWithPrevious */
+.keepWithPrevious {
+  break-before: avoid-page;
+}
+/* Change the approach to avoiding breaks inside artwork etc. */
+figure, pre, table, .artwork, .sourcecode  {
+  break-before: auto;
+  break-after: auto;
+}
+/* Avoid breaks between <dt> and <dd> */
+dl {
+  break-before: auto;
+  break-inside: auto;
+}
+dt {
+  break-before: auto;
+  break-after: avoid-page;
+}
+dd {
+  break-before: avoid-page;
+  break-after: auto;
+  orphans: 3;
+  widows: 3
+}
+span.break, dd.break {
+  margin-bottom: 0;
+  min-height: 0;
+  break-before: auto;
+  break-inside: auto;
+  break-after: auto;
+}
+/* Undo break-before ToC */
+@media print {
+  #toc {
+    break-before: auto;
+  }
+}
+/* Text in compact lists should not get extra bottim margin space,
+   since that would makes the list not compact */
+ul.compact p, .ulCompact p,
+ol.compact p, .olCompact p {
+ margin: 0;
+}
+/* But the list as a whole needs the extra space at the end */
+section ul.compact,
+section .ulCompact,
+section ol.compact,
+section .olCompact {
+  margin-bottom: 1em;                    /* same as p not within ul.compact etc. */
+}
+/* The tt and code background above interferes with for instance table cell
+   backgrounds.  Changed to something a bit more selective. */
+tt, code {
+  background-color: transparent;
+}
+p tt, p code, li tt, li code {
+  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+}
+/* Tweak the pre margin -- 0px doesn't come out well */
+pre {
+   margin-top: 0.5px;
+}
+/* Tweak the comact list text */
+ul.compact, .ulCompact,
+ol.compact, .olCompact,
+dl.compact, .dlCompact {
+  line-height: normal;
+}
+/* Don't add top margin for nested lists */
+li > ul, li > ol, li > dl,
+dd > ul, dd > ol, dd > dl,
+dl > dd > dl {
+  margin-top: initial;
+}
+/* Elements that should not be rendered on the same line as a <dt> */
+/* This should match the element list in writer.text.TextWriter.render_dl() */
+dd > div.artwork:first-child,
+dd > aside:first-child,
+dd > figure:first-child,
+dd > ol:first-child,
+dd > div:first-child > pre.sourcecode,
+dd > table:first-child,
+dd > ul:first-child {
+  clear: left;
+}
+/* fix for weird browser behaviour when <dd/> is empty */
+dt+dd:empty::before{
+  content: "\00a0";
+}
+/* Make paragraph spacing inside <li> smaller than in body text, to fit better within the list */
+li > p {
+  margin-bottom: 0.5em
+}
+/* Don't let p margin spill out from inside list items */
+li > p:last-of-type {
+  margin-bottom: 0;
+}
+</style>
+<link href="rfc-local.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css">
+<script type="application/javascript">async function addMetadata(){try{const e=document.styleSheets[0].cssRules;for(let t=0;t<e.length;t++)if(/#identifiers/.exec(e[t].selectorText)){const a=e[t].cssText.replace("#identifiers","#external-updates");document.styleSheets[0].insertRule(a,document.styleSheets[0].cssRules.length)}}catch(e){console.log(e)}const e=document.getElementById("external-metadata");if(e)try{var t,a="",o=function(e){const t=document.getElementsByTagName("meta");for(let a=0;a<t.length;a++)if(t[a].getAttribute("name")===e)return t[a].getAttribute("content");return""}("rfc.number");if(o){t="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc"+o+".json";try{const e=await fetch(t);a=await e.json()}catch(e){t=document.URL.indexOf("html")>=0?document.URL.replace(/html$/,"json"):document.URL+".json";const o=await fetch(t);a=await o.json()}}if(!a)return;e.style.display="block";const s="",d="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc",n="https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search",c="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info",l=a.doc_id.toLowerCase(),i=a.doc_id.slice(0,3).toLowerCase(),f=a.doc_id.slice(3).replace(/^0+/,""),u={status:"Status",obsoletes:"Obsoletes",obsoleted_by:"Obsoleted By",updates:"Updates",updated_by:"Updated By",see_also:"See Also",errata_url:"Errata"};let h="<dl style='overflow:hidden' id='external-updates'>";["status","obsoletes","obsoleted_by","updates","updated_by","see_also","errata_url"].forEach(e=>{if("status"==e){a[e]=a[e].toLowerCase();var t=a[e].split(" "),o=t.length,w="",p=1;for(let e=0;e<o;e++)p<o?w=w+r(t[e])+" ":w+=r(t[e]),p++;a[e]=w}else if("obsoletes"==e||"obsoleted_by"==e||"updates"==e||"updated_by"==e){var g,m="",b=1;g=a[e].length;for(let t=0;t<g;t++)a[e][t]&&(a[e][t]=String(a[e][t]).toLowerCase(),m=b<g?m+"<a href='"+s+"/rfc/".concat(a[e][t])+"'>"+a[e][t].slice(3)+"</a>, ":m+"<a href='"+s+"/rfc/".concat(a[e][t])+"'>"+a[e][t].slice(3)+"</a>",b++);a[e]=m}else if("see_also"==e){var y,L="",C=1;y=a[e].length;for(let t=0;t<y;t++)if(a[e][t]){a[e][t]=String(a[e][t]);var _=a[e][t].slice(0,3),v=a[e][t].slice(3).replace(/^0+/,"");L=C<y?"RFC"!=_?L+"<a href='"+s+"/info/"+_.toLowerCase().concat(v.toLowerCase())+"'>"+_+" "+v+"</a>, ":L+"<a href='"+s+"/info/"+_.toLowerCase().concat(v.toLowerCase())+"'>"+v+"</a>, ":"RFC"!=_?L+"<a href='"+s+"/info/"+_.toLowerCase().concat(v.toLowerCase())+"'>"+_+" "+v+"</a>":L+"<a href='"+s+"/info/"+_.toLowerCase().concat(v.toLowerCase())+"'>"+v+"</a>",C++}a[e]=L}else if("errata_url"==e){var R="";R=a[e]?R+"<a href='"+a[e]+"'>Errata exist</a> | <a href='"+d+"/"+l+"'>Datatracker</a>| <a href='"+n+"/?"+i+"="+f+"&submit="+i+"'>IPR</a> | <a href='"+c+"/"+l+"'>Info page</a>":"<a href='"+d+"/"+l+"'>Datatracker</a> | <a href='"+n+"/?"+i+"="+f+"&submit="+i+"'>IPR</a> | <a href='"+c+"/"+l+"'>Info page</a>",a[e]=R}""!=a[e]?"Errata"==u[e]?h+=`<dt>More info:</dt><dd>${a[e]}</dd>`:h+=`<dt>${u[e]}:</dt><dd>${a[e]}</dd>`:"Errata"==u[e]&&(h+=`<dt>More info:</dt><dd>${a[e]}</dd>`)}),h+="</dl>",e.innerHTML=h}catch(e){console.log(e)}else console.log("Could not locate metadata <div> element");function r(e){return e.charAt(0).toUpperCase()+e.slice(1)}}window.removeEventListener("load",addMetadata),window.addEventListener("load",addMetadata);</script>
+</head>
+<body>
+<script src="metadata.min.js"></script>
+<table class="ears">
+<thead><tr>
+<td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
+<td class="center">JSON Schema</td>
+<td class="right">June 2022</td>
+</tr></thead>
+<tfoot><tr>
+<td class="left">Wright, et al.</td>
+<td class="center">Expires 18 December 2022</td>
+<td class="right">[Page]</td>
+</tr></tfoot>
+</table>
+<div id="external-metadata" class="document-information"></div>
+<div id="internal-metadata" class="document-information">
+<dl id="identifiers">
+<dt class="label-workgroup">Workgroup:</dt>
+<dd class="workgroup">Internet Engineering Task Force</dd>
+<dt class="label-internet-draft">Internet-Draft:</dt>
+<dd class="internet-draft">draft-bhutton-json-schema-01</dd>
+<dt class="label-published">Published:</dt>
+<dd class="published">
+<time datetime="2022-06-16" class="published">16 June 2022</time>
+    </dd>
+<dt class="label-intended-status">Intended Status:</dt>
+<dd class="intended-status">Informational</dd>
+<dt class="label-expires">Expires:</dt>
+<dd class="expires"><time datetime="2022-12-18">18 December 2022</time></dd>
+<dt class="label-authors">Authors:</dt>
+<dd class="authors">
+<div class="author">
+      <div class="author-name">A. Wright, <span class="editor">Ed.</span>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="author">
+      <div class="author-name">H. Andrews, <span class="editor">Ed.</span>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="author">
+      <div class="author-name">B. Hutton, <span class="editor">Ed.</span>
+</div>
+<div class="org">Postman</div>
+</div>
+<div class="author">
+      <div class="author-name">G. Dennis</div>
+</div>
+</dd>
+</dl>
+</div>
+<h1 id="title">JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents</h1>
+<section id="section-abstract">
+      <h2 id="abstract"><a href="#abstract" class="selfRef">Abstract</a></h2>
+<p id="section-abstract-1">
+                JSON Schema defines the media type "application/schema+json", a JSON-based format
+                for describing the structure of JSON data.
+                JSON Schema asserts what a JSON document must look like,
+                ways to extract information from it,
+                and how to interact with it.
+                The "application/schema-instance+json" media type provides additional
+                feature-rich integration with "application/schema+json" beyond what can be offered
+                for "application/json" documents.<a href="#section-abstract-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section class="note" id="section-note.1">
+      <h2 id="name-note-to-readers">
+<a href="#name-note-to-readers" class="section-name selfRef">Note to Readers</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-note.1-1">
+                The issues list for this draft can be found at
+                <span><a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues">https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues</a></span>.<a href="#section-note.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-note.1-2">
+                For additional information, see <span><a href="https://json-schema.org/">https://json-schema.org/</a></span>.<a href="#section-note.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-note.1-3">
+                To provide feedback, use this issue tracker, the communication methods listed on the
+                homepage, or email the document editors.<a href="#section-note.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<div id="status-of-memo">
+<section id="section-boilerplate.1">
+        <h2 id="name-status-of-this-memo">
+<a href="#name-status-of-this-memo" class="section-name selfRef">Status of This Memo</a>
+        </h2>
+<p id="section-boilerplate.1-1">
+        This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
+        provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.<a href="#section-boilerplate.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-boilerplate.1-2">
+        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 <span><a href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/">https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/</a></span>.<a href="#section-boilerplate.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-boilerplate.1-3">
+        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."<a href="#section-boilerplate.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-boilerplate.1-4">
+        This Internet-Draft will expire on 18 December 2022.<a href="#section-boilerplate.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="copyright">
+<section id="section-boilerplate.2">
+        <h2 id="name-copyright-notice">
+<a href="#name-copyright-notice" class="section-name selfRef">Copyright Notice</a>
+        </h2>
+<p id="section-boilerplate.2-1">
+            Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
+            document authors. All rights reserved.<a href="#section-boilerplate.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-boilerplate.2-2">
+            This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
+            Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
+            (<span><a href="https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info">https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info</a></span>) 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 Revised BSD License text as described in
+            Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
+            warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.<a href="#section-boilerplate.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="toc">
+<section id="section-toc.1">
+        <a href="#" onclick="scroll(0,0)" class="toplink">▲</a><h2 id="name-table-of-contents">
+<a href="#name-table-of-contents" class="section-name selfRef">Table of Contents</a>
+        </h2>
+<nav class="toc"><ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.1">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.1.1" class="keepWithNext"><a href="#section-1" class="xref">1</a>.  <a href="#name-introduction" class="xref">Introduction</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.2">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.2.1" class="keepWithNext"><a href="#section-2" class="xref">2</a>.  <a href="#name-conventions-and-terminology" class="xref">Conventions and Terminology</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.3">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.3.1" class="keepWithNext"><a href="#section-3" class="xref">3</a>.  <a href="#name-overview" class="xref">Overview</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.1"><a href="#section-4" class="xref">4</a>.  <a href="#name-definitions" class="xref">Definitions</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.1.1"><a href="#section-4.1" class="xref">4.1</a>.  <a href="#name-json-document" class="xref">JSON Document</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.1"><a href="#section-4.2" class="xref">4.2</a>.  <a href="#name-instance" class="xref">Instance</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.1.1"><a href="#section-4.2.1" class="xref">4.2.1</a>.  <a href="#name-instance-data-model" class="xref">Instance Data Model</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.2.1"><a href="#section-4.2.2" class="xref">4.2.2</a>.  <a href="#name-instance-equality" class="xref">Instance Equality</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.3">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.3.1"><a href="#section-4.2.3" class="xref">4.2.3</a>.  <a href="#name-non-json-instances" class="xref">Non-JSON Instances</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.1"><a href="#section-4.3" class="xref">4.3</a>.  <a href="#name-json-schema-documents" class="xref">JSON Schema Documents</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.2.1.1"><a href="#section-4.3.1" class="xref">4.3.1</a>.  <a href="#name-json-schema-objects-and-key" class="xref">JSON Schema Objects and Keywords</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.2.2.1"><a href="#section-4.3.2" class="xref">4.3.2</a>.  <a href="#name-boolean-json-schemas" class="xref">Boolean JSON Schemas</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.2.3">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.2.3.1"><a href="#section-4.3.3" class="xref">4.3.3</a>.  <a href="#name-schema-vocabularies" class="xref">Schema Vocabularies</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.2.4">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.2.4.1"><a href="#section-4.3.4" class="xref">4.3.4</a>.  <a href="#name-meta-schemas" class="xref">Meta-Schemas</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.2.5">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.2.5.1"><a href="#section-4.3.5" class="xref">4.3.5</a>.  <a href="#name-root-schema-and-subschemas-" class="xref">Root Schema and Subschemas and Resources</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.5">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.5.1"><a href="#section-5" class="xref">5</a>.  <a href="#name-fragment-identifiers" class="xref">Fragment Identifiers</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.1"><a href="#section-6" class="xref">6</a>.  <a href="#name-general-considerations" class="xref">General Considerations</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.1.1"><a href="#section-6.1" class="xref">6.1</a>.  <a href="#name-range-of-json-values" class="xref">Range of JSON Values</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2.1"><a href="#section-6.2" class="xref">6.2</a>.  <a href="#name-programming-language-indepe" class="xref">Programming Language Independence</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.3">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.3.1"><a href="#section-6.3" class="xref">6.3</a>.  <a href="#name-mathematical-integers" class="xref">Mathematical Integers</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4.1"><a href="#section-6.4" class="xref">6.4</a>.  <a href="#name-regular-expressions" class="xref">Regular Expressions</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.5">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.5.1"><a href="#section-6.5" class="xref">6.5</a>.  <a href="#name-extending-json-schema" class="xref">Extending JSON Schema</a></p>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.1"><a href="#section-7" class="xref">7</a>.  <a href="#name-keyword-behaviors" class="xref">Keyword Behaviors</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.1.1"><a href="#section-7.1" class="xref">7.1</a>.  <a href="#name-lexical-scope-and-dynamic-s" class="xref">Lexical Scope and Dynamic Scope</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.2.1"><a href="#section-7.2" class="xref">7.2</a>.  <a href="#name-keyword-interactions" class="xref">Keyword Interactions</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.1"><a href="#section-7.3" class="xref">7.3</a>.  <a href="#name-default-behaviors" class="xref">Default Behaviors</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.4">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.4.1"><a href="#section-7.4" class="xref">7.4</a>.  <a href="#name-identifiers" class="xref">Identifiers</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.5">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.5.1"><a href="#section-7.5" class="xref">7.5</a>.  <a href="#name-applicators" class="xref">Applicators</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.5.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.5.2.1.1"><a href="#section-7.5.1" class="xref">7.5.1</a>.  <a href="#name-referenced-and-referencing-" class="xref">Referenced and Referencing Schemas</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.6">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.6.1"><a href="#section-7.6" class="xref">7.6</a>.  <a href="#name-assertions" class="xref">Assertions</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.6.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.6.2.1.1"><a href="#section-7.6.1" class="xref">7.6.1</a>.  <a href="#name-assertions-and-instance-pri" class="xref">Assertions and Instance Primitive Types</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.7">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.7.1"><a href="#section-7.7" class="xref">7.7</a>.  <a href="#name-annotations" class="xref">Annotations</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.7.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.7.2.1.1"><a href="#section-7.7.1" class="xref">7.7.1</a>.  <a href="#name-collecting-annotations" class="xref">Collecting Annotations</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.8">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.8.1"><a href="#section-7.8" class="xref">7.8</a>.  <a href="#name-reserved-locations" class="xref">Reserved Locations</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.9">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.9.1"><a href="#section-7.9" class="xref">7.9</a>.  <a href="#name-loading-instance-data" class="xref">Loading Instance Data</a></p>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.1"><a href="#section-8" class="xref">8</a>.  <a href="#name-the-json-schema-core-vocabu" class="xref">The JSON Schema Core Vocabulary</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1.1"><a href="#section-8.1" class="xref">8.1</a>.  <a href="#name-meta-schemas-and-vocabulari" class="xref">Meta-Schemas and Vocabularies</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1.2.1.1"><a href="#section-8.1.1" class="xref">8.1.1</a>.  <a href="#name-the-schema-keyword" class="xref">The "$schema" Keyword</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1.2.2.1"><a href="#section-8.1.2" class="xref">8.1.2</a>.  <a href="#name-the-vocabulary-keyword" class="xref">The "$vocabulary" Keyword</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1.2.3">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1.2.3.1"><a href="#section-8.1.3" class="xref">8.1.3</a>.  <a href="#name-updates-to-meta-schema-and-" class="xref">Updates to Meta-Schema and Vocabulary URIs</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2.1"><a href="#section-8.2" class="xref">8.2</a>.  <a href="#name-base-uri-anchors-and-derefe" class="xref">Base URI, Anchors, and Dereferencing</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2.2.1.1"><a href="#section-8.2.1" class="xref">8.2.1</a>.  <a href="#name-the-id-keyword" class="xref">The "$id" Keyword</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2.2.2.1"><a href="#section-8.2.2" class="xref">8.2.2</a>.  <a href="#name-defining-location-independe" class="xref">Defining location-independent identifiers</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2.2.3">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2.2.3.1"><a href="#section-8.2.3" class="xref">8.2.3</a>.  <a href="#name-schema-references" class="xref">Schema References</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2.2.4">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2.2.4.1"><a href="#section-8.2.4" class="xref">8.2.4</a>.  <a href="#name-schema-re-use-with-defs" class="xref">Schema Re-Use With "$defs"</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.3">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.3.1"><a href="#section-8.3" class="xref">8.3</a>.  <a href="#name-comments-with-comment" class="xref">Comments With "$comment"</a></p>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.1"><a href="#section-9" class="xref">9</a>.  <a href="#name-loading-and-processing-sche" class="xref">Loading and Processing Schemas</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1.1"><a href="#section-9.1" class="xref">9.1</a>.  <a href="#name-loading-a-schema" class="xref">Loading a Schema</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1.2.1.1"><a href="#section-9.1.1" class="xref">9.1.1</a>.  <a href="#name-initial-base-uri" class="xref">Initial Base URI</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1.2.2.1"><a href="#section-9.1.2" class="xref">9.1.2</a>.  <a href="#name-loading-a-referenced-schema" class="xref">Loading a referenced schema</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1.2.3">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1.2.3.1"><a href="#section-9.1.3" class="xref">9.1.3</a>.  <a href="#name-detecting-a-meta-schema" class="xref">Detecting a Meta-Schema</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.2.1"><a href="#section-9.2" class="xref">9.2</a>.  <a href="#name-dereferencing" class="xref">Dereferencing</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.2.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.2.2.1.1"><a href="#section-9.2.1" class="xref">9.2.1</a>.  <a href="#name-json-pointer-fragments-and-" class="xref">JSON Pointer fragments and embedded schema resources</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.3">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.3.1"><a href="#section-9.3" class="xref">9.3</a>.  <a href="#name-compound-documents" class="xref">Compound Documents</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.3.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.3.2.1.1"><a href="#section-9.3.1" class="xref">9.3.1</a>.  <a href="#name-bundling" class="xref">Bundling</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.3.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.3.2.2.1"><a href="#section-9.3.2" class="xref">9.3.2</a>.  <a href="#name-differing-and-default-diale" class="xref">Differing and Default Dialects</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.3.2.3">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.3.2.3.1"><a href="#section-9.3.3" class="xref">9.3.3</a>.  <a href="#name-validating" class="xref">Validating</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.4">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.4.1"><a href="#section-9.4" class="xref">9.4</a>.  <a href="#name-caveats" class="xref">Caveats</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.4.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.4.2.1.1"><a href="#section-9.4.1" class="xref">9.4.1</a>.  <a href="#name-guarding-against-infinite-r" class="xref">Guarding Against Infinite Recursion</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.4.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.4.2.2.1"><a href="#section-9.4.2" class="xref">9.4.2</a>.  <a href="#name-references-to-possible-non-" class="xref">References to Possible Non-Schemas</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.5">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.5.1"><a href="#section-9.5" class="xref">9.5</a>.  <a href="#name-associating-instances-and-s" class="xref">Associating Instances and Schemas</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.5.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.5.2.1.1"><a href="#section-9.5.1" class="xref">9.5.1</a>.  <a href="#name-usage-for-hypermedia" class="xref">Usage for Hypermedia</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.10.1"><a href="#section-10" class="xref">10</a>. <a href="#name-a-vocabulary-for-applying-s" class="xref">A Vocabulary for Applying Subschemas</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.1.1"><a href="#section-10.1" class="xref">10.1</a>.  <a href="#name-keyword-independence" class="xref">Keyword Independence</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.2.1"><a href="#section-10.2" class="xref">10.2</a>.  <a href="#name-keywords-for-applying-subsc" class="xref">Keywords for Applying Subschemas in Place</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.2.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.2.2.1.1"><a href="#section-10.2.1" class="xref">10.2.1</a>.  <a href="#name-keywords-for-applying-subsch" class="xref">Keywords for Applying Subschemas With Logic</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.2.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.2.2.2.1"><a href="#section-10.2.2" class="xref">10.2.2</a>.  <a href="#name-keywords-for-applying-subsche" class="xref">Keywords for Applying Subschemas Conditionally</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.3">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.3.1"><a href="#section-10.3" class="xref">10.3</a>.  <a href="#name-keywords-for-applying-subschem" class="xref">Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Child Instances</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.3.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.3.2.1.1"><a href="#section-10.3.1" class="xref">10.3.1</a>.  <a href="#name-keywords-for-applying-subschema" class="xref">Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Arrays</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.3.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.3.2.2.1"><a href="#section-10.3.2" class="xref">10.3.2</a>.  <a href="#name-keywords-for-applying-subschemas" class="xref">Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Objects</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.11">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.11.1"><a href="#section-11" class="xref">11</a>. <a href="#name-a-vocabulary-for-unevaluate" class="xref">A Vocabulary for Unevaluated Locations</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.1.1"><a href="#section-11.1" class="xref">11.1</a>.  <a href="#name-keyword-independence-2" class="xref">Keyword Independence</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.2.1"><a href="#section-11.2" class="xref">11.2</a>.  <a href="#name-unevaluateditems" class="xref">unevaluatedItems</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.3">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.3.1"><a href="#section-11.3" class="xref">11.3</a>.  <a href="#name-unevaluatedproperties" class="xref">unevaluatedProperties</a></p>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.1"><a href="#section-12" class="xref">12</a>. <a href="#name-output-formatting" class="xref">Output Formatting</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.1.1"><a href="#section-12.1" class="xref">12.1</a>.  <a href="#name-format" class="xref">Format</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.2.1"><a href="#section-12.2" class="xref">12.2</a>.  <a href="#name-output-formats" class="xref">Output Formats</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.3">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.3.1"><a href="#section-12.3" class="xref">12.3</a>.  <a href="#name-minimum-information" class="xref">Minimum Information</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.3.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.3.2.1.1"><a href="#section-12.3.1" class="xref">12.3.1</a>.  <a href="#name-keyword-relative-location" class="xref">Keyword Relative Location</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.3.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.3.2.2.1"><a href="#section-12.3.2" class="xref">12.3.2</a>.  <a href="#name-keyword-absolute-location" class="xref">Keyword Absolute Location</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.3.2.3">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.3.2.3.1"><a href="#section-12.3.3" class="xref">12.3.3</a>.  <a href="#name-instance-location" class="xref">Instance Location</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.3.2.4">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.3.2.4.1"><a href="#section-12.3.4" class="xref">12.3.4</a>.  <a href="#name-error-or-annotation" class="xref">Error or Annotation</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.3.2.5">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.3.2.5.1"><a href="#section-12.3.5" class="xref">12.3.5</a>.  <a href="#name-nested-results" class="xref">Nested Results</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.4">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.4.1"><a href="#section-12.4" class="xref">12.4</a>.  <a href="#name-output-structure" class="xref">Output Structure</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.4.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.4.2.1.1"><a href="#section-12.4.1" class="xref">12.4.1</a>.  <a href="#name-flag" class="xref">Flag</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.4.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.4.2.2.1"><a href="#section-12.4.2" class="xref">12.4.2</a>.  <a href="#name-basic" class="xref">Basic</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.4.2.3">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.4.2.3.1"><a href="#section-12.4.3" class="xref">12.4.3</a>.  <a href="#name-detailed" class="xref">Detailed</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.4.2.4">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.4.2.4.1"><a href="#section-12.4.4" class="xref">12.4.4</a>.  <a href="#name-verbose" class="xref">Verbose</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.4.2.5">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.4.2.5.1"><a href="#section-12.4.5" class="xref">12.4.5</a>.  <a href="#name-output-validation-schemas" class="xref">Output validation schemas</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.13">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.13.1"><a href="#section-13" class="xref">13</a>. <a href="#name-security-considerations" class="xref">Security Considerations</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.14">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.14.1"><a href="#section-14" class="xref">14</a>. <a href="#name-iana-considerations" class="xref">IANA Considerations</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.1.1"><a href="#section-14.1" class="xref">14.1</a>.  <a href="#name-application-schemajson" class="xref">application/schema+json</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.2.1"><a href="#section-14.2" class="xref">14.2</a>.  <a href="#name-application-schema-instance" class="xref">application/schema-instance+json</a></p>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.15">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.15.1"><a href="#section-15" class="xref">15</a>. <a href="#name-references" class="xref">References</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.15.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.15.2.1.1"><a href="#section-15.1" class="xref">15.1</a>.  <a href="#name-normative-references" class="xref">Normative References</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.15.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.15.2.2.1"><a href="#section-15.2" class="xref">15.2</a>.  <a href="#name-informative-references" class="xref">Informative References</a></p>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.16">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.16.1"><a href="#appendix-A" class="xref">Appendix A</a>.  <a href="#name-schema-identification-examp" class="xref">Schema identification examples</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.17">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.17.1"><a href="#appendix-B" class="xref">Appendix B</a>.  <a href="#name-manipulating-schema-documen" class="xref">Manipulating schema documents and references</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.17.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.17.2.1.1"><a href="#appendix-B.1" class="xref">B.1</a>.  <a href="#name-bundling-schema-resources-i" class="xref">Bundling schema resources into a single document</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.17.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.17.2.2.1"><a href="#appendix-B.2" class="xref">B.2</a>.  <a href="#name-reference-removal-is-not-al" class="xref">Reference removal is not always safe</a></p>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.18">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.18.1"><a href="#appendix-C" class="xref">Appendix C</a>.  <a href="#name-example-of-recursive-schema" class="xref">Example of recursive schema extension</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.19">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.19.1"><a href="#appendix-D" class="xref">Appendix D</a>.  <a href="#name-working-with-vocabularies" class="xref">Working with vocabularies</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.19.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.19.2.1.1"><a href="#appendix-D.1" class="xref">D.1</a>.  <a href="#name-best-practices-for-vocabula" class="xref">Best practices for vocabulary and meta-schema authors</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.19.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.19.2.2.1"><a href="#appendix-D.2" class="xref">D.2</a>.  <a href="#name-example-meta-schema-with-vo" class="xref">Example meta-schema with vocabulary declarations</a></p>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.20">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.20.1"><a href="#appendix-E" class="xref">Appendix E</a>.  <a href="#name-references-and-generative-u" class="xref">References and generative use cases</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.21">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.21.1"><a href="#appendix-F" class="xref">Appendix F</a>.  <a href="#name-acknowledgments" class="xref">Acknowledgments</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.22">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.22.1"><a href="#appendix-G" class="xref">Appendix G</a>.  <a href="#name-changelog" class="xref">ChangeLog</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.23">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.23.1"><a href="#appendix-H" class="xref"></a><a href="#name-authors-addresses" class="xref">Authors' Addresses</a></p>
+</li>
+        </ul>
+</nav>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-1">
+      <h2 id="name-introduction">
+<a href="#section-1" class="section-number selfRef">1. </a><a href="#name-introduction" class="section-name selfRef">Introduction</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-1-1">
+                JSON Schema is a JSON media type for defining the structure of JSON data. JSON Schema
+                is intended to define validation, documentation, hyperlink navigation, and interaction
+                control of JSON data.<a href="#section-1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-1-2">
+                This specification defines JSON Schema core terminology and mechanisms, including
+                pointing to another JSON Schema by reference,
+                dereferencing a JSON Schema reference,
+                specifying the dialect being used,
+                specifying a dialect's vocabulary requirements,
+                and defining the expected output.<a href="#section-1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-1-3">
+                Other specifications define the vocabularies that perform assertions about validation,
+                linking, annotation, navigation, and interaction.<a href="#section-1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-2">
+      <h2 id="name-conventions-and-terminology">
+<a href="#section-2" class="section-number selfRef">2. </a><a href="#name-conventions-and-terminology" class="section-name selfRef">Conventions and Terminology</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-2-1">
+                
+
+                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 <span><a href="#RFC2119" class="xref">RFC 2119</a> [<a href="#RFC2119" class="xref">RFC2119</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-2-2">
+                The terms "JSON", "JSON text", "JSON value", "member", "element", "object", "array",
+                "number", "string", "boolean", "true", "false", and "null" in this document are to
+                be interpreted as defined in <span><a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC 8259</a> [<a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC8259</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-3">
+      <h2 id="name-overview">
+<a href="#section-3" class="section-number selfRef">3. </a><a href="#name-overview" class="section-name selfRef">Overview</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-3-1">
+                This document proposes a new media type "application/schema+json" to identify a JSON
+                Schema for describing JSON data.
+                It also proposes a further optional media type, "application/schema-instance+json",
+                to provide additional integration features.
+                JSON Schemas are themselves JSON documents.
+                This, and related specifications, define keywords allowing authors to describe JSON
+                data in several ways.<a href="#section-3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-3-2">
+                JSON Schema uses keywords to assert constraints on JSON instances or annotate those
+                instances with additional information.  Additional keywords are used to apply
+                assertions and annotations to more complex JSON data structures, or based on
+                some sort of condition.<a href="#section-3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-3-3">
+                To facilitate re-use, keywords can be organized into vocabularies. A vocabulary
+                consists of a list of keywords, together with their syntax and semantics.
+                A dialect is defined as a set of vocabularies and their required support
+                identified in a meta-schema.<a href="#section-3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-3-4">
+                JSON Schema can be extended either by defining additional vocabularies,
+                or less formally by defining additional keywords outside of any vocabulary.
+                Unrecognized individual keywords simply have their values collected as annotations,
+                while the behavior with respect to an unrecognized vocabulary can be controlled
+                when declaring which vocabularies are in use.<a href="#section-3-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-3-5">
+                This document defines a core vocabulary that MUST be supported by any
+                implementation, and cannot be disabled.  Its keywords are each prefixed
+                with a "$" character to emphasize their required nature.  This vocabulary
+                is essential to the functioning of the "application/schema+json" media
+                type, and is used to bootstrap the loading of other vocabularies.<a href="#section-3-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-3-6">
+                Additionally, this document defines a RECOMMENDED vocabulary of keywords
+                for applying subschemas conditionally, and for applying subschemas to
+                the contents of objects and arrays.  Either this vocabulary or one very
+                much like it is required to write schemas for non-trivial JSON instances,
+                whether those schemas are intended for assertion validation, annotation,
+                or both.  While not part of the required core vocabulary, for maximum
+                interoperability this additional vocabulary is included in this document
+                and its use is strongly encouraged.<a href="#section-3-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-3-7">
+                Further vocabularies for purposes such as structural validation or
+                hypermedia annotation are defined in other documents.  These other
+                documents each define a dialect collecting the standard sets of
+                vocabularies needed to write schemas for that document's purpose.<a href="#section-3-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-4">
+      <h2 id="name-definitions">
+<a href="#section-4" class="section-number selfRef">4. </a><a href="#name-definitions" class="section-name selfRef">Definitions</a>
+      </h2>
+<section id="section-4.1">
+        <h3 id="name-json-document">
+<a href="#section-4.1" class="section-number selfRef">4.1. </a><a href="#name-json-document" class="section-name selfRef">JSON Document</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-4.1-1">
+                    A JSON document is an information resource (series of octets) described by the
+                    application/json media type.<a href="#section-4.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.1-2">
+                    In JSON Schema, the terms "JSON document", "JSON text", and "JSON value" are
+                    interchangeable because of the data model it defines.<a href="#section-4.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.1-3">
+                    JSON Schema is only defined over JSON documents. However, any document or memory
+                    structure that can be parsed into or processed according to the JSON Schema data
+                    model can be interpreted against a JSON Schema, including media types like
+                    <span><a href="#RFC7049" class="xref">CBOR</a> [<a href="#RFC7049" class="xref">RFC7049</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-4.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-4.2">
+        <h3 id="name-instance">
+<a href="#section-4.2" class="section-number selfRef">4.2. </a><a href="#name-instance" class="section-name selfRef">Instance</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-4.2-1">
+                    A JSON document to which a schema is applied is known as an "instance".<a href="#section-4.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.2-2">
+                    JSON Schema is defined over "application/json" or compatible documents,
+                    including media types with the "+json" structured syntax suffix.<a href="#section-4.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.2-3">
+                    Among these, this specification defines the "application/schema-instance+json"
+                    media type which defines handling for fragments in the URI.<a href="#section-4.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-4.2.1">
+          <h4 id="name-instance-data-model">
+<a href="#section-4.2.1" class="section-number selfRef">4.2.1. </a><a href="#name-instance-data-model" class="section-name selfRef">Instance Data Model</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-4.2.1-1">
+                        JSON Schema interprets documents according to a data model. A JSON value
+                        interpreted according to this data model is called an "instance".<a href="#section-4.2.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.2.1-2">
+                        An instance has one of six primitive types, and a range of possible values
+                        depending on the type:<a href="#section-4.2.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-4.2.1-3">
+            <dt id="section-4.2.1-3.1">null:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.1-3.2">A JSON "null" value<a href="#section-4.2.1-3.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-4.2.1-3.3">boolean:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.1-3.4">A "true" or "false" value, from the JSON "true" or "false" value<a href="#section-4.2.1-3.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-4.2.1-3.5">object:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.1-3.6">An unordered set of properties mapping a string to an instance, from the JSON "object" value<a href="#section-4.2.1-3.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-4.2.1-3.7">array:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.1-3.8">An ordered list of instances, from the JSON "array" value<a href="#section-4.2.1-3.8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-4.2.1-3.9">number:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.1-3.10">An arbitrary-precision, base-10 decimal number value, from the JSON "number" value<a href="#section-4.2.1-3.10" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-4.2.1-3.11">string:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.1-3.12">A string of Unicode code points, from the JSON "string" value<a href="#section-4.2.1-3.12" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+<p id="section-4.2.1-4">
+                        Whitespace and formatting concerns, including different lexical
+                        representations of numbers that are equal within the data model, are thus
+                        outside the scope of JSON Schema.  JSON Schema
+                        <span><a href="#vocabulary" class="xref">vocabularies</a> (<a href="#vocabulary" class="xref">Section 8.1</a>)</span> that wish
+                        to work with such differences in lexical representations SHOULD define
+                        keywords to precisely interpret formatted strings within the data model
+                        rather than relying on having the original JSON representation Unicode
+                        characters available.<a href="#section-4.2.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.2.1-5">
+                        Since an object cannot have two properties with the same key, behavior for a
+                        JSON document that tries to define two properties with
+                        the same key in a single object is undefined.<a href="#section-4.2.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.2.1-6">
+                        Note that JSON Schema vocabularies are free to define their own extended
+                        type system.  This should not be confused with the core data model types
+                        defined here.  As an example, "integer" is a reasonable type for a
+                        vocabulary to define as a value for a keyword, but the data model
+                        makes no distinction between integers and other numbers.<a href="#section-4.2.1-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-4.2.2">
+          <h4 id="name-instance-equality">
+<a href="#section-4.2.2" class="section-number selfRef">4.2.2. </a><a href="#name-instance-equality" class="section-name selfRef">Instance Equality</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-4.2.2-1">
+                        Two JSON instances are said to be equal if and only if they are of the same type
+                        and have the same value according to the data model. Specifically, this means:<a href="#section-4.2.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ul class="normal ulEmpty">
+<li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-4.2.2-2.1">both are null; or<a href="#section-4.2.2-2.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-4.2.2-2.2">both are true; or<a href="#section-4.2.2-2.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-4.2.2-2.3">both are false; or<a href="#section-4.2.2-2.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-4.2.2-2.4">both are strings, and are the same codepoint-for-codepoint; or<a href="#section-4.2.2-2.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-4.2.2-2.5">both are numbers, and have the same mathematical value; or<a href="#section-4.2.2-2.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-4.2.2-2.6">both are arrays, and have an equal value item-for-item; or<a href="#section-4.2.2-2.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-4.2.2-2.7">both are objects, and each property in one has exactly one property with
+                                a key equal to the other's, and that other property has an equal
+                                value.<a href="#section-4.2.2-2.7" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+<p id="section-4.2.2-3">
+                        Implied in this definition is that arrays must be the same length,
+                        objects must have the same number of members,
+                        properties in objects are unordered,
+                        there is no way to define multiple properties with the same key,
+                        and mere formatting differences (indentation, placement of commas, trailing
+                        zeros) are insignificant.<a href="#section-4.2.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-4.2.3">
+          <h4 id="name-non-json-instances">
+<a href="#section-4.2.3" class="section-number selfRef">4.2.3. </a><a href="#name-non-json-instances" class="section-name selfRef">Non-JSON Instances</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-4.2.3-1">
+                        It is possible to use JSON Schema with a superset of the JSON Schema data model,
+                        where an instance may be outside any of the six JSON data types.<a href="#section-4.2.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.2.3-2">
+                        In this case, annotations still apply; but most validation keywords will not be useful,
+                        as they will always pass or always fail.<a href="#section-4.2.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.2.3-3">
+                        A custom vocabulary may define support for a superset of the core data model.
+                        The schema itself may only be expressible in this superset;
+                        for example, to make use of the "const" keyword.<a href="#section-4.2.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+<div id="schema-document">
+<section id="section-4.3">
+        <h3 id="name-json-schema-documents">
+<a href="#section-4.3" class="section-number selfRef">4.3. </a><a href="#name-json-schema-documents" class="section-name selfRef">JSON Schema Documents</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-4.3-1">
+                    A JSON Schema document, or simply a schema, is a JSON document used to describe
+                    an instance.
+                    A schema can itself be interpreted as an instance, but SHOULD always be given
+                    the media type "application/schema+json" rather than
+                    "application/schema-instance+json".  The "application/schema+json" media
+                    type is defined to offer a superset of the
+                    fragment identifier syntax and semantics provided by
+                    "application/schema-instance+json".<a href="#section-4.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.3-2">
+                    A JSON Schema MUST be an object or a boolean.<a href="#section-4.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-4.3.1">
+          <h4 id="name-json-schema-objects-and-key">
+<a href="#section-4.3.1" class="section-number selfRef">4.3.1. </a><a href="#name-json-schema-objects-and-key" class="section-name selfRef">JSON Schema Objects and Keywords</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-4.3.1-1">
+                        Object properties that are applied to the instance are called keywords,
+                        or schema keywords.  Broadly speaking, keywords fall into one
+                        of five categories:<a href="#section-4.3.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-4.3.1-2">
+            <dt id="section-4.3.1-2.1">identifiers:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.3.1-2.2">
+                                control schema identification through setting a URI
+                                for the schema and/or changing how the base URI is determined<a href="#section-4.3.1-2.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-4.3.1-2.3">assertions:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.3.1-2.4">
+                                produce a boolean result when applied to an instance<a href="#section-4.3.1-2.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-4.3.1-2.5">annotations:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.3.1-2.6">
+                                attach information to an instance for application use<a href="#section-4.3.1-2.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-4.3.1-2.7">applicators:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.3.1-2.8">
+                                apply one or more subschemas to a particular location
+                                in the instance, and combine or modify their results<a href="#section-4.3.1-2.8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-4.3.1-2.9">reserved locations:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.3.1-2.10">
+                                do not directly affect results, but reserve a place
+                                for a specific purpose to ensure interoperability<a href="#section-4.3.1-2.10" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+<p id="section-4.3.1-3">
+                        Keywords may fall into multiple categories, although applicators
+                        SHOULD only produce assertion results based on their subschemas'
+                        results.  They should not define additional constraints independent
+                        of their subschemas.<a href="#section-4.3.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.3.1-4">
+                        Keywords which are properties within the same schema object are referred to as adjacent keywords.<a href="#section-4.3.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.3.1-5">
+                        Extension keywords, meaning those defined outside of this document
+                        and its companions, are free to define other behaviors as well.<a href="#section-4.3.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.3.1-6">
+                        A JSON Schema MAY contain properties which are not schema keywords.
+                        Unknown keywords SHOULD be treated as annotations, where the value
+                        of the keyword is the value of the annotation.<a href="#section-4.3.1-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.3.1-7">
+                        An empty schema is a JSON Schema with no properties, or only unknown
+                        properties.<a href="#section-4.3.1-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-4.3.2">
+          <h4 id="name-boolean-json-schemas">
+<a href="#section-4.3.2" class="section-number selfRef">4.3.2. </a><a href="#name-boolean-json-schemas" class="section-name selfRef">Boolean JSON Schemas</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-4.3.2-1">
+                        The boolean schema values "true" and "false" are trivial schemas that
+                        always produce themselves as assertion results, regardless of the
+                        instance value.  They never produce annotation results.<a href="#section-4.3.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.3.2-2">
+                        These boolean schemas exist to clarify schema author intent and
+                        facilitate schema processing optimizations.  They behave identically
+                        to the following schema objects (where "not" is part of the
+                        subschema application vocabulary defined in this document).<a href="#section-4.3.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-4.3.2-3">
+            <dt id="section-4.3.2-3.1">true:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.3.2-3.2">
+                                Always passes validation, as if the empty schema {}<a href="#section-4.3.2-3.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-4.3.2-3.3">false:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.3.2-3.4">
+                                Always fails validation, as if the schema { "not": {} }<a href="#section-4.3.2-3.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+<p id="section-4.3.2-4">
+                        While the empty schema object is unambiguous, there are many
+                        possible equivalents to the "false" schema.  Using the boolean
+                        values ensures that the intent is clear to both human readers
+                        and implementations.<a href="#section-4.3.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-4.3.3">
+          <h4 id="name-schema-vocabularies">
+<a href="#section-4.3.3" class="section-number selfRef">4.3.3. </a><a href="#name-schema-vocabularies" class="section-name selfRef">Schema Vocabularies</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-4.3.3-1">
+                        A schema vocabulary, or simply a vocabulary, is a set of keywords,
+                        their syntax, and their semantics.  A vocabulary is generally organized
+                        around a particular purpose.  Different uses of JSON Schema, such
+                        as validation, hypermedia, or user interface generation, will
+                        involve different sets of vocabularies.<a href="#section-4.3.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.3.3-2">
+                        Vocabularies are the primary unit of re-use in JSON Schema, as schema
+                        authors can indicate what vocabularies are required or optional in
+                        order to process the schema.  Since vocabularies are identified by URIs
+                        in the meta-schema, generic implementations can load extensions to support
+                        previously unknown vocabularies.  While keywords can be supported outside
+                        of any vocabulary, there is no analogous mechanism to indicate individual
+                        keyword usage.<a href="#section-4.3.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.3.3-3">
+                        A schema vocabulary can be defined by anything from an informal description
+                        to a standards proposal, depending on the audience and interoperability
+                        expectations.  In particular, in order to facilitate vocabulary use within
+                        non-public organizations, a vocabulary specification need not be published
+                        outside of its scope of use.<a href="#section-4.3.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-4.3.4">
+          <h4 id="name-meta-schemas">
+<a href="#section-4.3.4" class="section-number selfRef">4.3.4. </a><a href="#name-meta-schemas" class="section-name selfRef">Meta-Schemas</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-4.3.4-1">
+                        A schema that itself describes a schema is called a meta-schema.
+                        Meta-schemas are used to validate JSON Schemas and specify which vocabularies
+                        they are using.<a href="#section-4.3.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.3.4-2">
+                        Typically, a meta-schema will specify a set of vocabularies, and validate
+                        schemas that conform to the syntax of those vocabularies.  However, meta-schemas
+                        and vocabularies are separate in order to allow meta-schemas to validate
+                        schema conformance more strictly or more loosely than the vocabularies'
+                        specifications call for.  Meta-schemas may also describe and validate
+                        additional keywords that are not part of a formal vocabulary.<a href="#section-4.3.4-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<div id="root">
+<section id="section-4.3.5">
+          <h4 id="name-root-schema-and-subschemas-">
+<a href="#section-4.3.5" class="section-number selfRef">4.3.5. </a><a href="#name-root-schema-and-subschemas-" class="section-name selfRef">Root Schema and Subschemas and Resources</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-4.3.5-1">
+                        A JSON Schema resource is a schema which is
+                        <span><a href="#RFC6596" class="xref">canonically</a> [<a href="#RFC6596" class="xref">RFC6596</a>]</span> identified by an
+                        <span><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">absolute URI</a> [<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span>.  Schema resources MAY
+                        also be identified by URIs, including URIs with fragments,
+                        if the resulting secondary resource (as defined by
+                        <span><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">section 3.5 of RFC 3986</a> [<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span>) is identical
+                        to the primary resource.  This can occur with the empty fragment,
+                        or when one schema resource is embedded in another.  Any such URIs
+                        with fragments are considered to be non-canonical.<a href="#section-4.3.5-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.3.5-2">
+                        The root schema is the schema that comprises the entire JSON document
+                        in question.  The root schema is always a schema resource, where the
+                        URI is determined as described in section
+                        <a href="#initial-base" class="xref">9.1.1</a>.
+                        <span class="cref">
+                            Note that documents that embed schemas in another format will not
+                            have a root schema resource in this sense.  Exactly how such usages
+                            fit with the JSON Schema document and resource concepts will be
+                            clarified in a future draft.
+            </span><a href="#section-4.3.5-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.3.5-3">
+                        Some keywords take schemas themselves, allowing JSON Schemas to be nested:<a href="#section-4.3.5-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-4.3.5-4">
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "title": "root",
+    "items": {
+        "title": "array item"
+    }
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#section-4.3.5-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="section-4.3.5-5">
+                        In this example document, the schema titled "array item" is a subschema,
+                        and the schema titled "root" is the root schema.<a href="#section-4.3.5-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.3.5-6">
+                        As with the root schema, a subschema is either an object or a boolean.<a href="#section-4.3.5-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.3.5-7">
+                        As discussed in section
+                        <a href="#id-keyword" class="xref">8.2.1</a>, a JSON Schema document
+                        can contain multiple JSON Schema resources.  When used without qualification,
+                        the term "root schema" refers to the document's root schema.  In some
+                        cases, resource root schemas are discussed.  A resource's root schema
+                        is its top-level schema object, which would also be a document root schema
+                        if the resource were to be extracted to a standalone JSON Schema document.<a href="#section-4.3.5-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-4.3.5-8">
+                        Whether multiple schema resources are embedded or linked with a reference,
+                        they are processed in the same way, with the same available behaviors.<a href="#section-4.3.5-8" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+</section>
+</div>
+</section>
+<div id="fragments">
+<section id="section-5">
+      <h2 id="name-fragment-identifiers">
+<a href="#section-5" class="section-number selfRef">5. </a><a href="#name-fragment-identifiers" class="section-name selfRef">Fragment Identifiers</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-5-1">
+                In accordance with section 3.1 of <span><a href="#RFC6839" class="xref">RFC 6839</a> [<a href="#RFC6839" class="xref">RFC6839</a>]</span>,
+                the syntax and semantics of fragment identifiers specified for
+                any +json media type SHOULD be as specified for "application/json".
+                (At publication of this document, there is no fragment identification
+                syntax defined for "application/json".)<a href="#section-5-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-5-2">
+                Additionally, the "application/schema+json" media type supports two
+                fragment identifier structures: plain names and JSON Pointers.
+                The "application/schema-instance+json" media type supports one
+                fragment identifier structure: JSON Pointers.<a href="#section-5-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-5-3">
+                The use of JSON Pointers as URI fragment identifiers is described in
+                <span><a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901</a> [<a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC6901</a>]</span>.
+                For "application/schema+json", which supports two fragment identifier syntaxes,
+                fragment identifiers matching the JSON Pointer syntax, including the empty string,
+                MUST be interpreted as JSON Pointer fragment identifiers.<a href="#section-5-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-5-4">
+                Per the W3C's
+                <span><a href="#W3C.WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025" class="xref">best practices for fragment identifiers</a> [<a href="#W3C.WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025" class="xref">W3C.WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025</a>]</span>,
+                plain name fragment identifiers in "application/schema+json" are reserved for referencing
+                locally named schemas.  All fragment identifiers that do
+                not match the JSON Pointer syntax MUST be interpreted as
+                plain name fragment identifiers.<a href="#section-5-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-5-5">
+                Defining and referencing a plain name fragment identifier within an
+                "application/schema+json" document are specified
+                in the <span><a href="#anchor" class="xref">"$anchor" keyword</a> (<a href="#anchor" class="xref">Section 8.2.2</a>)</span> section.<a href="#section-5-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-5-6"></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-6">
+      <h2 id="name-general-considerations">
+<a href="#section-6" class="section-number selfRef">6. </a><a href="#name-general-considerations" class="section-name selfRef">General Considerations</a>
+      </h2>
+<section id="section-6.1">
+        <h3 id="name-range-of-json-values">
+<a href="#section-6.1" class="section-number selfRef">6.1. </a><a href="#name-range-of-json-values" class="section-name selfRef">Range of JSON Values</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-6.1-1">
+                    An instance may be any valid JSON value as defined by <span><a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">JSON</a> [<a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC8259</a>]</span>.
+                    JSON Schema imposes no restrictions on type: JSON Schema can describe any JSON
+                    value, including, for example, null.<a href="#section-6.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<div id="language">
+<section id="section-6.2">
+        <h3 id="name-programming-language-indepe">
+<a href="#section-6.2" class="section-number selfRef">6.2. </a><a href="#name-programming-language-indepe" class="section-name selfRef">Programming Language Independence</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-6.2-1">
+                    JSON Schema is programming language agnostic, and supports the full range of
+                    values described in the data model.
+                    Be aware, however, that some languages and JSON parsers may not be able to
+                    represent in memory the full range of values describable by JSON.<a href="#section-6.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="integers">
+<section id="section-6.3">
+        <h3 id="name-mathematical-integers">
+<a href="#section-6.3" class="section-number selfRef">6.3. </a><a href="#name-mathematical-integers" class="section-name selfRef">Mathematical Integers</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-6.3-1">
+                    Some programming languages and parsers use different internal representations
+                    for floating point numbers than they do for integers.<a href="#section-6.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.3-2">
+                    For consistency, integer JSON numbers SHOULD NOT be encoded with a fractional
+                    part.<a href="#section-6.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="regex">
+<section id="section-6.4">
+        <h3 id="name-regular-expressions">
+<a href="#section-6.4" class="section-number selfRef">6.4. </a><a href="#name-regular-expressions" class="section-name selfRef">Regular Expressions</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-6.4-1">
+                    Keywords MAY use regular expressions to express constraints, or constrain
+                    the instance value to be a regular expression.
+                    These regular expressions SHOULD be valid according to the regular expression
+                    dialect described in <span><a href="#ecma262" class="xref">ECMA-262, section 21.2.1</a> [<a href="#ecma262" class="xref">ecma262</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-6.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.4-2">
+                    Regular expressions SHOULD be built with the "u" flag (or equivalent) to provide
+                    Unicode support, or processed in such a way which provides Unicode support as
+                    defined by ECMA-262.<a href="#section-6.4-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.4-3">
+                    Furthermore, given the high disparity in regular expression constructs support,
+                    schema authors SHOULD limit themselves to the following regular expression
+                    tokens:<a href="#section-6.4-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ul class="normal ulEmpty">
+<li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-6.4-4.1">individual Unicode characters, as defined by the <span><a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">JSON specification</a> [<a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC8259</a>]</span>;<a href="#section-6.4-4.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-6.4-4.2">simple character classes ([abc]), range character classes ([a-z]);<a href="#section-6.4-4.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-6.4-4.3">complemented character classes ([^abc], [^a-z]);<a href="#section-6.4-4.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-6.4-4.4">simple quantifiers: "+" (one or more), "*" (zero or more), "?" (zero or
+                        one), and their lazy versions ("+?", "*?", "??");<a href="#section-6.4-4.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-6.4-4.5">range quantifiers: "{x}" (exactly x occurrences), "{x,y}" (at least x, at
+                        most y, occurrences), {x,} (x occurrences or more), and their lazy
+                        versions;<a href="#section-6.4-4.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-6.4-4.6">the beginning-of-input ("^") and end-of-input ("$") anchors;<a href="#section-6.4-4.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-6.4-4.7">simple grouping ("(...)") and alternation ("|").<a href="#section-6.4-4.7" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+        </ul>
+<p id="section-6.4-5">
+                    Finally, implementations MUST NOT take regular expressions to be
+                    anchored, neither at the beginning nor at the end. This means, for instance,
+                    the pattern "es" matches "expression".<a href="#section-6.4-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="extending">
+<section id="section-6.5">
+        <h3 id="name-extending-json-schema">
+<a href="#section-6.5" class="section-number selfRef">6.5. </a><a href="#name-extending-json-schema" class="section-name selfRef">Extending JSON Schema</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-6.5-1">
+                    Additional schema keywords and schema vocabularies MAY be defined
+                    by any entity.  Save for explicit agreement, schema authors SHALL NOT
+                    expect these additional keywords and vocabularies to be supported by
+                    implementations that do not explicitly document such support.
+                    Implementations SHOULD treat keywords they do not support as annotations,
+                    where the value of the keyword is the value of the annotation.<a href="#section-6.5-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.5-2">
+                    Implementations MAY provide the ability to register or load handlers
+                    for vocabularies that they do not support directly.  The exact mechanism
+                    for registering and implementing such handlers is implementation-dependent.<a href="#section-6.5-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7">
+      <h2 id="name-keyword-behaviors">
+<a href="#section-7" class="section-number selfRef">7. </a><a href="#name-keyword-behaviors" class="section-name selfRef">Keyword Behaviors</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-7-1">
+                JSON Schema keywords fall into several general behavior categories.
+                Assertions validate that an instance satisfies constraints, producing
+                a boolean result.  Annotations attach information that applications
+                may use in any way they see fit.
+                Applicators apply subschemas to parts of the instance and combine
+                their results.<a href="#section-7-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7-2">
+                Extension keywords SHOULD stay within these categories, keeping in mind
+                that annotations in particular are extremely flexible.  Complex behavior
+                is usually better delegated to applications on the basis of annotation
+                data than implemented directly as schema keywords.  However, extension
+                keywords MAY define other behaviors for specialized purposes.<a href="#section-7-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7-3">
+                Evaluating an instance against a schema involves processing all of the
+                keywords in the schema against the appropriate locations within the instance.
+                Typically, applicator keywords are processed until a schema object with no
+                applicators (and therefore no subschemas) is reached.  The appropriate
+                location in the instance is evaluated against the assertion and
+                annotation keywords in the schema object, and their results are gathered
+                into the parent schema according to the rules of the applicator.<a href="#section-7-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7-4">
+                Evaluation of a parent schema object can complete once all of its
+                subschemas have been evaluated, although in some circumstances evaluation
+                may be short-circuited due to assertion results.  When annotations are
+                being collected, some assertion result short-circuiting is not possible
+                due to the need to examine all subschemas for annotation collection, including
+                those that cannot further change the assertion result.<a href="#section-7-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div id="scopes">
+<section id="section-7.1">
+        <h3 id="name-lexical-scope-and-dynamic-s">
+<a href="#section-7.1" class="section-number selfRef">7.1. </a><a href="#name-lexical-scope-and-dynamic-s" class="section-name selfRef">Lexical Scope and Dynamic Scope</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-7.1-1">
+                    While most JSON Schema keywords can be evaluated on their own,
+                    or at most need to take into account the values or results of
+                    adjacent keywords in the same schema object, a few have more
+                    complex behavior.<a href="#section-7.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.1-2">
+                    The lexical scope of a keyword is determined by the nested JSON
+                    data structure of objects and arrays.  The largest such scope
+                    is an entire schema document.  The smallest scope is a single
+                    schema object with no subschemas.<a href="#section-7.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.1-3">
+                    Keywords MAY be defined with a partial value, such as a URI-reference,
+                    which must be resolved against another value, such as another
+                    URI-reference or a full URI, which is found through the lexical
+                    structure of the JSON document.  The "$id", "$ref", and
+                    "$dynamicRef" core keywords, and the "base" JSON Hyper-Schema
+                    keyword, are examples of this sort of behavior.<a href="#section-7.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.1-4">
+                    Note that some keywords, such as "$schema", apply to the lexical
+                    scope of the entire schema resource, and therefore MUST only
+                    appear in a schema resource's root schema.<a href="#section-7.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.1-5">
+                    Other keywords may take into account the dynamic scope that
+                    exists during the evaluation of a schema, typically together
+                    with an instance document.
+                    The outermost dynamic scope is the schema object at
+                    which processing begins, even if it is not a schema resource root.
+                    The path from this root schema to any particular keyword (that
+                    includes any "$ref" and "$dynamicRef" keywords that may have
+                    been resolved) is considered the keyword's "validation path."<a href="#section-7.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.1-6">
+                    Lexical and dynamic scopes align until a reference keyword
+                    is encountered.  While following the reference keyword moves processing
+                    from one lexical scope into a different one, from the perspective
+                    of dynamic scope, following a reference is no different from descending
+                    into a subschema present as a value.  A keyword on the far side of
+                    that reference that resolves information through the dynamic scope
+                    will consider the originating side of the reference to be their
+                    dynamic parent, rather than examining the local lexically enclosing parent.<a href="#section-7.1-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.1-7">
+                    The concept of dynamic scope is primarily used with "$dynamicRef" and
+                    "$dynamicAnchor", and should be considered an advanced feature
+                    and used with caution when defining additional keywords.  It also appears
+                    when reporting errors and collected annotations, as it may be possible
+                    to revisit the same lexical scope repeatedly with different dynamic
+                    scopes.  In such cases, it is important to inform the user of the
+                    dynamic path that produced the error or annotation.<a href="#section-7.1-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-7.2">
+        <h3 id="name-keyword-interactions">
+<a href="#section-7.2" class="section-number selfRef">7.2. </a><a href="#name-keyword-interactions" class="section-name selfRef">Keyword Interactions</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-7.2-1">
+                    Keyword behavior MAY be defined in terms of the annotation results
+                    of <span><a href="#root" class="xref">subschemas</a> (<a href="#root" class="xref">Section 4.3.5</a>)</span> and/or adjacent keywords
+                    (keywords within the same schema object) and their subschemas.
+                    Such keywords MUST NOT result in a circular dependency.
+                    Keywords MAY modify their behavior based on the presence or absence
+                    of another keyword in the same
+                    <span><a href="#schema-document" class="xref">schema object</a> (<a href="#schema-document" class="xref">Section 4.3</a>)</span>.<a href="#section-7.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.3">
+        <h3 id="name-default-behaviors">
+<a href="#section-7.3" class="section-number selfRef">7.3. </a><a href="#name-default-behaviors" class="section-name selfRef">Default Behaviors</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-7.3-1">
+                    A missing keyword MUST NOT produce a false assertion result, MUST
+                    NOT produce annotation results, and MUST NOT cause any other schema
+                    to be evaluated as part of its own behavioral definition.
+                    However, given that missing keywords do not contribute annotations,
+                    the lack of annotation results may indirectly change the behavior
+                    of other keywords.<a href="#section-7.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.3-2">
+                    In some cases, the missing keyword assertion behavior of a keyword is
+                    identical to that produced by a certain value, and keyword definitions
+                    SHOULD note such values where known.  However, even if the value which
+                    produces the default behavior would produce annotation results if
+                    present, the default behavior still MUST NOT result in annotations.<a href="#section-7.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.3-3">
+                    Because annotation collection can add significant cost in terms of both
+                    computation and memory, implementations MAY opt out of this feature.
+                    Keywords that are specified in terms of collected annotations SHOULD
+                    describe reasonable alternate approaches when appropriate.
+                    This approach is demonstrated by the
+                    "<a href="#items" class="xref">items</a>" and
+                    "<a href="#additionalProperties" class="xref">additionalProperties</a>" keywords in this
+                    document.<a href="#section-7.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.3-4">
+                    Note that when no such alternate approach is possible for a keyword,
+                    implementations that do not support annotation collections will not
+                    be able to support those keywords or vocabularies that contain them.<a href="#section-7.3-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.4">
+        <h3 id="name-identifiers">
+<a href="#section-7.4" class="section-number selfRef">7.4. </a><a href="#name-identifiers" class="section-name selfRef">Identifiers</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-7.4-1">
+                    Identifiers define URIs for a schema, or affect how such URIs are
+                    resolved in <span><a href="#references" class="xref">references</a> (<a href="#references" class="xref">Section 8.2.3</a>)</span>, or both.
+                    The Core vocabulary defined in this document defines several
+                    identifying keywords, most notably "$id".<a href="#section-7.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.4-2">
+                    Canonical schema URIs MUST NOT change while processing an instance, but
+                    keywords that affect URI-reference resolution MAY have behavior that
+                    is only fully determined at runtime.<a href="#section-7.4-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.4-3">
+                    While custom identifier keywords are possible, vocabulary designers should
+                    take care not to disrupt the functioning of core keywords. For example,
+                    the "$dynamicAnchor" keyword in this specification limits its URI resolution
+                    effects to the matching "$dynamicRef" keyword, leaving the behavior
+                    of "$ref" undisturbed.<a href="#section-7.4-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<div id="applicators">
+<section id="section-7.5">
+        <h3 id="name-applicators">
+<a href="#section-7.5" class="section-number selfRef">7.5. </a><a href="#name-applicators" class="section-name selfRef">Applicators</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-7.5-1">
+                    Applicators allow for building more complex schemas than can be accomplished
+                    with a single schema object.  Evaluation of an instance against a
+                    <span><a href="#schema-document" class="xref">schema document</a> (<a href="#schema-document" class="xref">Section 4.3</a>)</span> begins by applying
+                    the <span><a href="#root" class="xref">root schema</a> (<a href="#root" class="xref">Section 4.3.5</a>)</span> to the complete instance
+                    document.  From there, keywords known as applicators are used to determine
+                    which additional schemas are applied.  Such schemas may be applied in-place
+                    to the current location, or to a child location.<a href="#section-7.5-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.5-2">
+                    The schemas to be applied may be present as subschemas comprising all or
+                    part of the keyword's value.  Alternatively, an applicator may refer to
+                    a schema elsewhere in the same schema document, or in a different one.
+                    The mechanism for identifying such referenced schemas is defined by the
+                    keyword.<a href="#section-7.5-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.5-3">
+                    Applicator keywords also define how subschema or referenced schema
+                    boolean <span><a href="#assertions" class="xref">assertion</a> (<a href="#assertions" class="xref">Section 7.6</a>)</span>
+                    results are modified and/or combined to produce the boolean result
+                    of the applicator.  Applicators may apply any boolean logic operation
+                    to the assertion results of subschemas, but MUST NOT introduce new
+                    assertion conditions of their own.<a href="#section-7.5-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.5-4">
+                    <span><a href="#annotations" class="xref">Annotation</a> (<a href="#annotations" class="xref">Section 7.7</a>)</span> results are
+                    preserved along with the instance location and the location of
+                    the schema keyword, so that applications can decide how to
+                    interpret multiple values.<a href="#section-7.5-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div id="referenced">
+<section id="section-7.5.1">
+          <h4 id="name-referenced-and-referencing-">
+<a href="#section-7.5.1" class="section-number selfRef">7.5.1. </a><a href="#name-referenced-and-referencing-" class="section-name selfRef">Referenced and Referencing Schemas</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-7.5.1-1">
+                        As noted in <a href="#applicators" class="xref">Section 7.5</a>, an applicator keyword may
+                        refer to a schema to be applied, rather than including it as a
+                        subschema in the applicator's value.  In such situations, the
+                        schema being applied is known as the referenced schema, while
+                        the schema containing the applicator keyword is the referencing schema.<a href="#section-7.5.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.5.1-2">
+                        While root schemas and subschemas are static concepts based on a
+                        schema's position within a schema document, referenced and referencing
+                        schemas are dynamic.  Different pairs of schemas may find themselves
+                        in various referenced and referencing arrangements during the evaluation
+                        of an instance against a schema.<a href="#section-7.5.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.5.1-3">
+                        For some by-reference applicators, such as
+                        <span><a href="#ref" class="xref">"$ref"</a> (<a href="#ref" class="xref">Section 8.2.3.1</a>)</span>, the referenced schema can be determined
+                        by static analysis of the schema document's lexical scope.  Others,
+                        such as "$dynamicRef" (with "$dynamicAnchor"), may make use of dynamic
+                        scoping, and therefore only be resolvable in the process of evaluating
+                        the schema with an instance.<a href="#section-7.5.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="assertions">
+<section id="section-7.6">
+        <h3 id="name-assertions">
+<a href="#section-7.6" class="section-number selfRef">7.6. </a><a href="#name-assertions" class="section-name selfRef">Assertions</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-7.6-1">
+                    JSON Schema can be used to assert constraints on a JSON document, which
+                    either passes or fails the assertions.  This approach can be used to validate
+                    conformance with the constraints, or document what is needed to satisfy them.<a href="#section-7.6-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.6-2">
+                    JSON Schema implementations produce a single boolean result when evaluating
+                    an instance against schema assertions.<a href="#section-7.6-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.6-3">
+                    An instance can only fail an assertion that is present in the schema.<a href="#section-7.6-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-7.6.1">
+          <h4 id="name-assertions-and-instance-pri">
+<a href="#section-7.6.1" class="section-number selfRef">7.6.1. </a><a href="#name-assertions-and-instance-pri" class="section-name selfRef">Assertions and Instance Primitive Types</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-7.6.1-1">
+                        Most assertions only constrain values within a certain
+                        primitive type.  When the type of the instance is not of the type
+                        targeted by the keyword, the instance is considered to conform
+                        to the assertion.<a href="#section-7.6.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.6.1-2">
+                        For example, the "maxLength" keyword from the companion
+                        <span><a href="#json-schema-validation" class="xref">validation vocabulary</a> [<a href="#json-schema-validation" class="xref">json-schema-validation</a>]</span>:
+                        will only restrict certain strings
+                        (that are too long) from being valid.  If the instance is a number,
+                        boolean, null, array, or object, then it is valid against this assertion.<a href="#section-7.6.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.6.1-3">
+                        This behavior allows keywords to be used more easily with instances
+                        that can be of multiple primitive types.  The companion validation
+                        vocabulary also includes a "type" keyword which can independently
+                        restrict the instance to one or more primitive types.  This allows
+                        for a concise expression of use cases such as a function that might
+                        return either a string of a certain length or a null value:<a href="#section-7.6.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-7.6.1-4">
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": ["string", "null"],
+    "maxLength": 255
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#section-7.6.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="section-7.6.1-5" class="keepWithPrevious">
+                            If "maxLength" also restricted the instance type to be a string,
+                            then this would be substantially more cumbersome to express because
+                            the example as written would not actually allow null values.
+                            Each keyword is evaluated separately unless explicitly specified
+                            otherwise, so if "maxLength" restricted the instance to strings,
+                            then including "null" in "type" would not have any useful effect.<a href="#section-7.6.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="annotations">
+<section id="section-7.7">
+        <h3 id="name-annotations">
+<a href="#section-7.7" class="section-number selfRef">7.7. </a><a href="#name-annotations" class="section-name selfRef">Annotations</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-7.7-1">
+                    JSON Schema can annotate an instance with information, whenever the instance
+                    validates against the schema object containing the annotation, and all of its
+                    parent schema objects.  The information can be a simple value, or can be
+                    calculated based on the instance contents.<a href="#section-7.7-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.7-2">
+                    Annotations are attached to specific locations in an instance.
+                    Since many subschemas can be applied to any single
+                    location, applications may need to decide how to handle differing
+                    annotation values being attached to the same instance location by
+                    the same schema keyword in different schema objects.<a href="#section-7.7-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.7-3">
+                    Unlike assertion results, annotation data can take a wide variety of forms,
+                    which are provided to applications to use as they see fit.  JSON Schema
+                    implementations are not expected to make use of the collected information
+                    on behalf of applications.<a href="#section-7.7-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.7-4">
+                    Unless otherwise specified, the value of an annotation keyword
+                    is the keyword's value.  However, other behaviors are possible.
+                    For example, <span><a href="#json-hyper-schema" class="xref">JSON Hyper-Schema's</a> [<a href="#json-hyper-schema" class="xref">json-hyper-schema</a>]</span>
+                    "links" keyword is a complex annotation that produces a value based
+                    in part on the instance data.<a href="#section-7.7-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.7-5">
+                    While "short-circuit" evaluation is possible for assertions, collecting
+                    annotations requires examining all schemas that apply to an instance
+                    location, even if they cannot change the overall assertion result.
+                    The only exception is that subschemas of a schema object that has
+                    failed validation MAY be skipped, as annotations are not retained
+                    for failing schemas.<a href="#section-7.7-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-7.7.1">
+          <h4 id="name-collecting-annotations">
+<a href="#section-7.7.1" class="section-number selfRef">7.7.1. </a><a href="#name-collecting-annotations" class="section-name selfRef">Collecting Annotations</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-7.7.1-1">
+                        Annotations are collected by keywords that explicitly define
+                        annotation-collecting behavior.  Note that boolean schemas cannot
+                        produce annotations as they do not make use of keywords.<a href="#section-7.7.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.7.1-2">
+                        A collected annotation MUST include the following information:<a href="#section-7.7.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ul class="normal ulEmpty">
+<li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-7.7.1-3.1">
+                                The name of the keyword that produces the annotation<a href="#section-7.7.1-3.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-7.7.1-3.2">
+                                The instance location to which it is attached, as a JSON Pointer<a href="#section-7.7.1-3.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-7.7.1-3.3">
+                                The schema location path, indicating how reference keywords
+                                such as "$ref" were followed to reach the absolute schema location.<a href="#section-7.7.1-3.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-7.7.1-3.4">
+                                The absolute schema location of the attaching keyword, as a URI.
+                                This MAY be omitted if it is the same as the schema location path
+                                from above.<a href="#section-7.7.1-3.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-7.7.1-3.5">
+                                The attached value(s)<a href="#section-7.7.1-3.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+<section id="section-7.7.1.1">
+            <h5 id="name-distinguishing-among-multip">
+<a href="#section-7.7.1.1" class="section-number selfRef">7.7.1.1. </a><a href="#name-distinguishing-among-multip" class="section-name selfRef">Distinguishing Among Multiple Values</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-7.7.1.1-1">
+                            Applications MAY make decisions on which of multiple annotation values
+                            to use based on the schema location that contributed the value.
+                            This is intended to allow flexible usage.  Collecting the schema location
+                            facilitates such usage.<a href="#section-7.7.1.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.7.1.1-2">
+                            For example, consider this schema, which uses annotations and assertions from
+                            the <span><a href="#json-schema-validation" class="xref">Validation specification</a> [<a href="#json-schema-validation" class="xref">json-schema-validation</a>]</span>:<a href="#section-7.7.1.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.7.1.1-3" class="keepWithNext">
+                                Note that some lines are wrapped for clarity.<a href="#section-7.7.1.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-7.7.1.1-4">
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "title": "Feature list",
+    "type": "array",
+    "prefixItems": [
+        {
+            "title": "Feature A",
+            "properties": {
+                "enabled": {
+                    "$ref": "#/$defs/enabledToggle",
+                    "default": true
+                }
+            }
+        },
+        {
+            "title": "Feature B",
+            "properties": {
+                "enabled": {
+                    "description": "If set to null, Feature B
+                                    inherits the enabled
+                                    value from Feature A",
+                    "$ref": "#/$defs/enabledToggle"
+                }
+            }
+        }
+    ],
+    "$defs": {
+        "enabledToggle": {
+            "title": "Enabled",
+            "description": "Whether the feature is enabled (true),
+                            disabled (false), or under
+                            automatic control (null)",
+            "type": ["boolean", "null"],
+            "default": null
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#section-7.7.1.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="section-7.7.1.1-5">
+                            In this example, both Feature A and Feature B make use of the re-usable
+                            "enabledToggle" schema.  That schema uses the "title", "description",
+                            and "default" annotations.  Therefore the application has to decide how
+                            to handle the additional "default" value for Feature A, and the additional
+                            "description" value for Feature B.<a href="#section-7.7.1.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.7.1.1-6">
+                            The application programmer and the schema author need to agree on the
+                            usage.  For this example, let's assume that they agree that the most
+                            specific "default" value will be used, and any additional, more generic
+                            "default" values will be silently ignored.  Let's also assume that they
+                            agree that all "description" text is to be used, starting with the most
+                            generic, and ending with the most specific.  This requires the schema
+                            author to write descriptions that work when combined in this way.<a href="#section-7.7.1.1-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.7.1.1-7">
+                            The application can use the schema location path to determine which
+                            values are which.  The values in the feature's immediate "enabled"
+                            property schema are more specific, while the values under the re-usable
+                            schema that is referenced to with "$ref" are more generic.  The schema
+                            location path will show whether each value was found by crossing a
+                            "$ref" or not.<a href="#section-7.7.1.1-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.7.1.1-8">
+                            Feature A will therefore use a default value of true, while Feature B
+                            will use the generic default value of null.  Feature A will only
+                            have the generic description from the "enabledToggle" schema, while
+                            Feature B will use that description, and also append its locally
+                            defined description that explains how to interpret a null value.<a href="#section-7.7.1.1-8" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.7.1.1-9">
+                            Note that there are other reasonable approaches that a different application
+                            might take.  For example, an application may consider the presence of
+                            two different values for "default" to be an error, regardless of their
+                            schema locations.<a href="#section-7.7.1.1-9" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.7.1.2">
+            <h5 id="name-annotations-and-assertions">
+<a href="#section-7.7.1.2" class="section-number selfRef">7.7.1.2. </a><a href="#name-annotations-and-assertions" class="section-name selfRef">Annotations and Assertions</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-7.7.1.2-1">
+                            Schema objects that produce a false assertion result MUST NOT
+                            produce any annotation results, whether from their own keywords
+                            or from keywords in subschemas.<a href="#section-7.7.1.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.7.1.2-2">
+                            Note that the overall schema results may still include annotations
+                            collected from other schema locations.  Given this schema:<a href="#section-7.7.1.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-7.7.1.2-3">
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "oneOf": [
+        {
+            "title": "Integer Value",
+            "type": "integer"
+        },
+        {
+            "title": "String Value",
+            "type": "string"
+        }
+    ]
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#section-7.7.1.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="section-7.7.1.2-4">
+                            Against the instance <code>"This is a string"</code>, the
+                            title annotation "Integer Value" is discarded because the type assertion
+                            in that schema object fails.  The title annotation "String Value"
+                            is kept, as the instance passes the string type assertions.<a href="#section-7.7.1.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.7.1.3">
+            <h5 id="name-annotations-and-applicators">
+<a href="#section-7.7.1.3" class="section-number selfRef">7.7.1.3. </a><a href="#name-annotations-and-applicators" class="section-name selfRef">Annotations and Applicators</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-7.7.1.3-1">
+                            In addition to possibly defining annotation results of their own,
+                            applicator keywords aggregate the annotations collected in their
+                            subschema(s) or referenced schema(s).<a href="#section-7.7.1.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-7.8">
+        <h3 id="name-reserved-locations">
+<a href="#section-7.8" class="section-number selfRef">7.8. </a><a href="#name-reserved-locations" class="section-name selfRef">Reserved Locations</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-7.8-1">
+                    A fourth category of keywords simply reserve a location to hold re-usable
+                    components or data of interest to schema authors that is not suitable
+                    for re-use.  These keywords do not affect validation or annotation results.
+                    Their purpose in the core vocabulary is to ensure that locations are
+                    available for certain purposes and will not be redefined by extension
+                    keywords.<a href="#section-7.8-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.8-2">
+                    While these keywords do not directly affect results, as explained in section
+                    <a href="#non-schemas" class="xref">9.4.2</a> unrecognized
+                    extension keywords that reserve locations for re-usable schemas may have
+                    undesirable interactions with references in certain circumstances.<a href="#section-7.8-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.9">
+        <h3 id="name-loading-instance-data">
+<a href="#section-7.9" class="section-number selfRef">7.9. </a><a href="#name-loading-instance-data" class="section-name selfRef">Loading Instance Data</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-7.9-1">
+                    While none of the vocabularies defined as part of this or the associated documents
+                    define a keyword which may target and/or load instance data, it is possible that
+                    other vocabularies may wish to do so.<a href="#section-7.9-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.9-2">
+                    Keywords MAY be defined to use JSON Pointers or Relative JSON Pointers to examine
+                    parts of an instance outside the current evaluation location.<a href="#section-7.9-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.9-3">
+                    Keywords that allow adjusting the location using a Relative JSON Pointer SHOULD
+                    default to using the current location if a default is desireable.<a href="#section-7.9-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+<section id="section-8">
+      <h2 id="name-the-json-schema-core-vocabu">
+<a href="#section-8" class="section-number selfRef">8. </a><a href="#name-the-json-schema-core-vocabu" class="section-name selfRef">The JSON Schema Core Vocabulary</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-8-1">
+                Keywords declared in this section, which all begin with "$", make up
+                the JSON Schema Core vocabulary.  These keywords are either required in
+                order to process any schema or meta-schema, including those split across
+                multiple documents, or exist to reserve keywords for purposes that
+                require guaranteed interoperability.<a href="#section-8-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8-2">
+                The Core vocabulary MUST be considered mandatory at all times, in order
+                to bootstrap the processing of further vocabularies.  Meta-schemas
+                that use the <span><a href="#vocabulary" class="xref">"$vocabulary"</a> (<a href="#vocabulary" class="xref">Section 8.1</a>)</span> keyword
+                to declare the vocabularies in use MUST explicitly list the Core vocabulary,
+                which MUST have a value of true indicating that it is required.<a href="#section-8-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8-3">
+                The behavior of a false value for this vocabulary (and only this
+                vocabulary) is undefined, as is the behavior when "$vocabulary"
+                is present but the Core vocabulary is not included.  However, it
+                is RECOMMENDED that implementations detect these cases and raise
+                an error when they occur.  It is not meaningful to declare that
+                a meta-schema optionally uses Core.<a href="#section-8-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8-4">
+                Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" MUST be considered to
+                require the Core vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.<a href="#section-8-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8-5">
+                The current URI for the Core vocabulary is:
+                &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/core&gt;.<a href="#section-8-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8-6">
+                The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is:
+                <span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/core">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/core</a></span>.<a href="#section-8-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8-7">
+                While the "$" prefix is not formally reserved for the Core vocabulary,
+                it is RECOMMENDED that extension keywords (in vocabularies or otherwise)
+                begin with a character other than "$" to avoid possible future collisions.<a href="#section-8-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div id="vocabulary">
+<section id="section-8.1">
+        <h3 id="name-meta-schemas-and-vocabulari">
+<a href="#section-8.1" class="section-number selfRef">8.1. </a><a href="#name-meta-schemas-and-vocabulari" class="section-name selfRef">Meta-Schemas and Vocabularies</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-8.1-1">
+                    Two concepts, meta-schemas and vocabularies, are used to inform an implementation
+                    how to interpret a schema.  Every schema has a meta-schema, which can be declared
+                    using the "$schema" keyword.<a href="#section-8.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1-2">
+                    The meta-schema serves two purposes:<a href="#section-8.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-8.1-3">
+          <dt id="section-8.1-3.1">Declaring the vocabularies in use</dt>
+          <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-8.1-3.2">
+                            The "$vocabulary" keyword, when it appears in a meta-schema, declares
+                            which vocabularies are available to be used in schemas that refer
+                            to that meta-schema.  Vocabularies define keyword semantics,
+                            as well as their general syntax.<a href="#section-8.1-3.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-8.1-3.3">Describing valid schema syntax</dt>
+          <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-8.1-3.4">
+                            A schema MUST successfully validate against its meta-schema, which
+                            constrains the syntax of the available keywords.  The syntax described
+                            is expected to be compatible with the vocabularies declared; while
+                            it is possible to describe an incompatible syntax, such a meta-schema
+                            would be unlikely to be useful.<a href="#section-8.1-3.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+<p id="section-8.1-4">
+                    Meta-schemas are separate from vocabularies to allow for
+                    vocabularies to be combined in different ways, and for meta-schema authors
+                    to impose additional constraints such as forbidding certain keywords, or
+                    performing unusually strict syntactical validation, as might be done
+                    during a development and testing cycle.  Each vocabulary typically identifies
+                    a meta-schema consisting only of the vocabulary's keywords.<a href="#section-8.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1-5">
+                    Meta-schema authoring is an advanced usage of JSON Schema, so the design of
+                    meta-schema features emphasizes flexibility over simplicity.<a href="#section-8.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div id="keyword-schema">
+<section id="section-8.1.1">
+          <h4 id="name-the-schema-keyword">
+<a href="#section-8.1.1" class="section-number selfRef">8.1.1. </a><a href="#name-the-schema-keyword" class="section-name selfRef">The "$schema" Keyword</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-8.1.1-1">
+                        The "$schema" keyword is both used as a JSON Schema dialect identifier and
+                        as the identifier of a resource which is itself a JSON Schema, which describes the
+                        set of valid schemas written for this particular dialect.<a href="#section-8.1.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1.1-2">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be a <span><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">URI</a> [<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span>
+                        (containing a scheme) and this URI MUST be normalized.
+                        The current schema MUST be valid against the meta-schema identified by this URI.<a href="#section-8.1.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1.1-3">
+                        If this URI identifies a retrievable resource, that resource SHOULD be of
+                        media type "application/schema+json".<a href="#section-8.1.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1.1-4">
+                        The "$schema" keyword SHOULD be used in the document root schema object,
+                        and MAY be used in the root schema objects of embedded schema resources.
+                        It MUST NOT appear in non-resource root schema objects.  If absent from
+                        the document root schema, the resulting behavior is implementation-defined.<a href="#section-8.1.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1.1-5">
+                        Values for this property are defined elsewhere in this and other documents,
+                        and by other parties.<a href="#section-8.1.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-8.1.2">
+          <h4 id="name-the-vocabulary-keyword">
+<a href="#section-8.1.2" class="section-number selfRef">8.1.2. </a><a href="#name-the-vocabulary-keyword" class="section-name selfRef">The "$vocabulary" Keyword</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-8.1.2-1">
+                        The "$vocabulary" keyword is used in meta-schemas to identify the
+                        vocabularies available for use in schemas described by that meta-schema.
+                        It is also used to indicate whether each vocabulary is required or optional,
+                        in the sense that an implementation MUST understand the required vocabularies
+                        in order to successfully process the schema. Together, this information forms
+                        a dialect. Any vocabulary that is understood by the implementation MUST be
+                        processed in a manner consistent with the semantic definitions contained
+                        within the vocabulary.<a href="#section-8.1.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1.2-2">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be an object.  The property names in the
+                        object MUST be URIs (containing a scheme) and this URI MUST be normalized.
+                        Each URI that appears as a property name identifies a specific set of
+                        keywords and their semantics.<a href="#section-8.1.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1.2-3">
+                        The URI MAY be a URL, but the nature of the retrievable resource is
+                        currently undefined, and reserved for future use.  Vocabulary authors
+                        MAY use the URL of the vocabulary specification, in a human-readable
+                        media type such as text/html or text/plain, as the vocabulary URI.
+                        <span class="cref">
+                            Vocabulary documents may be added in forthcoming drafts.
+                            For now, identifying the keyword set is deemed sufficient as that,
+                            along with meta-schema validation, is how the current "vocabularies"
+                            work today.  Any future vocabulary document format will be specified
+                            as a JSON document, so using text/html or other non-JSON formats
+                            in the meantime will not produce any future ambiguity.
+            </span><a href="#section-8.1.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1.2-4">
+                        The values of the object properties MUST be booleans.
+                        If the value is true, then implementations that do not recognize
+                        the vocabulary MUST refuse to process any schemas that declare
+                        this meta-schema with "$schema".  If the value is false, implementations
+                        that do not recognize the vocabulary SHOULD proceed with processing
+                        such schemas.  The value has no impact if the implementation
+                        understands the vocabulary.<a href="#section-8.1.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1.2-5">
+                        Per <a href="#extending" class="xref">6.5</a>, unrecognized
+                        keywords SHOULD be treated as annotations.
+                        This remains the case for keywords defined
+                        by unrecognized vocabularies.  It is not currently possible to distinguish
+                        between unrecognized keywords that are defined in vocabularies from
+                        those that are not part of any vocabulary.<a href="#section-8.1.2-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1.2-6">
+                        The "$vocabulary" keyword SHOULD be used in the root schema of any schema
+                        document intended for use as a meta-schema.  It MUST NOT appear in subschemas.<a href="#section-8.1.2-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1.2-7">
+                        The "$vocabulary" keyword MUST be ignored in schema documents that
+                        are not being processed as a meta-schema.  This allows validating
+                        a meta-schema M against its own meta-schema M' without requiring
+                        the validator to understand the vocabularies declared by M.<a href="#section-8.1.2-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-8.1.2.1">
+            <h5 id="name-default-vocabularies">
+<a href="#section-8.1.2.1" class="section-number selfRef">8.1.2.1. </a><a href="#name-default-vocabularies" class="section-name selfRef">Default vocabularies</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-8.1.2.1-1">
+                            If "$vocabulary" is absent, an implementation MAY determine
+                            behavior based on the meta-schema if it is recognized from the
+                            URI value of the referring schema's "$schema" keyword.
+                            This is how behavior (such as Hyper-Schema usage) has been
+                            recognized prior to the existence of vocabularies.<a href="#section-8.1.2.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1.2.1-2">
+                            If the meta-schema, as referenced by the schema, is not recognized,
+                            or is missing, then the behavior is implementation-defined.
+                            If the implementation
+                            proceeds with processing the schema, it MUST assume the use of the
+                            core vocabulary.  If the implementation is built for a specific purpose,
+                            then it SHOULD assume the use of all of the most relevant vocabularies
+                            for that purpose.<a href="#section-8.1.2.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1.2.1-3">
+                            For example, an implementation that is a validator
+                            SHOULD assume the use of all vocabularies in this
+                            specification and the companion Validation specification.<a href="#section-8.1.2.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-8.1.2.2">
+            <h5 id="name-non-inheritability-of-vocab">
+<a href="#section-8.1.2.2" class="section-number selfRef">8.1.2.2. </a><a href="#name-non-inheritability-of-vocab" class="section-name selfRef">Non-inheritability of vocabularies</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-8.1.2.2-1">
+                            Note that the processing restrictions on "$vocabulary" mean that
+                            meta-schemas that reference other meta-schemas using "$ref" or
+                            similar keywords do not automatically inherit the vocabulary
+                            declarations of those other meta-schemas.  All such declarations
+                            must be repeated in the root of each schema document intended
+                            for use as a meta-schema.  This is demonstrated in
+                            <span><a href="#example-meta-schema" class="xref">the example meta-schema</a> (<a href="#example-meta-schema" class="xref">Appendix D.2</a>)</span>.
+                            <span class="cref">
+                                This requirement allows implementations to find all vocabulary
+                                requirement information in a single place for each meta-schema.
+                                As schema extensibility means that there are endless potential
+                                ways to combine more fine-grained meta-schemas by reference,
+                                requiring implementations to anticipate all possibilities and
+                                search for vocabularies in referenced meta-schemas would
+                                be overly burdensome.
+              </span><a href="#section-8.1.2.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+<section id="section-8.1.3">
+          <h4 id="name-updates-to-meta-schema-and-">
+<a href="#section-8.1.3" class="section-number selfRef">8.1.3. </a><a href="#name-updates-to-meta-schema-and-" class="section-name selfRef">Updates to Meta-Schema and Vocabulary URIs</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-8.1.3-1">
+                        Updated vocabulary and meta-schema URIs MAY be published between
+                        specification drafts in order to correct errors.  Implementations
+                        SHOULD consider URIs dated after this specification draft and
+                        before the next to indicate the same syntax and semantics
+                        as those listed here.<a href="#section-8.1.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-8.2">
+        <h3 id="name-base-uri-anchors-and-derefe">
+<a href="#section-8.2" class="section-number selfRef">8.2. </a><a href="#name-base-uri-anchors-and-derefe" class="section-name selfRef">Base URI, Anchors, and Dereferencing</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-8.2-1">
+                    To differentiate between schemas in a vast ecosystem, schemas are
+                    identified by <span><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">URI</a> [<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span>, and can embed references
+                    to other schemas by specifying their URI.<a href="#section-8.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2-2">
+                    Several keywords can accept a relative <span><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">URI-reference</a> [<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span>,
+                    or a value used to construct a relative URI-reference.  For these keywords,
+                    it is necessary to establish a base URI in order to resolve the reference.<a href="#section-8.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div id="id-keyword">
+<section id="section-8.2.1">
+          <h4 id="name-the-id-keyword">
+<a href="#section-8.2.1" class="section-number selfRef">8.2.1. </a><a href="#name-the-id-keyword" class="section-name selfRef">The "$id" Keyword</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-8.2.1-1">
+                        The "$id" keyword identifies a schema resource with its
+                        <span><a href="#RFC6596" class="xref">canonical</a> [<a href="#RFC6596" class="xref">RFC6596</a>]</span> URI.<a href="#section-8.2.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.1-2">
+                        Note that this URI is an identifier and not necessarily a network locator.
+                        In the case of a network-addressable URL, a schema need not be downloadable
+                        from its canonical URI.<a href="#section-8.2.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.1-3">
+                        If present, the value for this keyword MUST be a string, and MUST represent a
+                        valid <span><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">URI-reference</a> [<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span>.  This URI-reference
+                        SHOULD be normalized, and MUST resolve to an
+                        <span><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">absolute-URI</a> [<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span> (without a fragment),
+                        or to a URI with an empty fragment.<a href="#section-8.2.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.1-4">
+                        The empty fragment form is NOT RECOMMENDED and is retained only
+                        for backwards compatibility, and because the
+                        application/schema+json media type defines that a URI with an
+                        empty fragment identifies the same resource as the same URI
+                        with the fragment removed.  However, since this equivalence is not
+                        part of the <span><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986 normalization process</a> [<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span>,
+                        implementers and schema authors cannot rely on generic URI libraries
+                        understanding it.<a href="#section-8.2.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.1-5">
+                        Therefore, "$id" MUST NOT contain a non-empty fragment, and SHOULD NOT
+                        contain an empty fragment.  The absolute-URI form MUST be considered
+                        the canonical URI, regardless of the presence or absence of an empty fragment.
+                        <span class="cref">
+                            An empty fragment is currently allowed because older meta-schemas have
+                            an empty fragment in their $id (or previously, id).
+                            A future draft may outright forbid even empty fragments in "$id".
+            </span><a href="#section-8.2.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.1-6">
+                        The absolute-URI also serves as the base URI for relative URI-references
+                        in keywords within the schema resource, in accordance with
+                        <span><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986 section 5.1.1</a> [<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span> regarding base URIs
+                        embedded in content.<a href="#section-8.2.1-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.1-7">
+                        The presence of "$id" in a subschema indicates that the subschema constitutes
+                        a distinct schema resource within a single schema document.  Furthermore,
+                        in accordance with <span><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986 section 5.1.2</a> [<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span>
+                        regarding encapsulating entities, if an "$id" in a subschema is a relative
+                        URI-reference, the base URI for resolving that reference is the URI of
+                        the parent schema resource.<a href="#section-8.2.1-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.1-8">
+                        If no parent schema object explicitly identifies itself as a resource
+                        with "$id", the base URI is that of the entire document, as established
+                        by the steps given in the <span><a href="#initial-base" class="xref">previous section.</a> (<a href="#initial-base" class="xref">Section 9.1.1</a>)</span><a href="#section-8.2.1-8" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-8.2.1.1">
+            <h5 id="name-identifying-the-root-schema">
+<a href="#section-8.2.1.1" class="section-number selfRef">8.2.1.1. </a><a href="#name-identifying-the-root-schema" class="section-name selfRef">Identifying the root schema</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-8.2.1.1-1">
+                            The root schema of a JSON Schema document SHOULD contain an "$id" keyword
+                            with an <span><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">absolute-URI</a> [<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span> (containing a scheme,
+                            but no fragment).<a href="#section-8.2.1.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="anchor">
+<section id="section-8.2.2">
+          <h4 id="name-defining-location-independe">
+<a href="#section-8.2.2" class="section-number selfRef">8.2.2. </a><a href="#name-defining-location-independe" class="section-name selfRef">Defining location-independent identifiers</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-8.2.2-1">
+                        Using JSON Pointer fragments requires knowledge of the structure of the schema.
+                        When writing schema documents with the intention to provide re-usable
+                        schemas, it may be preferable to use a plain name fragment that is not tied to
+                        any particular structural location.  This allows a subschema to be relocated
+                        without requiring JSON Pointer references to be updated.<a href="#section-8.2.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.2-2">
+                        The "$anchor" and "$dynamicAnchor" keywords are used to specify such
+                        fragments.  They are identifier keywords that can only be used to create
+                        plain name fragments, rather than absolute URIs as seen with "$id".<a href="#section-8.2.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.2-3">
+                        The base URI to which the resulting fragment is appended is the canonical
+                        URI of the schema resource containing the "$anchor" or "$dynamicAnchor"
+                        in question.  As discussed in the previous section, this is either the
+                        nearest "$id" in the same or parent schema object, or the base URI
+                        for the document as determined according to RFC 3986.<a href="#section-8.2.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.2-4">
+                        Separately from the usual usage of URIs, "$dynamicAnchor"
+                        indicates that the fragment is an extension point when used with
+                        the "$dynamicRef" keyword.  This low-level, advanced feature
+                        makes it easier to extend recursive schemas such as the meta-schemas,
+                        without imposing any particular semantics on that extension.
+                        See the section on <span><a href="#dynamic-ref" class="xref">"$dynamicRef"</a> (<a href="#dynamic-ref" class="xref">Section 8.2.3.2</a>)</span>
+                        for details.<a href="#section-8.2.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.2-5">
+                        In most cases, the normal fragment behavior both suffices and
+                        is more intuitive.  Therefore it is RECOMMENDED that "$anchor"
+                        be used to create plain name fragments unless there is a clear
+                        need for "$dynamicAnchor".<a href="#section-8.2.2-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.2-6">
+                        If present, the value of this keyword MUST be a string and MUST start with
+                        a letter ([A-Za-z]) or underscore ("_"), followed by any number of letters,
+                        digits ([0-9]), hyphens ("-"), underscores ("_"), and periods (".").
+                        This matches the US-ASCII part of XML's
+                        <span><a href="#xml-names" class="xref">NCName production</a> [<a href="#xml-names" class="xref">xml-names</a>]</span>.
+                        <span class="cref">
+                            Note that the anchor string does not include the "#" character,
+                            as it is not a URI-reference.  An "$anchor": "foo" becomes the
+                            fragment "#foo" when used in a URI.  See below for full examples.
+            </span><a href="#section-8.2.2-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.2-7">
+                        The effect of specifying the same fragment name multiple times within
+                        the same resource, using any combination of "$anchor" and/or
+                        "$dynamicAnchor", is undefined.  Implementations MAY
+                        raise an error if such usage is detected.<a href="#section-8.2.2-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="references">
+<section id="section-8.2.3">
+          <h4 id="name-schema-references">
+<a href="#section-8.2.3" class="section-number selfRef">8.2.3. </a><a href="#name-schema-references" class="section-name selfRef">Schema References</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-8.2.3-1">
+                        Several keywords can be used to reference a schema which is to be applied to the
+                        current instance location. "$ref" and "$dynamicRef" are applicator
+                        keywords, applying the referenced schema to the instance.<a href="#section-8.2.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.3-2">
+                        As the values of "$ref" and "$dynamicRef" are URI References, this allows
+                        the possibility to externalise or divide a schema across multiple files,
+                        and provides the ability to validate recursive structures through
+                        self-reference.<a href="#section-8.2.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.3-3">
+                        The resolved URI produced by these keywords is not necessarily a network
+                        locator, only an identifier. A schema need not be downloadable from the
+                        address if it is a network-addressable URL, and implementations SHOULD NOT
+                        assume they should perform a network operation when they encounter
+                        a network-addressable URI.<a href="#section-8.2.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div id="ref">
+<section id="section-8.2.3.1">
+            <h5 id="name-direct-references-with-ref">
+<a href="#section-8.2.3.1" class="section-number selfRef">8.2.3.1. </a><a href="#name-direct-references-with-ref" class="section-name selfRef">Direct References with "$ref"</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-8.2.3.1-1">
+                            The "$ref" keyword is an applicator that is used to reference a statically
+                            identified schema.  Its results are the results of the referenced schema.
+                            <span class="cref">
+                                Note that this definition of how the results are determined means that
+                                other keywords can appear alongside of "$ref" in the same schema object.
+              </span><a href="#section-8.2.3.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.3.1-2">
+                            The value of the "$ref" keyword MUST be a string which is a URI-Reference.
+                            Resolved against the current URI base, it produces the URI of the schema
+                            to apply.  This resolution is safe to perform on schema load, as the
+                            process of evaluating an instance cannot change how the reference resolves.<a href="#section-8.2.3.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="dynamic-ref">
+<section id="section-8.2.3.2">
+            <h5 id="name-dynamic-references-with-dyn">
+<a href="#section-8.2.3.2" class="section-number selfRef">8.2.3.2. </a><a href="#name-dynamic-references-with-dyn" class="section-name selfRef">Dynamic References with "$dynamicRef"</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-8.2.3.2-1">
+                            The "$dynamicRef" keyword is an applicator that allows for deferring the
+                            full resolution until runtime, at which point it is resolved each time it is
+                            encountered while evaluating an instance.<a href="#section-8.2.3.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.3.2-2">
+                            Together with "$dynamicAnchor", "$dynamicRef" implements a cooperative
+                            extension mechanism that is primarily useful with recursive schemas
+                            (schemas that reference themselves).  Both the extension point and the
+                            runtime-determined extension target are defined with "$dynamicAnchor",
+                            and only exhibit runtime dynamic behavior when referenced with
+                            "$dynamicRef".<a href="#section-8.2.3.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.3.2-3">
+                            The value of the "$dynamicRef" property MUST be a string which is
+                            a URI-Reference.  Resolved against the current URI base, it produces
+                            the URI used as the starting point for runtime resolution.  This initial
+                            resolution is safe to perform on schema load.<a href="#section-8.2.3.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.3.2-4">
+                            If the initially resolved starting point URI includes a fragment that
+                            was created by the "$dynamicAnchor" keyword, the initial URI MUST be
+                            replaced by the URI (including the fragment) for the outermost schema
+                            resource in the <span><a href="#scopes" class="xref">dynamic scope</a> (<a href="#scopes" class="xref">Section 7.1</a>)</span> that defines
+                            an identically named fragment with "$dynamicAnchor".<a href="#section-8.2.3.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.3.2-5">
+                            Otherwise, its behavior is identical to "$ref", and no runtime
+                            resolution is needed.<a href="#section-8.2.3.2-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.3.2-6">
+                            For a full example using these keyword, see appendix
+                            <a href="#recursive-example" class="xref">C</a>.
+                            <span class="cref">
+                                The difference between the hyper-schema meta-schema in pre-2019
+                                drafts and an this draft dramatically demonstrates the utility
+                                of these keywords.
+              </span><a href="#section-8.2.3.2-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="defs">
+<section id="section-8.2.4">
+          <h4 id="name-schema-re-use-with-defs">
+<a href="#section-8.2.4" class="section-number selfRef">8.2.4. </a><a href="#name-schema-re-use-with-defs" class="section-name selfRef">Schema Re-Use With "$defs"</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-8.2.4-1">
+                        The "$defs" keyword reserves a location for schema
+                        authors to inline re-usable JSON Schemas into a more general schema.
+                        The keyword does not directly affect the validation result.<a href="#section-8.2.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.4-2">
+                        This keyword's value MUST be an object.
+                        Each member value of this object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-8.2.4-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2.4-3">
+                        As an example, here is a schema describing an array of positive
+                        integers, where the positive integer constraint is a subschema in
+                        "$defs":<a href="#section-8.2.4-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-8.2.4-4">
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": "array",
+    "items": { "$ref": "#/$defs/positiveInteger" },
+    "$defs": {
+        "positiveInteger": {
+            "type": "integer",
+            "exclusiveMinimum": 0
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#section-8.2.4-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+</section>
+</div>
+</section>
+<section id="section-8.3">
+        <h3 id="name-comments-with-comment">
+<a href="#section-8.3" class="section-number selfRef">8.3. </a><a href="#name-comments-with-comment" class="section-name selfRef">Comments With "$comment"</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-8.3-1">
+                    This keyword reserves a location for comments from schema authors
+                    to readers or maintainers of the schema.<a href="#section-8.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.3-2">
+                    The value of this keyword MUST be a string. Implementations MUST NOT present this
+                    string to end users.  Tools for editing schemas SHOULD support displaying and
+                    editing this keyword.  The value of this keyword MAY be used in debug or error
+                    output which is intended for developers making use of schemas.<a href="#section-8.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.3-3">
+                    Schema vocabularies SHOULD allow "$comment" within any object containing
+                    vocabulary keywords.  Implementations MAY assume "$comment" is allowed
+                    unless the vocabulary specifically forbids it.  Vocabularies MUST NOT
+                    specify any effect of "$comment" beyond what is described in this
+                    specification.<a href="#section-8.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.3-4">
+                    Tools that translate other media types or programming languages
+                    to and from application/schema+json MAY choose to convert that media type or
+                    programming language's native comments to or from "$comment" values.
+                    The behavior of such translation when both native comments and "$comment"
+                    properties are present is implementation-dependent.<a href="#section-8.3-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.3-5">
+                    Implementations MAY strip "$comment" values at any point during processing.
+                    In particular, this allows for shortening schemas when the size of deployed
+                    schemas is a concern.<a href="#section-8.3-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.3-6">
+                    Implementations MUST NOT take any other action based on the presence, absence,
+                    or contents of "$comment" properties.  In particular, the value of "$comment"
+                    MUST NOT be collected as an annotation result.<a href="#section-8.3-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+<section id="section-9">
+      <h2 id="name-loading-and-processing-sche">
+<a href="#section-9" class="section-number selfRef">9. </a><a href="#name-loading-and-processing-sche" class="section-name selfRef">Loading and Processing Schemas</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-9-1"></p>
+<section id="section-9.1">
+        <h3 id="name-loading-a-schema">
+<a href="#section-9.1" class="section-number selfRef">9.1. </a><a href="#name-loading-a-schema" class="section-name selfRef">Loading a Schema</a>
+        </h3>
+<div id="initial-base">
+<section id="section-9.1.1">
+          <h4 id="name-initial-base-uri">
+<a href="#section-9.1.1" class="section-number selfRef">9.1.1. </a><a href="#name-initial-base-uri" class="section-name selfRef">Initial Base URI</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-9.1.1-1">
+                        <span><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986 Section 5.1</a> [<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span> defines how to determine the
+                        default base URI of a document.<a href="#section-9.1.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.1.1-2">
+                        Informatively, the initial base URI of a schema is the URI at which it was
+                        found, whether that was a network location, a local filesystem, or any other
+                        situation identifiable by a URI of any known scheme.<a href="#section-9.1.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.1.1-3">
+                        If a schema document defines no explicit base URI with "$id"
+                        (embedded in content), the base URI is that determined per
+                        <span><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986 section 5</a> [<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-9.1.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.1.1-4">
+                        If no source is known, or no URI scheme is known for the source, a suitable
+                        implementation-specific default URI MAY be used as described in
+                        <span><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986 Section 5.1.4</a> [<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span>.  It is RECOMMENDED
+                        that implementations document any default base URI that they assume.<a href="#section-9.1.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.1.1-5">
+                        If a schema object is embedded in a document of another media type, then
+                        the initial base URI is determined according to the rules of that
+                        media type.<a href="#section-9.1.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.1.1-6">
+                        Unless the "$id" keyword described in an earlier section is present in the
+                        root schema, this base URI SHOULD be considered the canonical URI of the
+                        schema document's root schema resource.<a href="#section-9.1.1-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-9.1.2">
+          <h4 id="name-loading-a-referenced-schema">
+<a href="#section-9.1.2" class="section-number selfRef">9.1.2. </a><a href="#name-loading-a-referenced-schema" class="section-name selfRef">Loading a referenced schema</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-9.1.2-1">
+                        The use of URIs to identify remote schemas does not necessarily mean anything is downloaded,
+                        but instead JSON Schema implementations SHOULD understand ahead of time which schemas they will be using,
+                        and the URIs that identify them.<a href="#section-9.1.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.1.2-2">
+                        When schemas are downloaded,
+                        for example by a generic user-agent that does not know until runtime which schemas to download,
+                        see <span><a href="#hypermedia" class="xref">Usage for Hypermedia</a> (<a href="#hypermedia" class="xref">Section 9.5.1</a>)</span>.<a href="#section-9.1.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.1.2-3">
+                        Implementations SHOULD be able to associate arbitrary URIs with an arbitrary
+                        schema and/or automatically associate a schema's "$id"-given URI, depending
+                        on the trust that the validator has in the schema.  Such URIs and schemas
+                        can be supplied to an implementation prior to processing instances, or may
+                        be noted within a schema document as it is processed, producing associations
+                        as shown in appendix <a href="#idExamples" class="xref">A</a>.<a href="#section-9.1.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.1.2-4">
+                        A schema MAY (and likely will) have multiple URIs, but there is no way for a
+                        URI to identify more than one schema. When multiple schemas try to identify
+                        as the same URI, validators SHOULD raise an error condition.<a href="#section-9.1.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-9.1.3">
+          <h4 id="name-detecting-a-meta-schema">
+<a href="#section-9.1.3" class="section-number selfRef">9.1.3. </a><a href="#name-detecting-a-meta-schema" class="section-name selfRef">Detecting a Meta-Schema</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-9.1.3-1">
+                        Implementations MUST recognize a schema as a meta-schema if it
+                        is being examined because it was identified as such by another
+                        schema's "$schema" keyword.  This means that a single schema
+                        document might sometimes be considered a regular schema, and
+                        other times be considered a meta-schema.<a href="#section-9.1.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.1.3-2">
+                        In the case of examining a schema which is its own meta-schema,
+                        when an implementation begins processing it as a regular schema,
+                        it is processed under those rules.  However, when loaded a second
+                        time as a result of checking its own "$schema" value, it is treated
+                        as a meta-schema.  So the same document is processed both ways in
+                        the course of one session.<a href="#section-9.1.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.1.3-3">
+                        Implementations MAY allow a schema to be explicitly passed as a meta-schema,
+                        for implementation-specific purposes, such as pre-loading a commonly
+                        used meta-schema and checking its vocabulary support requirements
+                        up front.  Meta-schema authors MUST NOT expect such features to be
+                        interoperable across implementations.<a href="#section-9.1.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+<section id="section-9.2">
+        <h3 id="name-dereferencing">
+<a href="#section-9.2" class="section-number selfRef">9.2. </a><a href="#name-dereferencing" class="section-name selfRef">Dereferencing</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-9.2-1">
+                    Schemas can be identified by any URI that has been given to them, including
+                    a JSON Pointer or their URI given directly by "$id".  In all cases,
+                    dereferencing a "$ref" reference involves first resolving its value as a
+                    URI reference against the current base URI per
+                    <span><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986</a> [<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-9.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.2-2">
+                    If the resulting URI identifies a schema within the current document, or
+                    within another schema document that has been made available to the implementation,
+                    then that schema SHOULD be used automatically.<a href="#section-9.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.2-3">
+                    For example, consider this schema:<a href="#section-9.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-9.2-4">
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "$id": "https://example.net/root.json",
+    "items": {
+        "type": "array",
+        "items": { "$ref": "#item" }
+    },
+    "$defs": {
+        "single": {
+            "$anchor": "item",
+            "type": "object",
+            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "other.json" }
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#section-9.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="section-9.2-5">
+                    When an implementation encounters the &lt;#/$defs/single&gt; schema,
+                    it resolves the "$anchor" value as a fragment name against the current
+                    base URI to form &lt;https://example.net/root.json#item&gt;.<a href="#section-9.2-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.2-6">
+                    When an implementation then looks inside the &lt;#/items&gt; schema, it
+                    encounters the &lt;#item&gt; reference, and resolves this to
+                    &lt;https://example.net/root.json#item&gt;, which it has seen defined in
+                    this same document and can therefore use automatically.<a href="#section-9.2-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.2-7">
+                    When an implementation encounters the reference to "other.json", it resolves
+                    this to &lt;https://example.net/other.json&gt;, which is not defined in this
+                    document.  If a schema with that identifier has otherwise been supplied to
+                    the implementation, it can also be used automatically.
+                    <span class="cref">
+                        What should implementations do when the referenced schema is not known?
+                        Are there circumstances in which automatic network dereferencing is
+                        allowed?  A same origin policy?  A user-configurable option?  In the
+                        case of an evolving API described by Hyper-Schema, it is expected that
+                        new schemas will be added to the system dynamically, so placing an
+                        absolute requirement of pre-loading schema documents is not feasible.
+          </span><a href="#section-9.2-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div id="embedded">
+<section id="section-9.2.1">
+          <h4 id="name-json-pointer-fragments-and-">
+<a href="#section-9.2.1" class="section-number selfRef">9.2.1. </a><a href="#name-json-pointer-fragments-and-" class="section-name selfRef">JSON Pointer fragments and embedded schema resources</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-9.2.1-1">
+                        Since JSON Pointer URI fragments are constructed based on the structure
+                        of the schema document, an embedded schema resource and its subschemas
+                        can be identified by JSON Pointer fragments relative to either its own
+                        canonical URI, or relative to any containing resource's URI.<a href="#section-9.2.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.2.1-2">
+                        Conceptually, a set of linked schema resources should behave
+                        identically whether each resource is a separate document connected with
+                        <span><a href="#references" class="xref">schema references</a> (<a href="#references" class="xref">Section 8.2.3</a>)</span>, or is structured as
+                        a single document with one or more schema resources embedded as
+                        subschemas.<a href="#section-9.2.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.2.1-3">
+                        Since URIs involving JSON Pointer fragments relative to the parent
+                        schema resource's URI cease to be valid when the embedded schema
+                        is moved to a separate document and referenced, applications and schemas
+                        SHOULD NOT use such URIs to identify embedded schema resources or
+                        locations within them.<a href="#section-9.2.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.2.1-4" class="keepWithNext">
+                            Consider the following schema document that contains another
+                            schema resource embedded within it:<a href="#section-9.2.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-9.2.1-5">
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "$id": "https://example.com/foo",
+    "items": {
+        "$id": "https://example.com/bar",
+        "additionalProperties": { }
+    }
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#section-9.2.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="section-9.2.1-6">
+                        The URI "https://example.com/foo#/items" points to the "items" schema,
+                        which is an embedded resource.  The canonical URI of that schema
+                        resource, however, is "https://example.com/bar".<a href="#section-9.2.1-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.2.1-7">
+                        For the "additionalProperties" schema within that embedded resource,
+                        the URI "https://example.com/foo#/items/additionalProperties" points
+                        to the correct object, but that object's URI relative to its resource's
+                        canonical URI is "https://example.com/bar#/additionalProperties".<a href="#section-9.2.1-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.2.1-8" class="keepWithNext">
+                            Now consider the following two schema resources linked by reference
+                            using a URI value for "$ref":<a href="#section-9.2.1-8" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-9.2.1-9">
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "$id": "https://example.com/foo",
+    "items": {
+        "$ref": "bar"
+    }
+}
+
+{
+    "$id": "https://example.com/bar",
+    "additionalProperties": { }
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#section-9.2.1-9" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="section-9.2.1-10" class="keepWithPrevious">
+                            Here we see that "https://example.com/bar#/additionalProperties",
+                            using a JSON Pointer fragment appended to the canonical URI of
+                            the "bar" schema resource, is still valid, while
+                            "https://example.com/foo#/items/additionalProperties", which relied
+                            on a JSON Pointer fragment appended to the canonical URI of the
+                            "foo" schema resource, no longer resolves to anything.<a href="#section-9.2.1-10" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.2.1-11">
+                        Note also that "https://example.com/foo#/items" is valid in both
+                        arrangements, but resolves to a different value.  This URI ends up
+                        functioning similarly to a retrieval URI for a resource.  While this URI
+                        is valid, it is more robust to use the "$id" of the embedded or referenced
+                        resource unless it is specifically desired to identify the object containing
+                        the "$ref" in the second (non-embedded) arrangement.<a href="#section-9.2.1-11" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.2.1-12">
+                        An implementation MAY choose not to support addressing schema resource
+                        contents by URIs using a base other than the resource's canonical URI,
+                        plus a JSON Pointer fragment relative to that base.  Therefore, schema
+                        authors SHOULD NOT rely on such URIs, as using them may reduce interoperability.
+                        <span class="cref">
+                            This is to avoid requiring implementations to keep track of a whole
+                            stack of possible base URIs and JSON Pointer fragments for each,
+                            given that all but one will be fragile if the schema resources
+                            are reorganized.  Some
+                            have argued that this is easy so there is
+                            no point in forbidding it, while others have argued that it complicates
+                            schema identification and should be forbidden.  Feedback on this
+                            topic is encouraged.
+                            After some discussion, we feel that we need to remove the use of
+                            "canonical" in favour of talking about JSON Pointers which reference
+                            across schema resource boundaries as undefined or even forbidden behavior
+                            (https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues/937,
+                            https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues/1183)
+            </span><a href="#section-9.2.1-12" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.2.1-13">
+                        Further examples of such non-canonical URI construction, as well as
+                        the appropriate canonical URI-based fragments to use instead,
+                        are provided in appendix <a href="#idExamples" class="xref">A</a>.<a href="#section-9.2.1-13" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+</section>
+<section id="section-9.3">
+        <h3 id="name-compound-documents">
+<a href="#section-9.3" class="section-number selfRef">9.3. </a><a href="#name-compound-documents" class="section-name selfRef">Compound Documents</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-9.3-1">
+                    A Compound Schema Document is defined as a JSON document (sometimes called a "bundled" schema)
+                    which has multiple embedded JSON Schema Resources bundled into the same document to
+                    ease transportation.<a href="#section-9.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.3-2">
+                    Each embedded Schema Resource MUST be treated as an individual Schema Resource, following standard
+                    schema loading and processing requirements, including determining vocabulary support.<a href="#section-9.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-9.3.1">
+          <h4 id="name-bundling">
+<a href="#section-9.3.1" class="section-number selfRef">9.3.1. </a><a href="#name-bundling" class="section-name selfRef">Bundling</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-9.3.1-1">
+                        The bundling process for creating a Compound Schema Document is defined as taking
+                        references (such as "$ref") to an external Schema Resource and embedding the referenced
+                        Schema Resources within the referring document. Bundling SHOULD be done in such a way that
+                        all URIs (used for referencing) in the base document and any referenced/embedded
+                        documents do not require altering.<a href="#section-9.3.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.3.1-2">
+                        Each embedded JSON Schema Resource MUST identify itself with a URI using the "$id" keyword,
+                        and SHOULD make use of the "$schema" keyword to identify the dialect it is using, in the root of the
+                        schema resource. It is RECOMMENDED that the URI identifier value of "$id" be an Absolute URI.<a href="#section-9.3.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.3.1-3">
+                        When the Schema Resource referenced by a by-reference applicator is bundled, it is RECOMMENDED that
+                        the Schema Resource be located as a value of a "$defs" object at the containing schema's root.
+                        The key of the "$defs" for the now embedded Schema Resource MAY be the "$id" of the bundled schema
+                        or some other form of application defined unique identifer (such as a UUID). This key is not
+                        intended to be referenced in JSON Schema, but may be used by an application to aid the
+                        bundling process.<a href="#section-9.3.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.3.1-4">
+                        A Schema Resource MAY be embedded in a location other than "$defs" where the location is defined
+                        as a schema value.<a href="#section-9.3.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.3.1-5">
+                        A Bundled Schema Resource MUST NOT be bundled by replacing the schema object from which it was
+                        referenced, or by wrapping the Schema Resource in other applicator keywords.<a href="#section-9.3.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.3.1-6">
+                        In order to produce identical output, references in the containing schema document to the
+                        previously external Schema Resources MUST NOT be changed, and now resolve to a schema using the
+                        "$id" of an embedded Schema Resource. Such identical output includes validation evaluation and URIs
+                        or paths used in resulting annotations or errors.<a href="#section-9.3.1-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.3.1-7">
+                        While the bundling process will often be the main method for creating a Compound Schema Document,
+                        it is also possible and expected that some will be created by hand, potentially without individual
+                        Schema Resources existing on their own previously.<a href="#section-9.3.1-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-9.3.2">
+          <h4 id="name-differing-and-default-diale">
+<a href="#section-9.3.2" class="section-number selfRef">9.3.2. </a><a href="#name-differing-and-default-diale" class="section-name selfRef">Differing and Default Dialects</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-9.3.2-1">
+                        When multiple schema resources are present in a single document,
+                        schema resources which do not define with which dialect they should be processed
+                        MUST be processed with the same dialect as the enclosing resource.<a href="#section-9.3.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.3.2-2">
+                        Since any schema that can be referenced can also be embedded, embedded schema resources MAY
+                        specify different processing dialects using the "$schema" values from their enclosing resource.<a href="#section-9.3.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-9.3.3">
+          <h4 id="name-validating">
+<a href="#section-9.3.3" class="section-number selfRef">9.3.3. </a><a href="#name-validating" class="section-name selfRef">Validating</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-9.3.3-1">
+                        Given that a Compound Schema Document may have embedded resources which identify as using different
+                        dialects, these documents SHOULD NOT be validated by applying a meta-schema
+                        to the Compound Schema Document as an instance. It is RECOMMENDED that an alternate
+                        validation process be provided in order to validate Schema Documents. Each Schema Resource
+                        SHOULD be separately validated against its associated meta-schema.
+                        <span class="cref">
+                            If you know a schema is what's being validated, you can identify if the schemas
+                            is a Compound Schema Document or not, by way of use of "$id", which identifies an
+                            embedded resource when used not at the document's root.
+            </span><a href="#section-9.3.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.3.3-2">
+                        A Compound Schema Document in which all embedded resources identify as using the same
+                        dialect, or in which "$schema" is omitted and therefore defaults to that of the enclosing resource,
+                        MAY be validated by applying the appropriate meta-schema.<a href="#section-9.3.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+<section id="section-9.4">
+        <h3 id="name-caveats">
+<a href="#section-9.4" class="section-number selfRef">9.4. </a><a href="#name-caveats" class="section-name selfRef">Caveats</a>
+        </h3>
+<section id="section-9.4.1">
+          <h4 id="name-guarding-against-infinite-r">
+<a href="#section-9.4.1" class="section-number selfRef">9.4.1. </a><a href="#name-guarding-against-infinite-r" class="section-name selfRef">Guarding Against Infinite Recursion</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-9.4.1-1">
+                        A schema MUST NOT be run into an infinite loop against an instance. For
+                        example, if two schemas "#alice" and "#bob" both have an "allOf" property
+                        that refers to the other, a naive validator might get stuck in an infinite
+                        recursive loop trying to validate the instance.  Schemas SHOULD NOT make
+                        use of infinite recursive nesting like this; the behavior is undefined.<a href="#section-9.4.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<div id="non-schemas">
+<section id="section-9.4.2">
+          <h4 id="name-references-to-possible-non-">
+<a href="#section-9.4.2" class="section-number selfRef">9.4.2. </a><a href="#name-references-to-possible-non-" class="section-name selfRef">References to Possible Non-Schemas</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-9.4.2-1">
+                        Subschema objects (or booleans) are recognized by their use with known
+                        applicator keywords or with location-reserving keywords such as
+                        <span><a href="#defs" class="xref">"$defs"</a> (<a href="#defs" class="xref">Section 8.2.4</a>)</span> that take one or more subschemas
+                        as a value.  These keywords may be "$defs" and the standard applicators
+                        from this document, or extension keywords from a known vocabulary, or
+                        implementation-specific custom keywords.<a href="#section-9.4.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.4.2-2">
+                        Multi-level structures of unknown keywords are capable of introducing
+                        nested subschemas, which would be subject to the processing rules for
+                        "$id".  Therefore, having a reference target in such an unrecognized
+                        structure cannot be reliably implemented, and the resulting behavior
+                        is undefined.  Similarly, a reference target under a known keyword,
+                        for which the value is known not to be a schema, results in undefined
+                        behavior in order to avoid burdening implementations with the need
+                        to detect such targets.
+                        <span class="cref">
+                            These scenarios are analogous to fetching a schema over HTTP
+                            but receiving a response with a Content-Type other than
+                            application/schema+json.  An implementation can certainly
+                            try to interpret it as a schema, but the origin server
+                            offered no guarantee that it actually is any such thing.
+                            Therefore, interpreting it as such has security implications
+                            and may produce unpredictable results.
+            </span><a href="#section-9.4.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.4.2-3">
+                        Note that single-level custom keywords with identical syntax and
+                        semantics to "$defs" do not allow for any intervening "$id" keywords,
+                        and therefore will behave correctly under implementations that attempt
+                        to use any reference target as a schema.  However, this behavior is
+                        implementation-specific and MUST NOT be relied upon for interoperability.<a href="#section-9.4.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+</section>
+<section id="section-9.5">
+        <h3 id="name-associating-instances-and-s">
+<a href="#section-9.5" class="section-number selfRef">9.5. </a><a href="#name-associating-instances-and-s" class="section-name selfRef">Associating Instances and Schemas</a>
+        </h3>
+<div id="hypermedia">
+<section id="section-9.5.1">
+          <h4 id="name-usage-for-hypermedia">
+<a href="#section-9.5.1" class="section-number selfRef">9.5.1. </a><a href="#name-usage-for-hypermedia" class="section-name selfRef">Usage for Hypermedia</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-9.5.1-1">
+                        JSON has been adopted widely by HTTP servers for automated APIs and robots. This
+                        section describes how to enhance processing of JSON documents in a more RESTful
+                        manner when used with protocols that support media types and
+                        <span><a href="#RFC8288" class="xref">Web linking</a> [<a href="#RFC8288" class="xref">RFC8288</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-9.5.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-9.5.1.1">
+            <h5 id="name-linking-to-a-schema">
+<a href="#section-9.5.1.1" class="section-number selfRef">9.5.1.1. </a><a href="#name-linking-to-a-schema" class="section-name selfRef">Linking to a Schema</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-9.5.1.1-1">
+                            It is RECOMMENDED that instances described by a schema provide a link to
+                            a downloadable JSON Schema using the link relation "describedby", as defined by
+                            <span><a href="#W3C.REC-ldp-20150226" class="xref">Linked Data Protocol 1.0, section 8.1</a> [<a href="#W3C.REC-ldp-20150226" class="xref">W3C.REC-ldp-20150226</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-9.5.1.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.5.1.1-2">
+                            In HTTP, such links can be attached to any response using the
+                            <span><a href="#RFC8288" class="xref">Link header</a> [<a href="#RFC8288" class="xref">RFC8288</a>]</span>. An example of such a header would be:<a href="#section-9.5.1.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-9.5.1.1-3">
+<pre>
+
+        Link: &lt;https://example.com/my-hyper-schema&gt;; rel="describedby"
+
+</pre><a href="#section-9.5.1.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+</section>
+<section id="section-9.5.1.2">
+            <h5 id="name-usage-over-http">
+<a href="#section-9.5.1.2" class="section-number selfRef">9.5.1.2. </a><a href="#name-usage-over-http" class="section-name selfRef">Usage Over HTTP</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-9.5.1.2-1">
+                            When used for hypermedia systems over a network,
+                            <span><a href="#RFC7231" class="xref">HTTP</a> [<a href="#RFC7231" class="xref">RFC7231</a>]</span> is frequently the protocol of choice for
+                            distributing schemas. Misbehaving clients can pose problems for server
+                            maintainers if they pull a schema over the network more frequently than
+                            necessary, when it's instead possible to cache a schema for a long period of
+                            time.<a href="#section-9.5.1.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.5.1.2-2">
+                            HTTP servers SHOULD set long-lived caching headers on JSON Schemas.
+                            HTTP clients SHOULD observe caching headers and not re-request documents within
+                            their freshness period.
+                            Distributed systems SHOULD make use of a shared cache and/or caching proxy.<a href="#section-9.5.1.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.5.1.2-3">
+                            Clients SHOULD set or prepend a User-Agent header specific to the JSON Schema
+                            implementation or software product. Since symbols are listed in decreasing order
+                            of significance, the JSON Schema library name/version should precede the more
+                            generic HTTP library name (if any). For example:<a href="#section-9.5.1.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-9.5.1.2-4">
+<pre>
+
+        User-Agent: product-name/5.4.1 so-cool-json-schema/1.0.2 curl/7.43.0
+
+</pre><a href="#section-9.5.1.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="section-9.5.1.2-5">
+                            Clients SHOULD be able to make requests with a "From" header so that server
+                            operators can contact the owner of a potentially misbehaving script.<a href="#section-9.5.1.2-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+</div>
+</section>
+</section>
+<section id="section-10">
+      <h2 id="name-a-vocabulary-for-applying-s">
+<a href="#section-10" class="section-number selfRef">10. </a><a href="#name-a-vocabulary-for-applying-s" class="section-name selfRef">A Vocabulary for Applying Subschemas</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-10-1">
+                This section defines a vocabulary of applicator keywords that
+                are RECOMMENDED for use as the basis of other vocabularies.<a href="#section-10-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10-2">
+                Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" SHOULD be considered to
+                require this vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.<a href="#section-10-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10-3">
+                The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Applicator vocabulary, is:
+                &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/applicator&gt;.<a href="#section-10-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10-4">
+                The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is:
+                <span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/applicator">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/applicator</a></span>.<a href="#section-10-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-10.1">
+        <h3 id="name-keyword-independence">
+<a href="#section-10.1" class="section-number selfRef">10.1. </a><a href="#name-keyword-independence" class="section-name selfRef">Keyword Independence</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-10.1-1">
+                    Schema keywords typically operate independently, without
+                    affecting each other's outcomes.<a href="#section-10.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.1-2">
+                    For schema author convenience, there are some exceptions among the
+                    keywords in this vocabulary:<a href="#section-10.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ul class="normal ulEmpty">
+<li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-10.1-3.1">
+                            "additionalProperties", whose behavior is defined in terms of
+                            "properties" and "patternProperties"<a href="#section-10.1-3.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-10.1-3.2">
+                            "items", whose behavior is defined in terms of "prefixItems"<a href="#section-10.1-3.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-10.1-3.3">
+                            "contains", whose behavior is affected by the presence and value of
+                            "minContains", in the Validation vocabulary<a href="#section-10.1-3.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+        </ul>
+</section>
+<div id="in-place">
+<section id="section-10.2">
+        <h3 id="name-keywords-for-applying-subsc">
+<a href="#section-10.2" class="section-number selfRef">10.2. </a><a href="#name-keywords-for-applying-subsc" class="section-name selfRef">Keywords for Applying Subschemas in Place</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-10.2-1">
+                    These keywords apply subschemas to the same location in the instance
+                    as the parent schema is being applied.  They allow combining
+                    or modifying the subschema results in various ways.<a href="#section-10.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2-2">
+                    Subschemas of these keywords evaluate the instance completely independently
+                    such that the results of one such subschema MUST NOT impact the results of sibling
+                    subschemas.  Therefore subschemas may be applied in
+                    any order.<a href="#section-10.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div id="logic">
+<section id="section-10.2.1">
+          <h4 id="name-keywords-for-applying-subsch">
+<a href="#section-10.2.1" class="section-number selfRef">10.2.1. </a><a href="#name-keywords-for-applying-subsch" class="section-name selfRef">Keywords for Applying Subschemas With Logic</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-10.2.1-1">
+                        These keywords correspond to logical operators for combining or modifying
+                        the boolean assertion results of the subschemas.  They have no direct
+                        impact on annotation collection, although they enable the same annotation
+                        keyword to be applied to an instance location with different values.
+                        Annotation keywords define their own rules for combining such values.<a href="#section-10.2.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div id="allOf">
+<section id="section-10.2.1.1">
+            <h5 id="name-allof">
+<a href="#section-10.2.1.1" class="section-number selfRef">10.2.1.1. </a><a href="#name-allof" class="section-name selfRef">allOf</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-10.2.1.1-1">
+                            This keyword's value MUST be a non-empty array.
+                            Each item of the array MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-10.2.1.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.1.1-2">
+                            An instance validates successfully against this keyword if it validates
+                            successfully against all schemas defined by this keyword's value.<a href="#section-10.2.1.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-10.2.1.2">
+            <h5 id="name-anyof">
+<a href="#section-10.2.1.2" class="section-number selfRef">10.2.1.2. </a><a href="#name-anyof" class="section-name selfRef">anyOf</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-10.2.1.2-1">
+                            This keyword's value MUST be a non-empty array.
+                            Each item of the array MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-10.2.1.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.1.2-2">
+                            An instance validates successfully against this keyword if it validates
+                            successfully against at least one schema defined by this keyword's value.
+                            Note that when annotations are being collected, all subschemas MUST
+                            be examined so that annotations are collected from each subschema
+                            that validates successfully.<a href="#section-10.2.1.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-10.2.1.3">
+            <h5 id="name-oneof">
+<a href="#section-10.2.1.3" class="section-number selfRef">10.2.1.3. </a><a href="#name-oneof" class="section-name selfRef">oneOf</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-10.2.1.3-1">
+                            This keyword's value MUST be a non-empty array.
+                            Each item of the array MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-10.2.1.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.1.3-2">
+                            An instance validates successfully against this keyword if it validates
+                            successfully against exactly one schema defined by this keyword's value.<a href="#section-10.2.1.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<div id="not">
+<section id="section-10.2.1.4">
+            <h5 id="name-not">
+<a href="#section-10.2.1.4" class="section-number selfRef">10.2.1.4. </a><a href="#name-not" class="section-name selfRef">not</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-10.2.1.4-1">
+                            This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-10.2.1.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.1.4-2">
+                            An instance is valid against this keyword if it fails to validate
+                            successfully against the schema defined by this keyword.<a href="#section-10.2.1.4-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="conditional">
+<section id="section-10.2.2">
+          <h4 id="name-keywords-for-applying-subsche">
+<a href="#section-10.2.2" class="section-number selfRef">10.2.2. </a><a href="#name-keywords-for-applying-subsche" class="section-name selfRef">Keywords for Applying Subschemas Conditionally</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-10.2.2-1">
+                        Three of these keywords work together to implement conditional
+                        application of a subschema based on the outcome of another subschema.
+                        The fourth is a shortcut for a specific conditional case.<a href="#section-10.2.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.2-2">
+                        "if", "then", and "else" MUST NOT interact with each other across
+                        subschema boundaries.  In other words, an "if" in one
+                        branch of an "allOf" MUST NOT have an impact on a "then"
+                        or "else" in another branch.<a href="#section-10.2.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.2-3">
+                        There is no default behavior for "if", "then", or "else"
+                        when they are not present.  In particular, they MUST NOT
+                        be treated as if present with an empty schema, and when
+                        "if" is not present, both "then" and "else" MUST be
+                        entirely ignored.<a href="#section-10.2.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-10.2.2.1">
+            <h5 id="name-if">
+<a href="#section-10.2.2.1" class="section-number selfRef">10.2.2.1. </a><a href="#name-if" class="section-name selfRef">if</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-10.2.2.1-1">
+                            This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-10.2.2.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.2.1-2">
+                            This validation outcome of this keyword's subschema
+                            has no direct effect on the overall validation
+                            result.  Rather, it controls which of the "then"
+                            or "else" keywords are evaluated.<a href="#section-10.2.2.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.2.1-3">
+                            Instances that successfully validate against this
+                            keyword's subschema MUST also be valid against
+                            the subschema value of the "then" keyword, if
+                            present.<a href="#section-10.2.2.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.2.1-4">
+                            Instances that fail to validate against this
+                            keyword's subschema MUST also be valid against
+                            the subschema value of the "else" keyword, if
+                            present.<a href="#section-10.2.2.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.2.1-5">
+                            If <span><a href="#annotations" class="xref">annotations</a> (<a href="#annotations" class="xref">Section 7.7</a>)</span>
+                            are being collected, they are collected from this
+                            keyword's subschema in the usual way, including when
+                            the keyword is present without either "then" or "else".<a href="#section-10.2.2.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-10.2.2.2">
+            <h5 id="name-then">
+<a href="#section-10.2.2.2" class="section-number selfRef">10.2.2.2. </a><a href="#name-then" class="section-name selfRef">then</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-10.2.2.2-1">
+                            This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-10.2.2.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.2.2-2">
+                            When "if" is present, and the instance successfully
+                            validates against its subschema, then validation
+                            succeeds against this keyword if the instance also
+                            successfully validates against this keyword's subschema.<a href="#section-10.2.2.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.2.2-3">
+                            This keyword has no effect when "if" is absent, or
+                            when the instance fails to validate against its
+                            subschema.  Implementations MUST NOT evaluate
+                            the instance against this keyword, for either validation
+                            or annotation collection purposes, in such cases.<a href="#section-10.2.2.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-10.2.2.3">
+            <h5 id="name-else">
+<a href="#section-10.2.2.3" class="section-number selfRef">10.2.2.3. </a><a href="#name-else" class="section-name selfRef">else</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-10.2.2.3-1">
+                            This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-10.2.2.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.2.3-2">
+                            When "if" is present, and the instance fails to
+                            validate against its subschema, then validation
+                            succeeds against this keyword if the instance
+                            successfully validates against this keyword's subschema.<a href="#section-10.2.2.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.2.3-3">
+                            This keyword has no effect when "if" is absent, or
+                            when the instance successfully validates against its
+                            subschema.  Implementations MUST NOT evaluate
+                            the instance against this keyword, for either validation
+                            or annotation collection purposes, in such cases.<a href="#section-10.2.2.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-10.2.2.4">
+            <h5 id="name-dependentschemas">
+<a href="#section-10.2.2.4" class="section-number selfRef">10.2.2.4. </a><a href="#name-dependentschemas" class="section-name selfRef">dependentSchemas</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-10.2.2.4-1">
+                            This keyword specifies subschemas that are evaluated if the instance
+                            is an object and contains a certain property.<a href="#section-10.2.2.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.2.4-2">
+                            This keyword's value MUST be an object.
+                            Each value in the object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-10.2.2.4-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.2.4-3">
+                            If the object key is a property in the instance, the entire
+                            instance must validate against the subschema.  Its use is
+                            dependent on the presence of the property.<a href="#section-10.2.2.4-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.2.2.4-4">
+                            Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty object.<a href="#section-10.2.2.4-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+</div>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-10.3">
+        <h3 id="name-keywords-for-applying-subschem">
+<a href="#section-10.3" class="section-number selfRef">10.3. </a><a href="#name-keywords-for-applying-subschem" class="section-name selfRef">Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Child Instances</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-10.3-1">
+                    Each of these keywords defines a rule for applying its
+                    subschema(s) to child instances, specifically object
+                    properties and array items, and combining their results.<a href="#section-10.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-10.3.1">
+          <h4 id="name-keywords-for-applying-subschema">
+<a href="#section-10.3.1" class="section-number selfRef">10.3.1. </a><a href="#name-keywords-for-applying-subschema" class="section-name selfRef">Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Arrays</a>
+          </h4>
+<section id="section-10.3.1.1">
+            <h5 id="name-prefixitems">
+<a href="#section-10.3.1.1" class="section-number selfRef">10.3.1.1. </a><a href="#name-prefixitems" class="section-name selfRef">prefixItems</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-10.3.1.1-1">
+                            The value of "prefixItems" MUST be a non-empty array of valid JSON Schemas.<a href="#section-10.3.1.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.1.1-2">
+                            Validation succeeds if each element of the instance validates
+                            against the schema at the same position, if any.  This keyword
+                            does not constrain the length of the array.  If the array is longer
+                            than this keyword's value, this keyword validates only the
+                            prefix of matching length.<a href="#section-10.3.1.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.1.1-3">
+                            This keyword produces an annotation value which is the largest
+                            index to which this keyword applied a subschema.  The value
+                            MAY be a boolean true if a subschema was applied to every
+                            index of the instance, such as is produced by the "items" keyword.
+                            This annotation affects the behavior of "items" and "unevaluatedItems".<a href="#section-10.3.1.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.1.1-4">
+                            Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as
+                            an empty array.<a href="#section-10.3.1.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<div id="items">
+<section id="section-10.3.1.2">
+            <h5 id="name-items">
+<a href="#section-10.3.1.2" class="section-number selfRef">10.3.1.2. </a><a href="#name-items" class="section-name selfRef">items</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-10.3.1.2-1">
+                            The value of "items" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-10.3.1.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.1.2-2">
+                            This keyword applies its subschema to all instance elements
+                            at indexes greater than the length of the "prefixItems" array
+                            in the same schema object, as reported by the annotation result
+                            of that "prefixItems" keyword.  If no such annotation
+                            result exists, "items" applies its subschema to all instance
+                            array elements.
+                            <span class="cref">
+                                Note that the behavior of "items" without "prefixItems" is
+                                identical to that of the schema form of "items" in prior drafts.
+                                When "prefixItems" is present, the behavior of "items" is
+                                identical to the former "additionalItems" keyword.
+              </span><a href="#section-10.3.1.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.1.2-3">
+                            If the "items" subschema is applied to any
+                            positions within the instance array, it produces an
+                            annotation result of boolean true, indicating that all remaining array
+                            elements have been evaluated against this keyword's subschema.
+                            This annotation affects the behavior of "unevaluatedItems" in the
+                            Unevaluated vocabulary.<a href="#section-10.3.1.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.1.2-4">
+                            Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as
+                            an empty schema.<a href="#section-10.3.1.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.1.2-5">
+                            Implementations MAY choose to implement or optimize this keyword
+                            in another way that produces the same effect, such as by directly
+                            checking for the presence and size of a "prefixItems" array.
+                            Implementations that do not support annotation collection MUST do so.<a href="#section-10.3.1.2-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-10.3.1.3">
+            <h5 id="name-contains">
+<a href="#section-10.3.1.3" class="section-number selfRef">10.3.1.3. </a><a href="#name-contains" class="section-name selfRef">contains</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-10.3.1.3-1">
+                            The value of this keyword MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-10.3.1.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.1.3-2">
+                            An array instance is valid against "contains" if at least one of
+                            its elements is valid against the given schema,
+                            except when "minContains" is present and has a value of 0, in which
+                            case an array instance MUST be considered valid against the "contains" keyword,
+                            even if none of its elements is valid against the given schema.<a href="#section-10.3.1.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.1.3-3">
+                            This keyword produces an annotation value which is an array of
+                            the indexes to which this keyword validates successfully when applying
+                            its subschema, in ascending order. The value MAY be a boolean "true" if
+                            the subschema validates successfully when applied to every index of the
+                            instance. The annotation MUST be present if the instance array to which
+                            this keyword's schema applies is empty.<a href="#section-10.3.1.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.1.3-4">
+                            This annotation affects the behavior of "unevaluatedItems" in the
+                            Unevaluated vocabulary, and MAY also be used to implement the
+                            "minContains" and "maxContains" keywords in the Validation vocabulary.<a href="#section-10.3.1.3-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.1.3-5">
+                            The subschema MUST be applied to every array element even after the first
+                            match has been found, in order to collect annotations for use by other
+                            keywords. This is to ensure that all possible annotations are collected.<a href="#section-10.3.1.3-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+<section id="section-10.3.2">
+          <h4 id="name-keywords-for-applying-subschemas">
+<a href="#section-10.3.2" class="section-number selfRef">10.3.2. </a><a href="#name-keywords-for-applying-subschemas" class="section-name selfRef">Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Objects</a>
+          </h4>
+<section id="section-10.3.2.1">
+            <h5 id="name-properties">
+<a href="#section-10.3.2.1" class="section-number selfRef">10.3.2.1. </a><a href="#name-properties" class="section-name selfRef">properties</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.1-1">
+                            The value of "properties" MUST be an object.
+                            Each value of this object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-10.3.2.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.1-2">
+                            Validation succeeds if, for each name that appears in both
+                            the instance and as a name within this keyword's value, the child
+                            instance for that name successfully validates against the
+                            corresponding schema.<a href="#section-10.3.2.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.1-3">
+                            The annotation result of this keyword is the set of instance
+                            property names matched by this keyword.
+                            This annotation affects the behavior of "additionalProperties" (in
+                            this vocabulary) and "unevaluatedProperties" in the Unevaluated vocabulary.<a href="#section-10.3.2.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.1-4">
+                            Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as
+                            an empty object.<a href="#section-10.3.2.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-10.3.2.2">
+            <h5 id="name-patternproperties">
+<a href="#section-10.3.2.2" class="section-number selfRef">10.3.2.2. </a><a href="#name-patternproperties" class="section-name selfRef">patternProperties</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.2-1">
+                            The value of "patternProperties" MUST be an object. Each property name
+                            of this object SHOULD be a valid regular expression, according to the
+                            ECMA-262 regular expression dialect. Each property value of this object
+                            MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-10.3.2.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.2-2">
+                            Validation succeeds if, for each instance name that matches any
+                            regular expressions that appear as a property name in this keyword's value,
+                            the child instance for that name successfully validates against each
+                            schema that corresponds to a matching regular expression.<a href="#section-10.3.2.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.2-3">
+                            The annotation result of this keyword is the set of instance
+                            property names matched by this keyword.
+                            This annotation affects the behavior of "additionalProperties" (in this
+                            vocabulary) and "unevaluatedProperties" (in the Unevaluated vocabulary).<a href="#section-10.3.2.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.2-4">
+                            Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as
+                            an empty object.<a href="#section-10.3.2.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<div id="additionalProperties">
+<section id="section-10.3.2.3">
+            <h5 id="name-additionalproperties">
+<a href="#section-10.3.2.3" class="section-number selfRef">10.3.2.3. </a><a href="#name-additionalproperties" class="section-name selfRef">additionalProperties</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.3-1">
+                            The value of "additionalProperties" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-10.3.2.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.3-2">
+                            The behavior of this keyword depends on the presence and
+                            annotation results of "properties" and "patternProperties"
+                            within the same schema object.
+                            Validation with "additionalProperties" applies only to the child
+                            values of instance names that do not appear in the annotation
+                            results of either "properties" or "patternProperties".<a href="#section-10.3.2.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.3-3">
+                            For all such properties, validation succeeds if the child instance
+                            validates against the "additionalProperties" schema.<a href="#section-10.3.2.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.3-4">
+                            The annotation result of this keyword is the set of instance
+                            property names validated by this keyword's subschema.
+                            This annotation affects the behavior of "unevaluatedProperties"
+                            in the Unevaluated vocabulary.<a href="#section-10.3.2.3-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.3-5">
+                            Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as
+                            an empty schema.<a href="#section-10.3.2.3-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.3-6">
+                            Implementations MAY choose to implement or optimize this keyword
+                            in another way that produces the same effect, such as by directly
+                            checking the names in "properties" and the patterns in
+                            "patternProperties" against the instance property set.
+                            Implementations that do not support annotation collection MUST do so.
+                            <span class="cref">
+                                In defining this option, it seems there is the potential for
+                                ambiguity in the output format. The ambiguity does not affect validation results,
+                                but it does affect the resulting output format.
+                                The ambiguity allows for multiple valid output results depending on whether annotations
+                                are used or a solution that "produces the same effect" as draft-07. It is understood
+                                that annotations from failing schemas are dropped.
+                                See our
+                                [Decision Record](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/tree/HEAD/adr/2022-04-08-cref-for-ambiguity-and-fix-later-gh-spec-issue-1172.md)
+                                for further details.
+              </span><a href="#section-10.3.2.3-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-10.3.2.4">
+            <h5 id="name-propertynames">
+<a href="#section-10.3.2.4" class="section-number selfRef">10.3.2.4. </a><a href="#name-propertynames" class="section-name selfRef">propertyNames</a>
+            </h5>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.4-1">
+                            The value of "propertyNames" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-10.3.2.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.4-2">
+                            If the instance is an object, this keyword validates if every property name in
+                            the instance validates against the provided schema.
+                            Note the property name that the schema is testing will always be a string.<a href="#section-10.3.2.4-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10.3.2.4-3">
+                            Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty schema.<a href="#section-10.3.2.4-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+</section>
+</section>
+<section id="section-11">
+      <h2 id="name-a-vocabulary-for-unevaluate">
+<a href="#section-11" class="section-number selfRef">11. </a><a href="#name-a-vocabulary-for-unevaluate" class="section-name selfRef">A Vocabulary for Unevaluated Locations</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-11-1">
+                The purpose of these keywords is to enable schema authors to apply
+                subschemas to array items or object properties that have not been
+                successfully evaluated against any dynamic-scope subschema of any
+                adjacent keywords.<a href="#section-11-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11-2">
+                These instance items or properties may have been unsuccessfully evaluated
+                against one or more adjacent keyword subschemas, such as when an assertion
+                in a branch of an "anyOf" fails.  Such failed evaluations are not considered
+                to contribute to whether or not the item or property has been evaluated.
+                Only successful evaluations are considered.<a href="#section-11-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11-3">
+                If an item in an array or an object property is "successfully evaluated", it
+                is logically considered to be valid in terms of the representation of the
+                object or array that's expected. For example if a subschema represents a car,
+                which requires between 2-4 wheels, and the value of "wheels" is 6, the instance
+                object is not "evaluated" to be a car, and the "wheels" property is considered
+                "unevaluated (successfully as a known thing)", and does not retain any annotations.<a href="#section-11-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11-4">
+                Recall that adjacent keywords are keywords within the same schema object,
+                and that the dynamic-scope subschemas include reference targets as well as
+                lexical subschemas.<a href="#section-11-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11-5">
+                The behavior of these keywords depend on the annotation results of
+                adjacent keywords that apply to the instance location being validated.<a href="#section-11-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11-6">
+                Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" SHOULD be considered to
+                require this vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.<a href="#section-11-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11-7">
+                The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Unevaluated Applicator
+                vocabulary, is:
+                &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/unevaluated&gt;.<a href="#section-11-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11-8">
+                The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is:
+                <span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/unevaluated">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/unevaluated</a></span>.<a href="#section-11-8" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-11.1">
+        <h3 id="name-keyword-independence-2">
+<a href="#section-11.1" class="section-number selfRef">11.1. </a><a href="#name-keyword-independence-2" class="section-name selfRef">Keyword Independence</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-11.1-1">
+                    Schema keywords typically operate independently, without
+                    affecting each other's outcomes. However, the keywords in this
+                    vocabulary are notable exceptions:<a href="#section-11.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ul class="normal ulEmpty">
+<li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-11.1-2.1">
+                            "unevaluatedItems", whose behavior is defined in terms of annotations
+                            from "prefixItems", "items", "contains", and itself<a href="#section-11.1-2.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-11.1-2.2">
+                            "unevaluatedProperties", whose behavior is defined in terms of
+                            annotations from "properties", "patternProperties",
+                            "additionalProperties" and itself<a href="#section-11.1-2.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+        </ul>
+</section>
+<div id="unevaluatedItems">
+<section id="section-11.2">
+        <h3 id="name-unevaluateditems">
+<a href="#section-11.2" class="section-number selfRef">11.2. </a><a href="#name-unevaluateditems" class="section-name selfRef">unevaluatedItems</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-11.2-1">
+                    The value of "unevaluatedItems" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-11.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11.2-2">
+                    The behavior of this keyword depends on the annotation results of
+                    adjacent keywords that apply to the instance location being validated.
+                    Specifically, the annotations from "prefixItems", "items", and "contains",
+                    which can come from those keywords when they are adjacent to the
+                    "unevaluatedItems" keyword. Those three annotations, as well as
+                    "unevaluatedItems", can also result from any and all adjacent
+                    <span><a href="#in-place" class="xref">in-place applicator</a> (<a href="#in-place" class="xref">Section 10.2</a>)</span> keywords.
+                    This includes but is not limited to the in-place applicators
+                    defined in this document.<a href="#section-11.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11.2-3">
+                    If no relevant annotations are present, the "unevaluatedItems"
+                    subschema MUST be applied to all locations in the array.
+                    If a boolean true value is present from any of the relevant annotations,
+                    "unevaluatedItems" MUST be ignored.  Otherwise, the subschema
+                    MUST be applied to any index greater than the largest annotation
+                    value for "prefixItems", which does not appear in any annotation
+                    value for "contains".<a href="#section-11.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11.2-4">
+                    This means that "prefixItems", "items", "contains", and all in-place
+                    applicators MUST be evaluated before this keyword can be evaluated.
+                    Authors of extension keywords MUST NOT define an in-place applicator
+                    that would need to be evaluated after this keyword.<a href="#section-11.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11.2-5">
+                    If the "unevaluatedItems" subschema is applied to any
+                    positions within the instance array, it produces an
+                    annotation result of boolean true, analogous to the
+                    behavior of "items".
+                    This annotation affects the behavior of "unevaluatedItems" in parent schemas.<a href="#section-11.2-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11.2-6">
+                    Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as
+                    an empty schema.<a href="#section-11.2-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="unevaluatedProperties">
+<section id="section-11.3">
+        <h3 id="name-unevaluatedproperties">
+<a href="#section-11.3" class="section-number selfRef">11.3. </a><a href="#name-unevaluatedproperties" class="section-name selfRef">unevaluatedProperties</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-11.3-1">
+                    The value of "unevaluatedProperties" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.<a href="#section-11.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11.3-2">
+                    The behavior of this keyword depends on the annotation results of
+                    adjacent keywords that apply to the instance location being validated.
+                    Specifically, the annotations from "properties", "patternProperties",
+                    and "additionalProperties", which can come from those keywords when
+                    they are adjacent to the "unevaluatedProperties" keyword.  Those
+                    three annotations, as well as "unevaluatedProperties", can also
+                    result from any and all adjacent
+                    <span><a href="#in-place" class="xref">in-place applicator</a> (<a href="#in-place" class="xref">Section 10.2</a>)</span> keywords.
+                    This includes but is not limited to the in-place applicators
+                    defined in this document.<a href="#section-11.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11.3-3">
+                    Validation with "unevaluatedProperties" applies only to the child
+                    values of instance names that do not appear in the "properties",
+                    "patternProperties", "additionalProperties", or
+                    "unevaluatedProperties" annotation results that apply to the
+                    instance location being validated.<a href="#section-11.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11.3-4">
+                    For all such properties, validation succeeds if the child instance
+                    validates against the "unevaluatedProperties" schema.<a href="#section-11.3-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11.3-5">
+                    This means that "properties", "patternProperties", "additionalProperties",
+                    and all in-place applicators MUST be evaluated before this keyword can
+                    be evaluated.  Authors of extension keywords MUST NOT define an in-place
+                    applicator that would need to be evaluated after this keyword.<a href="#section-11.3-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11.3-6">
+                    The annotation result of this keyword is the set of instance
+                    property names validated by this keyword's subschema.
+                    This annotation affects the behavior of "unevaluatedProperties" in parent schemas.<a href="#section-11.3-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-11.3-7">
+                    Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as
+                    an empty schema.<a href="#section-11.3-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+</section>
+<div id="output">
+<section id="section-12">
+      <h2 id="name-output-formatting">
+<a href="#section-12" class="section-number selfRef">12. </a><a href="#name-output-formatting" class="section-name selfRef">Output Formatting</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-12-1">
+                JSON Schema is defined to be platform-independent.  As such, to increase compatibility
+                across platforms, implementations SHOULD conform to a standard validation output
+                format.  This section describes the minimum requirements that consumers will need to
+                properly interpret validation results.<a href="#section-12-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-12.1">
+        <h3 id="name-format">
+<a href="#section-12.1" class="section-number selfRef">12.1. </a><a href="#name-format" class="section-name selfRef">Format</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-12.1-1">
+                    JSON Schema output is defined using the JSON Schema data instance model as described
+                    in section 4.2.1.  Implementations MAY deviate from this as supported by their
+                    specific languages and platforms, however it is RECOMMENDED that the output be
+                    convertible to the JSON format defined herein via serialization or other means.<a href="#section-12.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-12.2">
+        <h3 id="name-output-formats">
+<a href="#section-12.2" class="section-number selfRef">12.2. </a><a href="#name-output-formats" class="section-name selfRef">Output Formats</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-12.2-1">
+                    This specification defines four output formats.  See the "Output Structure"
+                    section for the requirements of each format.<a href="#section-12.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ul class="normal ulEmpty">
+<li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-12.2-2.1">
+                            Flag - A boolean which simply indicates the overall validation result
+                            with no further details.<a href="#section-12.2-2.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-12.2-2.2">
+                            Basic - Provides validation information in a flat list structure.<a href="#section-12.2-2.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-12.2-2.3">
+                            Detailed - Provides validation information in a condensed hierarchical
+                            structure based on the structure of the schema.<a href="#section-12.2-2.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-12.2-2.4">
+                            Verbose - Provides validation information in an uncondensed hierarchical
+                            structure that matches the exact structure of the schema.<a href="#section-12.2-2.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+        </ul>
+<p id="section-12.2-3">
+                    An implementation SHOULD provide at least one of the "flag", "basic", or "detailed"
+                    format and MAY provide the "verbose" format.  If it provides one or more of the
+                    "detailed" or "verbose" formats, it MUST also provide the "flag" format.
+                    Implementations SHOULD specify in their documentation which formats they support.<a href="#section-12.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-12.3">
+        <h3 id="name-minimum-information">
+<a href="#section-12.3" class="section-number selfRef">12.3. </a><a href="#name-minimum-information" class="section-name selfRef">Minimum Information</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-12.3-1">
+                    Beyond the simplistic "flag" output, additional information is useful to aid in
+                    debugging a schema or instance.  Each sub-result SHOULD contain the information
+                    contained within this section at a minimum.<a href="#section-12.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-12.3-2">
+                    A single object that contains all of these components is considered an
+                    output unit.<a href="#section-12.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-12.3-3">
+                    Implementations MAY elect to provide additional information.<a href="#section-12.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-12.3.1">
+          <h4 id="name-keyword-relative-location">
+<a href="#section-12.3.1" class="section-number selfRef">12.3.1. </a><a href="#name-keyword-relative-location" class="section-name selfRef">Keyword Relative Location</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-12.3.1-1">
+                        The relative location of the validating keyword that follows the validation
+                        path.  The value MUST be expressed as a JSON Pointer, and it MUST include
+                        any by-reference applicators such as "$ref" or "$dynamicRef".<a href="#section-12.3.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-12.3.1-2">
+<pre>
+
+/properties/width/$ref/minimum
+
+</pre><a href="#section-12.3.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="section-12.3.1-3">
+                    Note that this pointer may not be resolvable by the normal JSON Pointer process
+                    due to the inclusion of these by-reference applicator keywords.<a href="#section-12.3.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-12.3.1-4">
+                        The JSON key for this information is "keywordLocation".<a href="#section-12.3.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-12.3.2">
+          <h4 id="name-keyword-absolute-location">
+<a href="#section-12.3.2" class="section-number selfRef">12.3.2. </a><a href="#name-keyword-absolute-location" class="section-name selfRef">Keyword Absolute Location</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-12.3.2-1">
+                        The absolute, dereferenced location of the validating keyword.  The value MUST
+                        be expressed as a full URI using the canonical URI of the relevant schema resource
+                        with a JSON Pointer fragment, and it MUST NOT include by-reference applicators
+                        such as "$ref" or "$dynamicRef" as non-terminal path components.
+                        It MAY end in such keywords if the error or annotation is for that
+                        keyword, such as an unresolvable reference.
+                        <span class="cref">
+                            Note that "absolute" here is in the sense of "absolute filesystem path"
+                            (meaning the complete location) rather than the "absolute-URI"
+                            terminology from RFC 3986 (meaning with scheme but without fragment).
+                            Keyword absolute locations will have a fragment in order to
+                            identify the keyword.
+            </span><a href="#section-12.3.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-12.3.2-2">
+<pre>
+
+https://example.com/schemas/common#/$defs/count/minimum
+
+</pre><a href="#section-12.3.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="section-12.3.2-3">
+                        This information MAY be omitted only if either the dynamic scope did not pass
+                        over a reference or if the schema does not declare an absolute URI as its "$id".<a href="#section-12.3.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-12.3.2-4">
+                        The JSON key for this information is "absoluteKeywordLocation".<a href="#section-12.3.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-12.3.3">
+          <h4 id="name-instance-location">
+<a href="#section-12.3.3" class="section-number selfRef">12.3.3. </a><a href="#name-instance-location" class="section-name selfRef">Instance Location</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-12.3.3-1">
+                        The location of the JSON value within the instance being validated.  The
+                        value MUST be expressed as a JSON Pointer.<a href="#section-12.3.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-12.3.3-2">
+                        The JSON key for this information is "instanceLocation".<a href="#section-12.3.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-12.3.4">
+          <h4 id="name-error-or-annotation">
+<a href="#section-12.3.4" class="section-number selfRef">12.3.4. </a><a href="#name-error-or-annotation" class="section-name selfRef">Error or Annotation</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-12.3.4-1">
+                        The error or annotation that is produced by the validation.<a href="#section-12.3.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-12.3.4-2">
+                        For errors, the specific wording for the message is not defined by this
+                        specification.  Implementations will need to provide this.<a href="#section-12.3.4-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-12.3.4-3">
+                        For annotations, each keyword that produces an annotation specifies its
+                        format.  By default, it is the keyword's value.<a href="#section-12.3.4-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-12.3.4-4">
+                        The JSON key for failed validations is "error"; for successful validations
+                        it is "annotation".<a href="#section-12.3.4-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-12.3.5">
+          <h4 id="name-nested-results">
+<a href="#section-12.3.5" class="section-number selfRef">12.3.5. </a><a href="#name-nested-results" class="section-name selfRef">Nested Results</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-12.3.5-1">
+                        For the two hierarchical structures, this property will hold nested errors
+                        and annotations.<a href="#section-12.3.5-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-12.3.5-2">
+                        The JSON key for nested results in failed validations is "errors"; for
+                        successful validations it is "annotations".  Note the plural forms, as
+                        a keyword with nested results can also have a local error or annotation.<a href="#section-12.3.5-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+<section id="section-12.4">
+        <h3 id="name-output-structure">
+<a href="#section-12.4" class="section-number selfRef">12.4. </a><a href="#name-output-structure" class="section-name selfRef">Output Structure</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-12.4-1">
+                    The output MUST be an object containing a boolean property named "valid".  When
+                    additional information about the result is required, the output MUST also contain
+                    "errors" or "annotations" as described below.<a href="#section-12.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ul class="normal ulEmpty">
+<li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-12.4-2.1">
+                            "valid" - a boolean value indicating the overall validation success or
+                            failure<a href="#section-12.4-2.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-12.4-2.2">
+                            "errors" - the collection of errors or annotations produced by a failed
+                            validation<a href="#section-12.4-2.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-12.4-2.3">
+                            "annotations" - the collection of errors or annotations produced by a
+                            successful validation<a href="#section-12.4-2.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+        </ul>
+<p id="section-12.4-3">
+                    For these examples, the following schema and instance will be used.<a href="#section-12.4-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-12.4-4">
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/polygon",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "$defs": {
+    "point": {
+      "type": "object",
+      "properties": {
+        "x": { "type": "number" },
+        "y": { "type": "number" }
+      },
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "required": [ "x", "y" ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "array",
+  "items": { "$ref": "#/$defs/point" },
+  "minItems": 3
+}
+
+[
+  {
+    "x": 2.5,
+    "y": 1.3
+  },
+  {
+    "x": 1,
+    "z": 6.7
+  }
+]
+
+</pre><a href="#section-12.4-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="section-12.4-5">
+                    This instance will fail validation and produce errors, but it's trivial to deduce
+                    examples for passing schemas that produce annotations.<a href="#section-12.4-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-12.4-6">
+                    Specifically, the errors it will produce are:<a href="#section-12.4-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ul class="normal ulEmpty">
+<li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-12.4-7.1">
+                            The second object is missing a "y" property.<a href="#section-12.4-7.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-12.4-7.2">
+                            The second object has a disallowed "z" property.<a href="#section-12.4-7.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-12.4-7.3">
+                            There are only two objects, but three are required.<a href="#section-12.4-7.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+        </ul>
+<p id="section-12.4-8">
+                    Note that the error message wording as depicted in these examples is not a
+                    requirement of this specification.  Implementations SHOULD craft error messages
+                    tailored for their audience or provide a templating mechanism that allows their
+                    users to craft their own messages.<a href="#section-12.4-8" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-12.4.1">
+          <h4 id="name-flag">
+<a href="#section-12.4.1" class="section-number selfRef">12.4.1. </a><a href="#name-flag" class="section-name selfRef">Flag</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-12.4.1-1">
+                        In the simplest case, merely the boolean result for the "valid" valid property
+                        needs to be fulfilled.<a href="#section-12.4.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-12.4.1-2">
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "valid": false
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#section-12.4.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="section-12.4.1-3">
+                        Because no errors or annotations are returned with this format, it is
+                        RECOMMENDED that implementations use short-circuiting logic to return
+                        failure or success as soon as the outcome can be determined.  For example,
+                        if an "anyOf" keyword contains five sub-schemas, and the second one
+                        passes, there is no need to check the other three.  The logic can simply
+                        return with success.<a href="#section-12.4.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-12.4.2">
+          <h4 id="name-basic">
+<a href="#section-12.4.2" class="section-number selfRef">12.4.2. </a><a href="#name-basic" class="section-name selfRef">Basic</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-12.4.2-1">
+                        The "Basic" structure is a flat list of output units.<a href="#section-12.4.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-12.4.2-2">
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "valid": false,
+  "errors": [
+    {
+      "keywordLocation": "",
+      "instanceLocation": "",
+      "error": "A subschema had errors."
+    },
+    {
+      "keywordLocation": "/items/$ref",
+      "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+        "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point",
+      "instanceLocation": "/1",
+      "error": "A subschema had errors."
+    },
+    {
+      "keywordLocation": "/items/$ref/required",
+      "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+        "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point/required",
+      "instanceLocation": "/1",
+      "error": "Required property 'y' not found."
+    },
+    {
+      "keywordLocation": "/items/$ref/additionalProperties",
+      "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+        "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point/additionalProperties",
+      "instanceLocation": "/1/z",
+      "error": "Additional property 'z' found but was invalid."
+    },
+    {
+      "keywordLocation": "/minItems",
+      "instanceLocation": "",
+      "error": "Expected at least 3 items but found 2"
+    }
+  ]
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#section-12.4.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+</section>
+<section id="section-12.4.3">
+          <h4 id="name-detailed">
+<a href="#section-12.4.3" class="section-number selfRef">12.4.3. </a><a href="#name-detailed" class="section-name selfRef">Detailed</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-12.4.3-1">
+                        The "Detailed" structure is based on the schema and can be more readable
+                        for both humans and machines.  Having the structure organized this way makes
+                        associations between the errors more apparent.  For example, the fact that
+                        the missing "y" property and the extra "z" property both stem from the same
+                        location in the instance is not immediately obvious in the "Basic" structure.
+                        In a hierarchy, the correlation is more easily identified.<a href="#section-12.4.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-12.4.3-2">
+                        The following rules govern the construction of the results object:<a href="#section-12.4.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ul class="normal ulEmpty">
+<li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-12.4.3-3.1">
+                                All applicator keywords ("*Of", "$ref", "if"/"then"/"else", etc.) require
+                                a node.<a href="#section-12.4.3-3.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-12.4.3-3.2">
+                                Nodes that have no children are removed.<a href="#section-12.4.3-3.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-12.4.3-3.3">
+                                Nodes that have a single child are replaced by the child.<a href="#section-12.4.3-3.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+<p id="section-12.4.3-4">
+                        Branch nodes do not require an error message or an annotation.<a href="#section-12.4.3-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-12.4.3-5">
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "valid": false,
+  "keywordLocation": "",
+  "instanceLocation": "",
+  "errors": [
+    {
+      "valid": false,
+      "keywordLocation": "/items/$ref",
+      "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+        "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point",
+      "instanceLocation": "/1",
+      "errors": [
+        {
+          "valid": false,
+          "keywordLocation": "/items/$ref/required",
+          "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+            "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point/required",
+          "instanceLocation": "/1",
+          "error": "Required property 'y' not found."
+        },
+        {
+          "valid": false,
+          "keywordLocation": "/items/$ref/additionalProperties",
+          "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+            "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point/additionalProperties",
+          "instanceLocation": "/1/z",
+          "error": "Additional property 'z' found but was invalid."
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "valid": false,
+      "keywordLocation": "/minItems",
+      "instanceLocation": "",
+      "error": "Expected at least 3 items but found 2"
+    }
+  ]
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#section-12.4.3-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+</section>
+<section id="section-12.4.4">
+          <h4 id="name-verbose">
+<a href="#section-12.4.4" class="section-number selfRef">12.4.4. </a><a href="#name-verbose" class="section-name selfRef">Verbose</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-12.4.4-1">
+                        The "Verbose" structure is a fully realized hierarchy that exactly matches
+                        that of the schema.  This structure has applications in form generation and
+                        validation where the error's location is important.<a href="#section-12.4.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-12.4.4-2">
+                        The primary difference between this and the "Detailed" structure is that
+                        all results are returned.  This includes sub-schema validation results that
+                        would otherwise be removed (e.g. annotations for failed validations,
+                        successful validations inside a `not` keyword, etc.).  Because of this, it
+                        is RECOMMENDED that each node also carry a `valid` property to indicate the
+                        validation result for that node.<a href="#section-12.4.4-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-12.4.4-3">
+                        Because this output structure can be quite large, a smaller example is given
+                        here for brevity.  The URI of the full output structure of the example above is:
+                        <span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/output/verbose-example">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/output/verbose-example</a></span>.<a href="#section-12.4.4-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-12.4.4-4">
+<pre>
+
+// schema
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/polygon",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "validProp": true,
+  },
+  "additionalProperties": false
+}
+
+// instance
+{
+  "validProp": 5,
+  "disallowedProp": "value"
+}
+
+// result
+{
+  "valid": false,
+  "keywordLocation": "",
+  "instanceLocation": "",
+  "errors": [
+    {
+      "valid": true,
+      "keywordLocation": "/type",
+      "instanceLocation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "valid": true,
+      "keywordLocation": "/properties",
+      "instanceLocation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "valid": false,
+      "keywordLocation": "/additionalProperties",
+      "instanceLocation": "",
+      "errors": [
+        {
+          "valid": false,
+          "keywordLocation": "/additionalProperties",
+          "instanceLocation": "/disallowedProp",
+          "error": "Additional property 'disallowedProp' found but was invalid."
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#section-12.4.4-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+</section>
+<section id="section-12.4.5">
+          <h4 id="name-output-validation-schemas">
+<a href="#section-12.4.5" class="section-number selfRef">12.4.5. </a><a href="#name-output-validation-schemas" class="section-name selfRef">Output validation schemas</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-12.4.5-1">
+                        For convenience, JSON Schema has been provided to validate output generated
+                        by implementations.  Its URI is:
+                        <span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/output/schema">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/output/schema</a></span>.<a href="#section-12.4.5-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="security">
+<section id="section-13">
+      <h2 id="name-security-considerations">
+<a href="#section-13" class="section-number selfRef">13. </a><a href="#name-security-considerations" class="section-name selfRef">Security Considerations</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-13-1">
+                Both schemas and instances are JSON values. As such, all security considerations
+                defined in <span><a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC 8259</a> [<a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC8259</a>]</span> apply.<a href="#section-13-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-13-2">
+                Instances and schemas are both frequently written by untrusted third parties, to be
+                deployed on public Internet servers.
+                Validators should take care that the parsing and validating against schemas does not consume excessive
+                system resources.
+                Validators MUST NOT fall into an infinite loop.<a href="#section-13-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-13-3">
+                A malicious party could cause an implementation to repeatedly collect a copy
+                of a very large value as an annotation.  Implementations SHOULD guard against
+                excessive consumption of system resources in such a scenario.<a href="#section-13-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-13-4">
+                Servers MUST ensure that malicious parties cannot change the functionality of
+                existing schemas by uploading a schema with a pre-existing or very similar "$id".<a href="#section-13-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-13-5">
+                Individual JSON Schema vocabularies are liable to also have their own security
+                considerations. Consult the respective specifications for more information.<a href="#section-13-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-13-6">
+                Schema authors should take care with "$comment" contents, as a malicious
+                implementation can display them to end-users in violation of a spec, or
+                fail to strip them if such behavior is expected.<a href="#section-13-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-13-7">
+                A malicious schema author could place executable code or other dangerous
+                material within a "$comment".  Implementations MUST NOT parse or otherwise
+                take action based on "$comment" contents.<a href="#section-13-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-14">
+      <h2 id="name-iana-considerations">
+<a href="#section-14" class="section-number selfRef">14. </a><a href="#name-iana-considerations" class="section-name selfRef">IANA Considerations</a>
+      </h2>
+<section id="section-14.1">
+        <h3 id="name-application-schemajson">
+<a href="#section-14.1" class="section-number selfRef">14.1. </a><a href="#name-application-schemajson" class="section-name selfRef">application/schema+json</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-14.1-1">
+                    The proposed MIME media type for JSON Schema is defined as follows:<a href="#section-14.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ul class="normal ulEmpty">
+<li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-14.1-2.1">Type name: application<a href="#section-14.1-2.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-14.1-2.2">Subtype name: schema+json<a href="#section-14.1-2.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-14.1-2.3">Required parameters: N/A<a href="#section-14.1-2.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-14.1-2.4">
+                            Encoding considerations: Encoding considerations are
+                            identical to those specified for the "application/json"
+                            media type.  See <span><a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">JSON</a> [<a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC8259</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-14.1-2.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-14.1-2.5">
+                            Security considerations: See Section
+                            <a href="#security" class="xref">13</a> above.<a href="#section-14.1-2.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-14.1-2.6">
+                            Interoperability considerations: See Sections
+                            <a href="#language" class="xref">6.2</a>,
+                            <a href="#integers" class="xref">6.3</a>, and
+                            <a href="#regex" class="xref">6.4</a> above.<a href="#section-14.1-2.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-14.1-2.7">
+                            Fragment identifier considerations: See Section
+                            <a href="#fragments" class="xref">5</a><a href="#section-14.1-2.7" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+        </ul>
+</section>
+<section id="section-14.2">
+        <h3 id="name-application-schema-instance">
+<a href="#section-14.2" class="section-number selfRef">14.2. </a><a href="#name-application-schema-instance" class="section-name selfRef">application/schema-instance+json</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-14.2-1">
+                    The proposed MIME media type for JSON Schema Instances that require
+                    a JSON Schema-specific media type is defined as follows:<a href="#section-14.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ul class="normal ulEmpty">
+<li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-14.2-2.1">Type name: application<a href="#section-14.2-2.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-14.2-2.2">Subtype name: schema-instance+json<a href="#section-14.2-2.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-14.2-2.3">Required parameters: N/A<a href="#section-14.2-2.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-14.2-2.4">
+                            Encoding considerations: Encoding considerations are
+                            identical to those specified for the "application/json"
+                            media type.  See <span><a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">JSON</a> [<a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC8259</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-14.2-2.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-14.2-2.5">
+                            Security considerations: See Section
+                            <a href="#security" class="xref">13</a> above.<a href="#section-14.2-2.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-14.2-2.6">
+                            Interoperability considerations: See Sections
+                            <a href="#language" class="xref">6.2</a>,
+                            <a href="#integers" class="xref">6.3</a>, and
+                            <a href="#regex" class="xref">6.4</a> above.<a href="#section-14.2-2.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-14.2-2.7">
+                            Fragment identifier considerations: See Section
+                            <a href="#fragments" class="xref">5</a><a href="#section-14.2-2.7" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+        </ul>
+</section>
+</section>
+<section id="section-15">
+      <h2 id="name-references">
+<a href="#section-15" class="section-number selfRef">15. </a><a href="#name-references" class="section-name selfRef">References</a>
+      </h2>
+<section id="section-15.1">
+        <h3 id="name-normative-references">
+<a href="#section-15.1" class="section-number selfRef">15.1. </a><a href="#name-normative-references" class="section-name selfRef">Normative References</a>
+        </h3>
+<dl class="references">
+<dt id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Bradner, S.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">BCP 14</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 2119</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC2119</span>, <time datetime="1997-03" class="refDate">March 1997</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC3986">[RFC3986]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Berners-Lee, T.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Fielding, R.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">L. Masinter</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">STD 66</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 3986</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC3986</span>, <time datetime="2005-01" class="refDate">January 2005</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC6839">[RFC6839]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Hansen, T.</span> and <span class="refAuthor">A. Melnikov</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Additional Media Type Structured Syntax Suffixes"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 6839</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC6839</span>, <time datetime="2013-01" class="refDate">January 2013</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6839">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6839</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC6901">[RFC6901]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Bryan, P., Ed.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Zyp, K.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">M. Nottingham, Ed.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Pointer"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 6901</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC6901</span>, <time datetime="2013-04" class="refDate">April 2013</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6901">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6901</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC8259">[RFC8259]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Bray, T., Ed.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">STD 90</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 8259</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC8259</span>, <time datetime="2017-12" class="refDate">December 2017</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="W3C.REC-ldp-20150226">[W3C.REC-ldp-20150226]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Speicher, S.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Arwe, J.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">A. Malhotra</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Linked Data Platform 1.0"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation REC-ldp-20150226</span>, <time datetime="2015-02-26" class="refDate">26 February 2015</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2015/REC-ldp-20150226">https://www.w3.org/TR/2015/REC-ldp-20150226</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="ecma262">[ecma262]</dt>
+      <dd>
+<span class="refTitle">"ECMA-262, 11th edition specification"</span>, <time datetime="2020-06" class="refDate">June 2020</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/11.0/index.html">https://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/11.0/index.html</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+</section>
+<section id="section-15.2">
+        <h3 id="name-informative-references">
+<a href="#section-15.2" class="section-number selfRef">15.2. </a><a href="#name-informative-references" class="section-name selfRef">Informative References</a>
+        </h3>
+<dl class="references">
+<dt id="RFC6596">[RFC6596]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Ohye, M.</span> and <span class="refAuthor">J. Kupke</span>, <span class="refTitle">"The Canonical Link Relation"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 6596</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC6596</span>, <time datetime="2012-04" class="refDate">April 2012</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6596">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6596</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC7049">[RFC7049]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Bormann, C.</span> and <span class="refAuthor">P. Hoffman</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 7049</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC7049</span>, <time datetime="2013-10" class="refDate">October 2013</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7049">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7049</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC7231">[RFC7231]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Fielding, R., Ed.</span> and <span class="refAuthor">J. Reschke, Ed.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 7231</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC7231</span>, <time datetime="2014-06" class="refDate">June 2014</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7231">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7231</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC8288">[RFC8288]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Nottingham, M.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Web Linking"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 8288</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC8288</span>, <time datetime="2017-10" class="refDate">October 2017</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8288">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8288</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="W3C.WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025">[W3C.WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Tennison, J.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Best Practices for Fragment Identifiers and Media Type Definitions"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">World Wide Web Consortium WD WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025</span>, <time datetime="2012-10-25" class="refDate">25 October 2012</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025">https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="json-schema-validation">[json-schema-validation]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Wright, A.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Andrews, H.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">B. Hutton</span>, <span class="refTitle">"JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON"</span>, <span class="refContent">Work in Progress</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">Internet-Draft, draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-01</span>, <time datetime="2022-06" class="refDate">June 2022</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-01">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-01</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="json-hyper-schema">[json-hyper-schema]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Andrews, H.</span> and <span class="refAuthor">A. Wright</span>, <span class="refTitle">"JSON Hyper-Schema: A Vocabulary for Hypermedia Annotation of JSON"</span>, <span class="refContent">Work in Progress</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">Internet-Draft, draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-02</span>, <time datetime="2017-11" class="refDate">November 2017</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-02">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-02</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="xml-names">[xml-names]</dt>
+      <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Bray, T., Ed.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Hollander, D., Ed.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Layman, A., Ed.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">R. Tobin, Ed.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Namespaces in XML 1.1 (Second Edition)"</span>, <time datetime="2006-08" class="refDate">August 2006</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names11-20060816">http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names11-20060816</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+</section>
+</section>
+<div id="idExamples">
+<section id="appendix-A">
+      <h2 id="name-schema-identification-examp">
+<a href="#appendix-A" class="section-number selfRef">Appendix A. </a><a href="#name-schema-identification-examp" class="section-name selfRef">Schema identification examples</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="appendix-A-1" class="keepWithNext">
+                    Consider the following schema, which shows "$id" being used to identify
+                    both the root schema and various subschemas, and "$anchor" being used
+                    to define plain name fragment identifiers.<a href="#appendix-A-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="appendix-A-2">
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "$id": "https://example.com/root.json",
+    "$defs": {
+        "A": { "$anchor": "foo" },
+        "B": {
+            "$id": "other.json",
+            "$defs": {
+                "X": { "$anchor": "bar" },
+                "Y": {
+                    "$id": "t/inner.json",
+                    "$anchor": "bar"
+                }
+            }
+        },
+        "C": {
+            "$id": "urn:uuid:ee564b8a-7a87-4125-8c96-e9f123d6766f"
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#appendix-A-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="appendix-A-3">
+                The schemas at the following URI-encoded <span><a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">JSON
+                Pointers</a> [<a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC6901</a>]</span> (relative to the root schema) have the following
+                base URIs, and are identifiable by any listed URI in accordance with
+                sections <a href="#fragments" class="xref">5</a> and
+                <a href="#embedded" class="xref">9.2.1</a> above.<a href="#appendix-A-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="appendix-A-4">
+        <dt id="appendix-A-4.1"># (document root)</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.2">
+          <span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="appendix-A-4.2.1">
+            <dt id="appendix-A-4.2.1.1">canonical (and base) URI</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.2.1.2">
+                                https://example.com/root.json<a href="#appendix-A-4.2.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.2.1.3">canonical resource URI plus pointer fragment</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.2.1.4">
+                                https://example.com/root.json#<a href="#appendix-A-4.2.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.3">#/$defs/A</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.4">
+          <span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="appendix-A-4.4.1">
+            <dt id="appendix-A-4.4.1.1">base URI</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.4.1.2">https://example.com/root.json<a href="#appendix-A-4.4.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.4.1.3">canonical resource URI plus plain fragment</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.4.1.4">
+                                https://example.com/root.json#foo<a href="#appendix-A-4.4.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.4.1.5">canonical resource URI plus pointer fragment</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.4.1.6">
+                                https://example.com/root.json#/$defs/A<a href="#appendix-A-4.4.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.5">#/$defs/B</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.6">
+          <span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="appendix-A-4.6.1">
+            <dt id="appendix-A-4.6.1.1">canonical (and base) URI</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.6.1.2">https://example.com/other.json<a href="#appendix-A-4.6.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.6.1.3">canonical resource URI plus pointer fragment</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.6.1.4">
+                                https://example.com/other.json#<a href="#appendix-A-4.6.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.6.1.5">base URI of enclosing (root.json) resource plus fragment</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.6.1.6">
+                                https://example.com/root.json#/$defs/B<a href="#appendix-A-4.6.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.7">#/$defs/B/$defs/X</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.8">
+          <span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="appendix-A-4.8.1">
+            <dt id="appendix-A-4.8.1.1">base URI</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.8.1.2">https://example.com/other.json<a href="#appendix-A-4.8.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.8.1.3">canonical resource URI plus plain fragment</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.8.1.4">
+                                https://example.com/other.json#bar<a href="#appendix-A-4.8.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.8.1.5">canonical resource URI plus pointer fragment</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.8.1.6">
+                                https://example.com/other.json#/$defs/X<a href="#appendix-A-4.8.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.8.1.7">base URI of enclosing (root.json) resource plus fragment</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.8.1.8">
+                                https://example.com/root.json#/$defs/B/$defs/X<a href="#appendix-A-4.8.1.8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.9">#/$defs/B/$defs/Y</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.10">
+          <span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="appendix-A-4.10.1">
+            <dt id="appendix-A-4.10.1.1">canonical (and base) URI</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.10.1.2">https://example.com/t/inner.json<a href="#appendix-A-4.10.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.10.1.3">canonical URI plus plain fragment</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.10.1.4">
+                                https://example.com/t/inner.json#bar<a href="#appendix-A-4.10.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.10.1.5">canonical URI plus pointer fragment</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.10.1.6">
+                                https://example.com/t/inner.json#<a href="#appendix-A-4.10.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.10.1.7">base URI of enclosing (other.json) resource plus fragment</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.10.1.8">
+                                https://example.com/other.json#/$defs/Y<a href="#appendix-A-4.10.1.8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.10.1.9">base URI of enclosing (root.json) resource plus fragment</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.10.1.10">
+                                https://example.com/root.json#/$defs/B/$defs/Y<a href="#appendix-A-4.10.1.10" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.11">#/$defs/C</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.12">
+          <span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="appendix-A-4.12.1">
+            <dt id="appendix-A-4.12.1.1">canonical (and base) URI</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.12.1.2">
+                                urn:uuid:ee564b8a-7a87-4125-8c96-e9f123d6766f<a href="#appendix-A-4.12.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.12.1.3">canonical URI plus pointer fragment</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.12.1.4">
+                                urn:uuid:ee564b8a-7a87-4125-8c96-e9f123d6766f#<a href="#appendix-A-4.12.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-4.12.1.5">base URI of enclosing (root.json) resource plus fragment</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-4.12.1.6">
+                                https://example.com/root.json#/$defs/C<a href="#appendix-A-4.12.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+</dd>
+      <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+<p id="appendix-A-5">
+                Note: The fragment part of the URI does not make it canonical or non-canonical,
+                rather, the base URI used (as part of the full URI with any fragment) is what
+                determines the canonical nature of the resulting full URI.
+                <span class="cref">
+                    Multiple "canonical" URIs? We Acknowledge this is potentially confusing, and
+                    direct you to read the CREF located in the
+                    <span><a href="#embedded" class="xref">JSON Pointer fragments and embedded schema resources</a> (<a href="#embedded" class="xref">Section 9.2.1</a>)</span>
+                    section for futher comments.
+        </span><a href="#appendix-A-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="appendix-B">
+      <h2 id="name-manipulating-schema-documen">
+<a href="#appendix-B" class="section-number selfRef">Appendix B. </a><a href="#name-manipulating-schema-documen" class="section-name selfRef">Manipulating schema documents and references</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="appendix-B-1">
+                Various tools have been created to rearrange schema documents
+                based on how and where references ("$ref") appear.  This appendix discusses
+                which use cases and actions are compliant with this specification.<a href="#appendix-B-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="appendix-B.1">
+        <h3 id="name-bundling-schema-resources-i">
+<a href="#appendix-B.1" class="section-number selfRef">B.1. </a><a href="#name-bundling-schema-resources-i" class="section-name selfRef">Bundling schema resources into a single document</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="appendix-B.1-1">
+                    A set of schema resources intended for use together can be organized
+                    with each in its own schema document, all in the same schema document,
+                    or any granularity of document grouping in between.<a href="#appendix-B.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-B.1-2">
+                    Numerous tools exist to perform various sorts of reference removal.
+                    A common case of this is producing a single file where all references
+                    can be resolved within that file.  This is typically done to simplify
+                    distribution, or to simplify coding so that various invocations
+                    of JSON Schema libraries do not have to keep track of and load
+                    a large number of resources.<a href="#appendix-B.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-B.1-3">
+                    This transformation can be safely and reversibly done as long as
+                    all static references (e.g. "$ref") use URI-references that resolve
+                    to URIs using the canonical resource URI as the base, and all schema
+                    resources have an absolute-URI as the "$id" in their root schema.<a href="#appendix-B.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-B.1-4">
+                    With these conditions met, each external resource can be copied
+                    under "$defs", without breaking any references among the resources'
+                    schema objects, and without changing any aspect of validation or
+                    annotation results.  The names of the schemas under "$defs" do
+                    not affect behavior, assuming they are each unique, as they
+                    do not appear in the canonical URIs for the embedded resources.<a href="#appendix-B.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="appendix-B.2">
+        <h3 id="name-reference-removal-is-not-al">
+<a href="#appendix-B.2" class="section-number selfRef">B.2. </a><a href="#name-reference-removal-is-not-al" class="section-name selfRef">Reference removal is not always safe</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="appendix-B.2-1">
+                    Attempting to remove all references and produce a single schema document does not,
+                    in all cases, produce a schema with identical behavior to the original form.<a href="#appendix-B.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-B.2-2">
+                    Since "$ref" is now treated like any other keyword, with other keywords allowed
+                    in the same schema objects, fully supporting non-recursive "$ref" removal in
+                    all cases can require relatively complex schema manipulations.  It is beyond
+                    the scope of this specification to determine or provide a set of safe "$ref"
+                    removal transformations, as they depend not only on the schema structure
+                    but also on the intended usage.<a href="#appendix-B.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+<div id="recursive-example">
+<section id="appendix-C">
+      <h2 id="name-example-of-recursive-schema">
+<a href="#appendix-C" class="section-number selfRef">Appendix C. </a><a href="#name-example-of-recursive-schema" class="section-name selfRef">Example of recursive schema extension</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="appendix-C-1" class="keepWithNext">
+                    Consider the following two schemas describing a simple
+                    recursive tree structure, where each node in the tree
+                    can have a "data" field of any type.  The first schema
+                    allows and ignores other instance properties.  The second is
+                    more strict and only allows the "data" and "children" properties.
+                    An example instance with "data" misspelled as "daat" is also shown.<a href="#appendix-C-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="appendix-C-2">
+<pre>
+
+// tree schema, extensible
+{
+    "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+    "$id": "https://example.com/tree",
+    "$dynamicAnchor": "node",
+
+    "type": "object",
+    "properties": {
+        "data": true,
+        "children": {
+            "type": "array",
+            "items": {
+                "$dynamicRef": "#node"
+            }
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+// strict-tree schema, guards against misspelled properties
+{
+    "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+    "$id": "https://example.com/strict-tree",
+    "$dynamicAnchor": "node",
+
+    "$ref": "tree",
+    "unevaluatedProperties": false
+}
+
+// instance with misspelled field
+{
+    "children": [ { "daat": 1 } ]
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#appendix-C-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="appendix-C-3">
+                When we load these two schemas, we will notice the "$dynamicAnchor"
+                named "node" (note the lack of "#" as this is just the name)
+                present in each, resulting in the following full schema URIs:<a href="#appendix-C-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-C-4.1">"https://example.com/tree#node"<a href="#appendix-C-4.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+        <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-4.2">"https://example.com/strict-tree#node"<a href="#appendix-C-4.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+      </ul>
+<p id="appendix-C-5">
+                In addition, JSON Schema implementations keep track of the fact
+                that these fragments were created with "$dynamicAnchor".<a href="#appendix-C-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-C-6">
+                If we apply the "strict-tree" schema to the instance, we will follow
+                the "$ref" to the "tree" schema, examine its "children" subschema,
+                and find the "$dynamicRef": to "#node" (note the "#" for URI fragment syntax)
+                in its "items" subschema.  That reference resolves to
+                "https://example.com/tree#node", which is a URI with a fragment
+                created by "$dynamicAnchor".  Therefore we must examine the dynamic
+                scope before following the reference.<a href="#appendix-C-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-C-7">
+                At this point, the dynamic path is
+                "#/$ref/properties/children/items/$dynamicRef", with a dynamic scope
+                containing (from the outermost scope to the innermost):<a href="#appendix-C-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ol start="1" type="1" class="normal type-1" id="appendix-C-8">
+<li id="appendix-C-8.1">"https://example.com/strict-tree#"<a href="#appendix-C-8.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+        <li id="appendix-C-8.2">"https://example.com/tree#"<a href="#appendix-C-8.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+        <li id="appendix-C-8.3">"https://example.com/tree#/properties/children"<a href="#appendix-C-8.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+        <li id="appendix-C-8.4">"https://example.com/tree#/properties/children/items"<a href="#appendix-C-8.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+      </ol>
+<p id="appendix-C-9">
+                Since we are looking for a plain name fragment, which can be
+                defined anywhere within a schema resource, the JSON Pointer fragments
+                are irrelevant to this check.  That means that we can remove those
+                fragments and eliminate consecutive duplicates, producing:<a href="#appendix-C-9" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ol start="1" type="1" class="normal type-1" id="appendix-C-10">
+<li id="appendix-C-10.1">"https://example.com/strict-tree"<a href="#appendix-C-10.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+        <li id="appendix-C-10.2">"https://example.com/tree"<a href="#appendix-C-10.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+      </ol>
+<p id="appendix-C-11">
+                In this case, the outermost resource also has a "node" fragment
+                defined by "$dynamicAnchor".  Therefore instead of resolving the
+                "$dynamicRef" to "https://example.com/tree#node", we resolve it to
+                "https://example.com/strict-tree#node".<a href="#appendix-C-11" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-C-12">
+                This way, the recursion in the "tree" schema recurses to the root
+                of "strict-tree", instead of only applying "strict-tree" to the
+                instance root, but applying "tree" to instance children.<a href="#appendix-C-12" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-C-13">
+                This example shows both "$dynamicAnchor"s in the same place
+                in each schema, specifically the resource root schema.
+                Since plain-name fragments are independent of the JSON structure,
+                this would work just as well if one or both of the node schema objects
+                were moved under "$defs".  It is the matching "$dynamicAnchor" values
+                which tell us how to resolve the dynamic reference, not any sort of
+                correlation in JSON structure.<a href="#appendix-C-13" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="appendix-D">
+      <h2 id="name-working-with-vocabularies">
+<a href="#appendix-D" class="section-number selfRef">Appendix D. </a><a href="#name-working-with-vocabularies" class="section-name selfRef">Working with vocabularies</a>
+      </h2>
+<section id="appendix-D.1">
+        <h3 id="name-best-practices-for-vocabula">
+<a href="#appendix-D.1" class="section-number selfRef">D.1. </a><a href="#name-best-practices-for-vocabula" class="section-name selfRef">Best practices for vocabulary and meta-schema authors</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="appendix-D.1-1">
+                    Vocabulary authors should
+                    take care to avoid keyword name collisions if the vocabulary is intended
+                    for broad use, and potentially combined with other vocabularies.  JSON
+                    Schema does not provide any formal namespacing system, but also does
+                    not constrain keyword names, allowing for any number of namespacing
+                    approaches.<a href="#appendix-D.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-D.1-2">
+                    Vocabularies may build on each other, such as by defining the behavior
+                    of their keywords with respect to the behavior of keywords from another
+                    vocabulary, or by using a keyword from another vocabulary with
+                    a restricted or expanded set of acceptable values.  Not all such
+                    vocabulary re-use will result in a new vocabulary that is compatible
+                    with the vocabulary on which it is built.  Vocabulary authors should
+                    clearly document what level of compatibility, if any, is expected.<a href="#appendix-D.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-D.1-3">
+                    Meta-schema authors should not use "$vocabulary" to combine multiple
+                    vocabularies that define conflicting syntax or semantics for the same
+                    keyword.  As semantic conflicts are not generally detectable through
+                    schema validation, implementations are not expected to detect such
+                    conflicts.  If conflicting vocabularies are declared, the resulting
+                    behavior is undefined.<a href="#appendix-D.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-D.1-4">
+                    Vocabulary authors SHOULD provide a meta-schema that validates the
+                    expected usage of the vocabulary's keywords on their own.  Such meta-schemas
+                    SHOULD not forbid additional keywords, and MUST not forbid any
+                    keywords from the Core vocabulary.<a href="#appendix-D.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-D.1-5">
+                    It is recommended that meta-schema authors reference each vocabulary's
+                    meta-schema using the <span><a href="#allOf" class="xref">"allOf"</a> (<a href="#allOf" class="xref">Section 10.2.1.1</a>)</span> keyword,
+                    although other mechanisms for constructing the meta-schema may be
+                    appropriate for certain use cases.<a href="#appendix-D.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-D.1-6">
+                    The recursive nature of meta-schemas makes the "$dynamicAnchor"
+                    and "$dynamicRef" keywords particularly useful for extending
+                    existing meta-schemas, as can be seen in the JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema
+                    which extends the Validation meta-schema.<a href="#appendix-D.1-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-D.1-7">
+                    Meta-schemas may impose additional constraints, including describing
+                    keywords not present in any vocabulary, beyond what the meta-schemas
+                    associated with the declared vocabularies describe.  This allows for
+                    restricting usage to a subset of a vocabulary, and for validating
+                    locally defined keywords not intended for re-use.<a href="#appendix-D.1-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-D.1-8">
+                    However, meta-schemas should not contradict any vocabularies that
+                    they declare, such as by requiring a different JSON type than
+                    the vocabulary expects.  The resulting behavior is undefined.<a href="#appendix-D.1-8" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-D.1-9">
+                    Meta-schemas intended for local use, with no need to test for
+                    vocabulary support in arbitrary implementations, can safely omit
+                    "$vocabulary" entirely.<a href="#appendix-D.1-9" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<div id="example-meta-schema">
+<section id="appendix-D.2">
+        <h3 id="name-example-meta-schema-with-vo">
+<a href="#appendix-D.2" class="section-number selfRef">D.2. </a><a href="#name-example-meta-schema-with-vo" class="section-name selfRef">Example meta-schema with vocabulary declarations</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="appendix-D.2-1">
+                    This meta-schema explicitly declares both the Core and Applicator vocabularies,
+                    together with an extension vocabulary, and combines their meta-schemas with
+                    an "allOf".  The extension vocabulary's meta-schema, which describes only the
+                    keywords in that vocabulary, is shown after the main example meta-schema.<a href="#appendix-D.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-D.2-2">
+                    The main example meta-schema also restricts the usage of the Unevaluated
+                    vocabulary by forbidding the keywords prefixed with "unevaluated", which
+                    are particularly complex to implement.  This does not change the semantics
+                    or set of keywords defined by the other vocabularies. It just ensures
+                    that schemas using this meta-schema that attempt to use the keywords
+                    prefixed with "unevaluated" will fail validation against this meta-schema.<a href="#appendix-D.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-D.2-3">
+                    Finally, this meta-schema describes the syntax of a keyword, "localKeyword",
+                    that is not part of any vocabulary.  Presumably, the implementors and users
+                    of this meta-schema will understand the semantics of "localKeyword".
+                    JSON Schema does not define any mechanism for expressing keyword semantics
+                    outside of vocabularies, making them unsuitable for use except in a
+                    specific environment in which they are understood.<a href="#appendix-D.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-D.2-4" class="keepWithNext">
+                        This meta-schema combines several vocabularies for general use.<a href="#appendix-D.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="appendix-D.2-5">
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/meta/general-use-example",
+  "$dynamicAnchor": "meta",
+  "$vocabulary": {
+    "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/core": true,
+    "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/applicator": true,
+    "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/validation": true,
+    "https://example.com/vocab/example-vocab": true
+  },
+  "allOf": [
+    {"$ref": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/core"},
+    {"$ref": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/applicator"},
+    {"$ref": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/validation"},
+    {"$ref": "https://example.com/meta/example-vocab"}
+  ],
+  "patternProperties": {
+    "^unevaluated": false
+  },
+  "properties": {
+    "localKeyword": {
+      "$comment": "Not in vocabulary, but validated if used",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  }
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#appendix-D.2-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="appendix-D.2-6" class="keepWithNext">
+                        This meta-schema describes only a single extension vocabulary.<a href="#appendix-D.2-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="appendix-D.2-7">
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/meta/example-vocab",
+  "$dynamicAnchor": "meta",
+  "$vocabulary": {
+    "https://example.com/vocab/example-vocab": true,
+  },
+  "type": ["object", "boolean"],
+  "properties": {
+    "minDate": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "pattern": "\d\d\d\d-\d\d-\d\d",
+      "format": "date",
+    }
+  }
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#appendix-D.2-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="appendix-D.2-8">
+                    As shown above, even though each of the single-vocabulary meta-schemas
+                    referenced in the general-use meta-schema's "allOf" declares its
+                    corresponding vocabulary, this new meta-schema must re-declare them.<a href="#appendix-D.2-8" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-D.2-9">
+                    The standard meta-schemas that combine all vocabularies defined by
+                    the Core and Validation specification, and that combine all vocabularies
+                    defined by those specifications as well as the Hyper-Schema specification,
+                    demonstrate additional complex combinations.  These URIs for these
+                    meta-schemas may be found in the Validation and Hyper-Schema specifications,
+                    respectively.<a href="#appendix-D.2-9" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-D.2-10">
+                    While the general-use meta-schema can validate the syntax of "minDate",
+                    it is the vocabulary that defines the logic behind the semantic meaning
+                    of "minDate".  Without an understanding of the semantics (in this example,
+                    that the instance value must be a date equal to or after the date
+                    provided as the keyword's value in the schema), an implementation can
+                    only validate the syntactic usage.  In this case, that means validating
+                    that it is a date-formatted string (using "pattern" to ensure that it is
+                    validated even when "format" functions purely as an annotation, as explained
+                    in the <span><a href="#json-schema-validation" class="xref">Validation specification</a> [<a href="#json-schema-validation" class="xref">json-schema-validation</a>]</span>.<a href="#appendix-D.2-10" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+</section>
+<section id="appendix-E">
+      <h2 id="name-references-and-generative-u">
+<a href="#appendix-E" class="section-number selfRef">Appendix E. </a><a href="#name-references-and-generative-u" class="section-name selfRef">References and generative use cases</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="appendix-E-1">
+                While the presence of references is expected to be transparent
+                to validation results, generative use cases such as code generators
+                and UI renderers often consider references to be semantically significant.<a href="#appendix-E-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-E-2">
+                To make such use case-specific semantics explicit, the best practice
+                is to create an annotation keyword for use in the same
+                schema object alongside of a reference keyword such as "$ref".<a href="#appendix-E-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-E-3" class="keepWithNext">
+                    For example, here is a hypothetical keyword for determining
+                    whether a code generator should consider the reference
+                    target to be a distinct class, and how those classes are related.
+                    Note that this example is solely for illustrative purposes, and is
+                    not intended to propose a functional code generation keyword.<a href="#appendix-E-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="appendix-E-4">
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "allOf": [
+        {
+            "classRelation": "is-a",
+            "$ref": "classes/base.json"
+        },
+        {
+            "$ref": "fields/common.json"
+        }
+    ],
+    "properties": {
+        "foo": {
+            "classRelation": "has-a",
+            "$ref": "classes/foo.json"
+        },
+        "date": {
+            "$ref": "types/dateStruct.json",
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#appendix-E-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="appendix-E-5">
+                Here, this schema represents some sort of object-oriented class.
+                The first reference in the "allOf" is noted as the base class.
+                The second is not assigned a class relationship, meaning that the
+                code generator should combine the target's definition with this
+                one as if no reference were involved.<a href="#appendix-E-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-E-6">
+                Looking at the properties, "foo" is flagged as object composition,
+                while the "date" property is not.  It is simply a field with
+                sub-fields, rather than an instance of a distinct class.<a href="#appendix-E-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-E-7">
+                This style of usage requires the annotation to be in the same object
+                as the reference, which must be recognizable as a reference.<a href="#appendix-E-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="appendix-F">
+      <h2 id="name-acknowledgments">
+<a href="#appendix-F" class="section-number selfRef">Appendix F. </a><a href="#name-acknowledgments" class="section-name selfRef">Acknowledgments</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="appendix-F-1">
+                Thanks to
+                Gary Court,
+                Francis Galiegue,
+                Kris Zyp,
+                and Geraint Luff
+                for their work on the initial drafts of JSON Schema.<a href="#appendix-F-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-F-2">
+                Thanks to
+                Jason Desrosiers,
+                Daniel Perrett,
+                Erik Wilde,
+                Evgeny Poberezkin,
+                Brad Bowman,
+                Gowry Sankar,
+                Donald Pipowitch,
+                Dave Finlay,
+                Denis Laxalde,
+                Phil Sturgeon,
+                Shawn Silverman,
+                and Karen Etheridge
+                for their submissions and patches to the document.<a href="#appendix-F-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="appendix-G">
+      <h2 id="name-changelog">
+<a href="#appendix-G" class="section-number selfRef">Appendix G. </a><a href="#name-changelog" class="section-name selfRef">ChangeLog</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="appendix-G-1">
+                <span class="cref">This section to be removed before leaving Internet-Draft status.</span><a href="#appendix-G-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="appendix-G-2">
+        <dt id="appendix-G-2.1">draft-bhutton-json-schema-01</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-G-2.2">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.2.1.1">Improve and clarify the "type", "contains", "unevaluatedProperties", and "unevaluatedItems" keyword explanations<a href="#appendix-G-2.2.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.2.1.2">Clarify various aspects of "canonical URIs"<a href="#appendix-G-2.2.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.2.1.3">Comment on ambiguity around annotations and "additionalProperties"<a href="#appendix-G-2.2.1.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.2.1.4">Clarify Vocabularies need not be formally defined<a href="#appendix-G-2.2.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.2.1.5">Remove references to remaining media-type parameters<a href="#appendix-G-2.2.1.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.2.1.6">Fix multiple examples<a href="#appendix-G-2.2.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-G-2.3">draft-bhutton-json-schema-00</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-G-2.4">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.4.1.1">"$schema" MAY change for embedded resources<a href="#appendix-G-2.4.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.4.1.2">Array-value "items" functionality is now "prefixItems"<a href="#appendix-G-2.4.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.4.1.3">"items" subsumes the old function of "additionalItems"<a href="#appendix-G-2.4.1.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.4.1.4">"contains" annotation behavior, and "contains" and "unevaluatedItems" interactions now specified<a href="#appendix-G-2.4.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.4.1.5">Rename $recursive* to $dynamic*, with behavior modification<a href="#appendix-G-2.4.1.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.4.1.6">$dynamicAnchor defines a fragment like $anchor<a href="#appendix-G-2.4.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.4.1.7">$dynamic* (previously $recursive) no longer use runtime base URI determination<a href="#appendix-G-2.4.1.7" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.4.1.8">Define Compound Schema Documents (bundle) and processing<a href="#appendix-G-2.4.1.8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.4.1.9">Reference ECMA-262, 11th edition for regular expression support<a href="#appendix-G-2.4.1.9" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.4.1.10">Regular expression should support unicode<a href="#appendix-G-2.4.1.10" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.4.1.11">Remove media type parameters<a href="#appendix-G-2.4.1.11" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.4.1.12">Specify Unknown keywords are collected as annotations<a href="#appendix-G-2.4.1.12" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.4.1.13">Moved "unevaluatedItems" and "unevaluatedProperties" from core into their own vocabulary<a href="#appendix-G-2.4.1.13" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-G-2.5">draft-handrews-json-schema-02</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-G-2.6">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.1">Update to RFC 8259 for JSON specification<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.2">Moved "definitions" from the Validation specification here as "$defs"<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.3">Moved applicator keywords from the Validation specification as their own vocabulary<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.4">Moved the schema form of "dependencies" from the Validation specification as "dependentSchemas"<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.5">Formalized annotation collection<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.6">Specified recommended output formats<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.7">Defined keyword interactions in terms of annotation and assertion results<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.7" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.8">Added "unevaluatedProperties" and "unevaluatedItems"<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.9">Define "$ref" behavior in terms of the assertion, applicator, and annotation model<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.9" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.10">Allow keywords adjacent to "$ref"<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.10" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.11">Note undefined behavior for "$ref" targets involving unknown keywords<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.11" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.12">Add recursive referencing, primarily for meta-schema extension<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.12" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.13">Add the concept of formal vocabularies, and how they can be recognized through meta-schemas<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.13" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.14">Additional guidance on initial base URIs beyond network retrieval<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.14" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.15">Allow "schema" media type parameter for "application/schema+json"<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.15" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.16">Better explanation of media type parameters and the HTTP Accept header<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.16" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.17">Use "$id" to establish canonical and base absolute-URIs only, no fragments<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.17" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.18">Replace plain-name-fragment-only form of "$id" with "$anchor"<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.18" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.6.1.19">Clarified that the behavior of JSON Pointers across "$id" boundary is unreliable<a href="#appendix-G-2.6.1.19" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-G-2.7">draft-handrews-json-schema-01</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-G-2.8">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.8.1.1">This draft is purely a clarification with no functional changes<a href="#appendix-G-2.8.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.8.1.2">Emphasized annotations as a primary usage of JSON Schema<a href="#appendix-G-2.8.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.8.1.3">Clarified $id by use cases<a href="#appendix-G-2.8.1.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.8.1.4">Exhaustive schema identification examples<a href="#appendix-G-2.8.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.8.1.5">Replaced "external referencing" with how and when an implementation might know of a schema from another document<a href="#appendix-G-2.8.1.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.8.1.6">Replaced "internal referencing" with how an implementation should recognized schema identifiers during parsing<a href="#appendix-G-2.8.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.8.1.7">Dereferencing the former "internal" or "external" references is always the same process<a href="#appendix-G-2.8.1.7" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.8.1.8">Minor formatting improvements<a href="#appendix-G-2.8.1.8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-G-2.9">draft-handrews-json-schema-00</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-G-2.10">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.10.1.1">Make the concept of a schema keyword vocabulary more clear<a href="#appendix-G-2.10.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.10.1.2">Note that the concept of "integer" is from a vocabulary, not the data model<a href="#appendix-G-2.10.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.10.1.3">Classify keywords as assertions or annotations and describe their general behavior<a href="#appendix-G-2.10.1.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.10.1.4">Explain the boolean schemas in terms of generalized assertions<a href="#appendix-G-2.10.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.10.1.5">Reserve "$comment" for non-user-visible notes about the schema<a href="#appendix-G-2.10.1.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.10.1.6">Wording improvements around "$id" and fragments<a href="#appendix-G-2.10.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.10.1.7">Note the challenges of extending meta-schemas with recursive references<a href="#appendix-G-2.10.1.7" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.10.1.8">Add "application/schema-instance+json" media type<a href="#appendix-G-2.10.1.8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.10.1.9">Recommend a "schema" link relation / parameter instead of "profile"<a href="#appendix-G-2.10.1.9" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-G-2.11">draft-wright-json-schema-01</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-G-2.12">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.12.1.1">Updated intro<a href="#appendix-G-2.12.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.12.1.2">Allowed for any schema to be a boolean<a href="#appendix-G-2.12.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.12.1.3">"$schema" SHOULD NOT appear in subschemas, although that may change<a href="#appendix-G-2.12.1.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.12.1.4">Changed "id" to "$id"; all core keywords prefixed with "$"<a href="#appendix-G-2.12.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.12.1.5">Clarify and formalize fragments for application/schema+json<a href="#appendix-G-2.12.1.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.12.1.6">Note applicability to formats such as CBOR that can be represented in the JSON data model<a href="#appendix-G-2.12.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-G-2.13">draft-wright-json-schema-00</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-G-2.14">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.14.1.1">Updated references to JSON<a href="#appendix-G-2.14.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.14.1.2">Updated references to HTTP<a href="#appendix-G-2.14.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.14.1.3">Updated references to JSON Pointer<a href="#appendix-G-2.14.1.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.14.1.4">Behavior for "id" is now specified in terms of RFC3986<a href="#appendix-G-2.14.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.14.1.5">Aligned vocabulary usage for URIs with RFC3986<a href="#appendix-G-2.14.1.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.14.1.6">Removed reference to draft-pbryan-zyp-json-ref-03<a href="#appendix-G-2.14.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.14.1.7">Limited use of "$ref" to wherever a schema is expected<a href="#appendix-G-2.14.1.7" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.14.1.8">Added definition of the "JSON Schema data model"<a href="#appendix-G-2.14.1.8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.14.1.9">Added additional security considerations<a href="#appendix-G-2.14.1.9" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.14.1.10">Defined use of subschema identifiers for "id"<a href="#appendix-G-2.14.1.10" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.14.1.11">Rewrote section on usage with HTTP<a href="#appendix-G-2.14.1.11" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.14.1.12">Rewrote section on usage with rel="describedBy" and rel="profile"<a href="#appendix-G-2.14.1.12" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.14.1.13">Fixed numerous invalid examples<a href="#appendix-G-2.14.1.13" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-G-2.15">draft-zyp-json-schema-04</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-G-2.16">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.16.1.1">Salvaged from draft v3.<a href="#appendix-G-2.16.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.16.1.2">Split validation keywords into separate document.<a href="#appendix-G-2.16.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.16.1.3">Split hypermedia keywords into separate document.<a href="#appendix-G-2.16.1.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.16.1.4">Initial post-split draft.<a href="#appendix-G-2.16.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.16.1.5">Mandate the use of JSON Reference, JSON Pointer.<a href="#appendix-G-2.16.1.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.16.1.6">Define the role of "id". Define URI resolution scope.<a href="#appendix-G-2.16.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.16.1.7">Add interoperability considerations.<a href="#appendix-G-2.16.1.7" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-G-2.17">draft-zyp-json-schema-00</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-G-2.18">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-G-2.18.1.1">Initial draft.<a href="#appendix-G-2.18.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+      <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+</section>
+<div id="authors-addresses">
+<section id="appendix-H">
+      <h2 id="name-authors-addresses">
+<a href="#name-authors-addresses" class="section-name selfRef">Authors' Addresses</a>
+      </h2>
+<address class="vcard">
+        <div dir="auto" class="left"><span class="fn nameRole">Austin Wright (<span class="role">editor</span>)</span></div>
+<div class="email">
+<span>Email:</span>
+<a href="mailto:aaa@bzfx.net" class="email">aaa@bzfx.net</a>
+</div>
+</address>
+<address class="vcard">
+        <div dir="auto" class="left"><span class="fn nameRole">Henry Andrews (<span class="role">editor</span>)</span></div>
+<div class="email">
+<span>Email:</span>
+<a href="mailto:andrews_henry@yahoo.com" class="email">andrews_henry@yahoo.com</a>
+</div>
+</address>
+<address class="vcard">
+        <div dir="auto" class="left"><span class="fn nameRole">Ben Hutton (<span class="role">editor</span>)</span></div>
+<div dir="auto" class="left"><span class="org">Postman</span></div>
+<div class="email">
+<span>Email:</span>
+<a href="mailto:ben@jsonschema.dev" class="email">ben@jsonschema.dev</a>
+</div>
+<div class="url">
+<span>URI:</span>
+<a href="https://jsonschema.dev" class="url">https://jsonschema.dev</a>
+</div>
+</address>
+<address class="vcard">
+        <div dir="auto" class="left"><span class="fn nameRole">Greg Dennis</span></div>
+<div class="email">
+<span>Email:</span>
+<a href="mailto:gregsdennis@yahoo.com" class="email">gregsdennis@yahoo.com</a>
+</div>
+<div class="url">
+<span>URI:</span>
+<a href="https://github.com/gregsdennis" class="url">https://github.com/gregsdennis</a>
+</div>
+</address>
+</section>
+</div>
+<script>const toc = document.getElementById("toc");
+toc.querySelector("h2").addEventListener("click", e => {
+  toc.classList.toggle("active");
+});
+toc.querySelector("nav").addEventListener("click", e => {
+  toc.classList.remove("active");
+});
+</script>
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html b/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..82d22aad
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html
@@ -0,0 +1,3185 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html>
+<html lang="en" class="Internet-Draft">
+<head>
+<meta charset="utf-8">
+<meta content="Common,Latin" name="scripts">
+<meta content="initial-scale=1.0" name="viewport">
+<title>JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON</title>
+<meta content="Austin Wright" name="author">
+<meta content="Henry Andrews" name="author">
+<meta content="Ben Hutton" name="author">
+<meta content="
+       
+                JSON Schema (application/schema+json) has several purposes, one of which is JSON
+                instance validation.
+                This document specifies a vocabulary for JSON Schema to describe the meaning of JSON
+                documents, provide hints for user interfaces working with JSON data, and to make
+                assertions about what a valid document must look like.
+       
+    " name="description">
+<meta content="xml2rfc 3.12.2" name="generator">
+<meta content="JSON" name="keyword">
+<meta content="Schema" name="keyword">
+<meta content="validation" name="keyword">
+<meta content="draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-01" name="ietf.draft">
+<!-- Generator version information:
+  xml2rfc 3.12.2
+    Python 3.9.4
+    appdirs 1.4.4
+    ConfigArgParse 1.5.3
+    google-i18n-address 2.5.0
+    html5lib 1.1
+    intervaltree 3.1.0
+    Jinja2 2.11.3
+    kitchen 1.2.6
+    lxml 4.8.0
+    pycountry 22.1.10
+    pyflakes 2.4.0
+    PyYAML 6.0
+    requests 2.25.1
+    setuptools 49.2.1
+    six 1.15.0
+-->
+<link href="jsonschema-validation.xml" rel="alternate" type="application/rfc+xml">
+<link href="#copyright" rel="license">
+<style type="text/css">/*
+
+  NOTE: Changes at the bottom of this file overrides some earlier settings.
+
+  Once the style has stabilized and has been adopted as an official RFC style,
+  this can be consolidated so that style settings occur only in one place, but
+  for now the contents of this file consists first of the initial CSS work as
+  provided to the RFC Formatter (xml2rfc) work, followed by itemized and
+  commented changes found necssary during the development of the v3
+  formatters.
+
+*/
+
+/* fonts */
+@import url('https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Noto+Sans'); /* Sans-serif */
+@import url('https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Noto+Serif'); /* Serif (print) */
+@import url('https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Roboto+Mono'); /* Monospace */
+
+@viewport {
+  zoom: 1.0;
+  width: extend-to-zoom;
+}
+@-ms-viewport {
+  width: extend-to-zoom;
+  zoom: 1.0;
+}
+/* general and mobile first */
+html {
+}
+body {
+  max-width: 90%;
+  margin: 1.5em auto;
+  color: #222;
+  background-color: #fff;
+  font-size: 14px;
+  font-family: 'Noto Sans', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
+  line-height: 1.6;
+  scroll-behavior: smooth;
+}
+.ears {
+  display: none;
+}
+
+/* headings */
+#title, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+  margin: 1em 0 0.5em;
+  font-weight: bold;
+  line-height: 1.3;
+}
+#title {
+  clear: both;
+  border-bottom: 1px solid #ddd;
+  margin: 0 0 0.5em 0;
+  padding: 1em 0 0.5em;
+}
+.author {
+  padding-bottom: 4px;
+}
+h1 {
+  font-size: 26px;
+  margin: 1em 0;
+}
+h2 {
+  font-size: 22px;
+  margin-top: -20px;  /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
+  padding-top: 33px;
+}
+h3 {
+  font-size: 18px;
+  margin-top: -36px;  /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
+  padding-top: 42px;
+}
+h4 {
+  font-size: 16px;
+  margin-top: -36px;  /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
+  padding-top: 42px;
+}
+h5, h6 {
+  font-size: 14px;
+}
+#n-copyright-notice {
+  border-bottom: 1px solid #ddd;
+  padding-bottom: 1em;
+  margin-bottom: 1em;
+}
+/* general structure */
+p {
+  padding: 0;
+  margin: 0 0 1em 0;
+  text-align: left;
+}
+div, span {
+  position: relative;
+}
+div {
+  margin: 0;
+}
+.alignRight.art-text {
+  background-color: #f9f9f9;
+  border: 1px solid #eee;
+  border-radius: 3px;
+  padding: 1em 1em 0;
+  margin-bottom: 1.5em;
+}
+.alignRight.art-text pre {
+  padding: 0;
+}
+.alignRight {
+  margin: 1em 0;
+}
+.alignRight > *:first-child {
+  border: none;
+  margin: 0;
+  float: right;
+  clear: both;
+}
+.alignRight > *:nth-child(2) {
+  clear: both;
+  display: block;
+  border: none;
+}
+svg {
+  display: block;
+}
+.alignCenter.art-text {
+  background-color: #f9f9f9;
+  border: 1px solid #eee;
+  border-radius: 3px;
+  padding: 1em 1em 0;
+  margin-bottom: 1.5em;
+}
+.alignCenter.art-text pre {
+  padding: 0;
+}
+.alignCenter {
+  margin: 1em 0;
+}
+.alignCenter > *:first-child {
+  border: none;
+  /* this isn't optimal, but it's an existence proof.  PrinceXML doesn't
+     support flexbox yet.
+  */
+  display: table;
+  margin: 0 auto;
+}
+
+/* lists */
+ol, ul {
+  padding: 0;
+  margin: 0 0 1em 2em;
+}
+ol ol, ul ul, ol ul, ul ol {
+  margin-left: 1em;
+}
+li {
+  margin: 0 0 0.25em 0;
+}
+.ulCompact li {
+  margin: 0;
+}
+ul.empty, .ulEmpty {
+  list-style-type: none;
+}
+ul.empty li, .ulEmpty li {
+  margin-top: 0.5em;
+}
+ul.ulBare, li.ulBare {
+  margin-left: 0em !important;
+}
+ul.compact, .ulCompact,
+ol.compact, .olCompact {
+  line-height: 100%;
+  margin: 0 0 0 2em;
+}
+
+/* definition lists */
+dl {
+}
+dl > dt {
+  float: left;
+  margin-right: 1em;
+}
+/* 
+dl.nohang > dt {
+  float: none;
+}
+*/
+dl > dd {
+  margin-bottom: .8em;
+  min-height: 1.3em;
+}
+dl.compact > dd, .dlCompact > dd {
+  margin-bottom: 0em;
+}
+dl > dd > dl {
+  margin-top: 0.5em;
+  margin-bottom: 0em;
+}
+
+/* links */
+a {
+  text-decoration: none;
+}
+a[href] {
+  color: #22e; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
+}
+a[href]:hover {
+  background-color: #f2f2f2;
+}
+figcaption a[href],
+a[href].selfRef {
+  color: #222;
+}
+/* XXX probably not this:
+a.selfRef:hover {
+  background-color: transparent;
+  cursor: default;
+} */
+
+/* Figures */
+tt, code, pre, code {
+  background-color: #f9f9f9;
+  font-family: 'Roboto Mono', monospace;
+}
+pre {
+  border: 1px solid #eee;
+  margin: 0;
+  padding: 1em;
+}
+img {
+  max-width: 100%;
+}
+figure {
+  margin: 0;
+}
+figure blockquote {
+  margin: 0.8em 0.4em 0.4em;
+}
+figcaption {
+  font-style: italic;
+  margin: 0 0 1em 0;
+}
+@media screen {
+  pre {
+    overflow-x: auto;
+    max-width: 100%;
+    max-width: calc(100% - 22px);
+  }
+}
+
+/* aside, blockquote */
+aside, blockquote {
+  margin-left: 0;
+  padding: 1.2em 2em;
+}
+blockquote {
+  background-color: #f9f9f9;
+  color: #111; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
+  border: 1px solid #ddd;
+  border-radius: 3px;
+  margin: 1em 0;
+}
+cite {
+  display: block;
+  text-align: right;
+  font-style: italic;
+}
+
+/* tables */
+table {
+  width: 100%;
+  margin: 0 0 1em;
+  border-collapse: collapse;
+  border: 1px solid #eee;
+}
+th, td {
+  text-align: left;
+  vertical-align: top;
+  padding: 0.5em 0.75em;
+}
+th {
+  text-align: left;
+  background-color: #e9e9e9;
+}
+tr:nth-child(2n+1) > td {
+  background-color: #f5f5f5;
+}
+table caption {
+  font-style: italic;
+  margin: 0;
+  padding: 0;
+  text-align: left;
+}
+table p {
+  /* XXX to avoid bottom margin on table row signifiers. If paragraphs should
+     be allowed within tables more generally, it would be far better to select on a class. */
+  margin: 0;
+}
+
+/* pilcrow */
+a.pilcrow {
+  color: #666; /* Arlen: AHDJ 2019 */
+  text-decoration: none;
+  visibility: hidden;
+  user-select: none;
+  -ms-user-select: none;
+  -o-user-select:none;
+  -moz-user-select: none;
+  -khtml-user-select: none;
+  -webkit-user-select: none;
+  -webkit-touch-callout: none;
+}
+@media screen {
+  aside:hover > a.pilcrow,
+  p:hover > a.pilcrow,
+  blockquote:hover > a.pilcrow,
+  div:hover > a.pilcrow,
+  li:hover > a.pilcrow,
+  pre:hover > a.pilcrow {
+    visibility: visible;
+  }
+  a.pilcrow:hover {
+    background-color: transparent;
+  }
+}
+
+/* misc */
+hr {
+  border: 0;
+  border-top: 1px solid #eee;
+}
+.bcp14 {
+  font-variant: small-caps;
+}
+
+.role {
+  font-variant: all-small-caps;
+}
+
+/* info block */
+#identifiers {
+  margin: 0;
+  font-size: 0.9em;
+}
+#identifiers dt {
+  width: 3em;
+  clear: left;
+}
+#identifiers dd {
+  float: left;
+  margin-bottom: 0;
+}
+/* Fix PDF info block run off issue */
+@media print {
+  #identifiers dd {
+    float: none;
+  }
+}
+#identifiers .authors .author {
+  display: inline-block;
+  margin-right: 1.5em;
+}
+#identifiers .authors .org {
+  font-style: italic;
+}
+
+/* The prepared/rendered info at the very bottom of the page */
+.docInfo {
+  color: #666; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
+  font-size: 0.9em;
+  font-style: italic;
+  margin-top: 2em;
+}
+.docInfo .prepared {
+  float: left;
+}
+.docInfo .prepared {
+  float: right;
+}
+
+/* table of contents */
+#toc  {
+  padding: 0.75em 0 2em 0;
+  margin-bottom: 1em;
+}
+nav.toc ul {
+  margin: 0 0.5em 0 0;
+  padding: 0;
+  list-style: none;
+}
+nav.toc li {
+  line-height: 1.3em;
+  margin: 0.75em 0;
+  padding-left: 1.2em;
+  text-indent: -1.2em;
+}
+/* references */
+.references dt {
+  text-align: right;
+  font-weight: bold;
+  min-width: 7em;
+}
+.references dd {
+  margin-left: 8em;
+  overflow: auto;
+}
+
+.refInstance {
+  margin-bottom: 1.25em;
+}
+
+.references .ascii {
+  margin-bottom: 0.25em;
+}
+
+/* index */
+.index ul {
+  margin: 0 0 0 1em;
+  padding: 0;
+  list-style: none;
+}
+.index ul ul {
+  margin: 0;
+}
+.index li {
+  margin: 0;
+  text-indent: -2em;
+  padding-left: 2em;
+  padding-bottom: 5px;
+}
+.indexIndex {
+  margin: 0.5em 0 1em;
+}
+.index a {
+  font-weight: 700;
+}
+/* make the index two-column on all but the smallest screens */
+@media (min-width: 600px) {
+  .index ul {
+    -moz-column-count: 2;
+    -moz-column-gap: 20px;
+  }
+  .index ul ul {
+    -moz-column-count: 1;
+    -moz-column-gap: 0;
+  }
+}
+
+/* authors */
+address.vcard {
+  font-style: normal;
+  margin: 1em 0;
+}
+
+address.vcard .nameRole {
+  font-weight: 700;
+  margin-left: 0;
+}
+address.vcard .label {
+  font-family: "Noto Sans",Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;
+  margin: 0.5em 0;
+}
+address.vcard .type {
+  display: none;
+}
+.alternative-contact {
+  margin: 1.5em 0 1em;
+}
+hr.addr {
+  border-top: 1px dashed;
+  margin: 0;
+  color: #ddd;
+  max-width: calc(100% - 16px);
+}
+
+/* temporary notes */
+.rfcEditorRemove::before {
+  position: absolute;
+  top: 0.2em;
+  right: 0.2em;
+  padding: 0.2em;
+  content: "The RFC Editor will remove this note";
+  color: #9e2a00; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
+  background-color: #ffd; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
+}
+.rfcEditorRemove {
+  position: relative;
+  padding-top: 1.8em;
+  background-color: #ffd; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
+  border-radius: 3px;
+}
+.cref {
+  background-color: #ffd; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
+  padding: 2px 4px;
+}
+.crefSource {
+  font-style: italic;
+}
+/* alternative layout for smaller screens */
+@media screen and (max-width: 1023px) {
+  body {
+    padding-top: 2em;
+  }
+  #title {
+    padding: 1em 0;
+  }
+  h1 {
+    font-size: 24px;
+  }
+  h2 {
+    font-size: 20px;
+    margin-top: -18px;  /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
+    padding-top: 38px;
+  }
+  #identifiers dd {
+    max-width: 60%;
+  }
+  #toc {
+    position: fixed;
+    z-index: 2;
+    top: 0;
+    right: 0;
+    padding: 0;
+    margin: 0;
+    background-color: inherit;
+    border-bottom: 1px solid #ccc;
+  }
+  #toc h2 {
+    margin: -1px 0 0 0;
+    padding: 4px 0 4px 6px;
+    padding-right: 1em;
+    min-width: 190px;
+    font-size: 1.1em;
+    text-align: right;
+    background-color: #444;
+    color: white;
+    cursor: pointer;
+  }
+  #toc h2::before { /* css hamburger */
+    float: right;
+    position: relative;
+    width: 1em;
+    height: 1px;
+    left: -164px;
+    margin: 6px 0 0 0;
+    background: white none repeat scroll 0 0;
+    box-shadow: 0 4px 0 0 white, 0 8px 0 0 white;
+    content: "";
+  }
+  #toc nav {
+    display: none;
+    padding: 0.5em 1em 1em;
+    overflow: auto;
+    height: calc(100vh - 48px);
+    border-left: 1px solid #ddd;
+  }
+}
+
+/* alternative layout for wide screens */
+@media screen and (min-width: 1024px) {
+  body {
+    max-width: 724px;
+    margin: 42px auto;
+    padding-left: 1.5em;
+    padding-right: 29em;
+  }
+  #toc {
+    position: fixed;
+    top: 42px;
+    right: 42px;
+    width: 25%;
+    margin: 0;
+    padding: 0 1em;
+    z-index: 1;
+  }
+  #toc h2 {
+    border-top: none;
+    border-bottom: 1px solid #ddd;
+    font-size: 1em;
+    font-weight: normal;
+    margin: 0;
+    padding: 0.25em 1em 1em 0;
+  }
+  #toc nav {
+    display: block;
+    height: calc(90vh - 84px);
+    bottom: 0;
+    padding: 0.5em 0 0;
+    overflow: auto;
+  }
+  img { /* future proofing */
+    max-width: 100%;
+    height: auto;
+  }
+}
+
+/* pagination */
+@media print {
+  body {
+
+    width: 100%;
+  }
+  p {
+    orphans: 3;
+    widows: 3;
+  }
+  #n-copyright-notice {
+    border-bottom: none;
+  }
+  #toc, #n-introduction {
+    page-break-before: always;
+  }
+  #toc {
+    border-top: none;
+    padding-top: 0;
+  }
+  figure, pre {
+    page-break-inside: avoid;
+  }
+  figure {
+    overflow: scroll;
+  }
+  h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+    page-break-after: avoid;
+  }
+  h2+*, h3+*, h4+*, h5+*, h6+* {
+    page-break-before: avoid;
+  }
+  pre {
+    white-space: pre-wrap;
+    word-wrap: break-word;
+    font-size: 10pt;
+  }
+  table {
+    border: 1px solid #ddd;
+  }
+  td {
+    border-top: 1px solid #ddd;
+  }
+}
+
+/* This is commented out here, as the string-set: doesn't
+   pass W3C validation currently */
+/*
+.ears thead .left {
+  string-set: ears-top-left content();
+}
+
+.ears thead .center {
+  string-set: ears-top-center content();
+}
+
+.ears thead .right {
+  string-set: ears-top-right content();
+}
+
+.ears tfoot .left {
+  string-set: ears-bottom-left content();
+}
+
+.ears tfoot .center {
+  string-set: ears-bottom-center content();
+}
+
+.ears tfoot .right {
+  string-set: ears-bottom-right content();
+}
+*/
+
+@page :first {
+  padding-top: 0;
+  @top-left {
+    content: normal;
+    border: none;
+  }
+  @top-center {
+    content: normal;
+    border: none;
+  }
+  @top-right {
+    content: normal;
+    border: none;
+  }
+}
+
+@page {
+  size: A4;
+  margin-bottom: 45mm;
+  padding-top: 20px;
+  /* The follwing is commented out here, but set appropriately by in code, as
+     the content depends on the document */
+  /*
+  @top-left {
+    content: 'Internet-Draft';
+    vertical-align: bottom;
+    border-bottom: solid 1px #ccc;
+  }
+  @top-left {
+    content: string(ears-top-left);
+    vertical-align: bottom;
+    border-bottom: solid 1px #ccc;
+  }
+  @top-center {
+    content: string(ears-top-center);
+    vertical-align: bottom;
+    border-bottom: solid 1px #ccc;
+  }
+  @top-right {
+    content: string(ears-top-right);
+    vertical-align: bottom;
+    border-bottom: solid 1px #ccc;
+  }
+  @bottom-left {
+    content: string(ears-bottom-left);
+    vertical-align: top;
+    border-top: solid 1px #ccc;
+  }
+  @bottom-center {
+    content: string(ears-bottom-center);
+    vertical-align: top;
+    border-top: solid 1px #ccc;
+  }
+  @bottom-right {
+      content: '[Page ' counter(page) ']';
+      vertical-align: top;
+      border-top: solid 1px #ccc;
+  }
+  */
+
+}
+
+/* Changes introduced to fix issues found during implementation */
+/* Make sure links are clickable even if overlapped by following H* */
+a {
+  z-index: 2;
+}
+/* Separate body from document info even without intervening H1 */
+section {
+  clear: both;
+}
+
+
+/* Top align author divs, to avoid names without organization dropping level with org names */
+.author {
+  vertical-align: top;
+}
+
+/* Leave room in document info to show Internet-Draft on one line */
+#identifiers dt {
+  width: 8em;
+}
+
+/* Don't waste quite as much whitespace between label and value in doc info */
+#identifiers dd {
+  margin-left: 1em;
+}
+
+/* Give floating toc a background color (needed when it's a div inside section */
+#toc {
+  background-color: white;
+}
+
+/* Make the collapsed ToC header render white on gray also when it's a link */
+@media screen and (max-width: 1023px) {
+  #toc h2 a,
+  #toc h2 a:link,
+  #toc h2 a:focus,
+  #toc h2 a:hover,
+  #toc a.toplink,
+  #toc a.toplink:hover {
+    color: white;
+    background-color: #444;
+    text-decoration: none;
+  }
+}
+
+/* Give the bottom of the ToC some whitespace */
+@media screen and (min-width: 1024px) {
+  #toc {
+    padding: 0 0 1em 1em;
+  }
+}
+
+/* Style section numbers with more space between number and title */
+.section-number {
+  padding-right: 0.5em;
+}
+
+/* prevent monospace from becoming overly large */
+tt, code, pre, code {
+  font-size: 95%;
+}
+
+/* Fix the height/width aspect for ascii art*/
+pre.sourcecode,
+.art-text pre {
+  line-height: 1.12;
+}
+
+
+/* Add styling for a link in the ToC that points to the top of the document */
+a.toplink {
+  float: right;
+  margin-right: 0.5em;
+}
+
+/* Fix the dl styling to match the RFC 7992 attributes */
+dl > dt,
+dl.dlParallel > dt {
+  float: left;
+  margin-right: 1em;
+}
+dl.dlNewline > dt {
+  float: none;
+}
+
+/* Provide styling for table cell text alignment */
+table td.text-left,
+table th.text-left {
+  text-align: left;
+}
+table td.text-center,
+table th.text-center {
+  text-align: center;
+}
+table td.text-right,
+table th.text-right {
+  text-align: right;
+}
+
+/* Make the alternative author contact informatio look less like just another
+   author, and group it closer with the primary author contact information */
+.alternative-contact {
+  margin: 0.5em 0 0.25em 0;
+}
+address .non-ascii {
+  margin: 0 0 0 2em;
+}
+
+/* With it being possible to set tables with alignment
+  left, center, and right, { width: 100%; } does not make sense */
+table {
+  width: auto;
+}
+
+/* Avoid reference text that sits in a block with very wide left margin,
+   because of a long floating dt label.*/
+.references dd {
+  overflow: visible;
+}
+
+/* Control caption placement */
+caption {
+  caption-side: bottom;
+}
+
+/* Limit the width of the author address vcard, so names in right-to-left
+   script don't end up on the other side of the page. */
+
+address.vcard {
+  max-width: 30em;
+  margin-right: auto;
+}
+
+/* For address alignment dependent on LTR or RTL scripts */
+address div.left {
+  text-align: left;
+}
+address div.right {
+  text-align: right;
+}
+
+/* Provide table alignment support.  We can't use the alignX classes above
+   since they do unwanted things with caption and other styling. */
+table.right {
+ margin-left: auto;
+ margin-right: 0;
+}
+table.center {
+ margin-left: auto;
+ margin-right: auto;
+}
+table.left {
+ margin-left: 0;
+ margin-right: auto;
+}
+
+/* Give the table caption label the same styling as the figcaption */
+caption a[href] {
+  color: #222;
+}
+
+@media print {
+  .toplink {
+    display: none;
+  }
+
+  /* avoid overwriting the top border line with the ToC header */
+  #toc {
+    padding-top: 1px;
+  }
+
+  /* Avoid page breaks inside dl and author address entries */
+  .vcard {
+    page-break-inside: avoid;
+  }
+
+}
+/* Tweak the bcp14 keyword presentation */
+.bcp14 {
+  font-variant: small-caps;
+  font-weight: bold;
+  font-size: 0.9em;
+}
+/* Tweak the invisible space above H* in order not to overlay links in text above */
+ h2 {
+  margin-top: -18px;  /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
+  padding-top: 31px;
+ }
+ h3 {
+  margin-top: -18px;  /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
+  padding-top: 24px;
+ }
+ h4 {
+  margin-top: -18px;  /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
+  padding-top: 24px;
+ }
+/* Float artwork pilcrow to the right */
+@media screen {
+  .artwork a.pilcrow {
+    display: block;
+    line-height: 0.7;
+    margin-top: 0.15em;
+  }
+}
+/* Make pilcrows on dd visible */
+@media screen {
+  dd:hover > a.pilcrow {
+    visibility: visible;
+  }
+}
+/* Make the placement of figcaption match that of a table's caption
+   by removing the figure's added bottom margin */
+.alignLeft.art-text,
+.alignCenter.art-text,
+.alignRight.art-text {
+   margin-bottom: 0;
+}
+.alignLeft,
+.alignCenter,
+.alignRight {
+  margin: 1em 0 0 0;
+}
+/* In print, the pilcrow won't show on hover, so prevent it from taking up space,
+   possibly even requiring a new line */
+@media print {
+  a.pilcrow {
+    display: none;
+  }
+}
+/* Styling for the external metadata */
+div#external-metadata {
+  background-color: #eee;
+  padding: 0.5em;
+  margin-bottom: 0.5em;
+  display: none;
+}
+div#internal-metadata {
+  padding: 0.5em;                       /* to match the external-metadata padding */
+}
+/* Styling for title RFC Number */
+h1#rfcnum {
+  clear: both;
+  margin: 0 0 -1em;
+  padding: 1em 0 0 0;
+}
+/* Make .olPercent look the same as <ol><li> */
+dl.olPercent > dd {
+  margin-bottom: 0.25em;
+  min-height: initial;
+}
+/* Give aside some styling to set it apart */
+aside {
+  border-left: 1px solid #ddd;
+  margin: 1em 0 1em 2em;
+  padding: 0.2em 2em;
+}
+aside > dl,
+aside > ol,
+aside > ul,
+aside > table,
+aside > p {
+  margin-bottom: 0.5em;
+}
+/* Additional page break settings */
+@media print {
+  figcaption, table caption {
+    page-break-before: avoid;
+  }
+}
+/* Font size adjustments for print */
+@media print {
+  body  { font-size: 10pt;      line-height: normal; max-width: 96%; }
+  h1    { font-size: 1.72em;    padding-top: 1.5em; } /* 1*1.2*1.2*1.2 */
+  h2    { font-size: 1.44em;    padding-top: 1.5em; } /* 1*1.2*1.2 */
+  h3    { font-size: 1.2em;     padding-top: 1.5em; } /* 1*1.2 */
+  h4    { font-size: 1em;       padding-top: 1.5em; }
+  h5, h6 { font-size: 1em;      margin: initial; padding: 0.5em 0 0.3em; }
+}
+/* Sourcecode margin in print, when there's no pilcrow */
+@media print {
+  .artwork,
+  .sourcecode {
+    margin-bottom: 1em;
+  }
+}
+/* Avoid narrow tables forcing too narrow table captions, which may render badly */
+table {
+  min-width: 20em;
+}
+/* ol type a */
+ol.type-a { list-style-type: lower-alpha; }
+ol.type-A { list-style-type: upper-alpha; }
+ol.type-i { list-style-type: lower-roman; }
+ol.type-I { list-style-type: lower-roman; }
+/* Apply the print table and row borders in general, on request from the RPC,
+and increase the contrast between border and odd row background sligthtly */
+table {
+  border: 1px solid #ddd;
+}
+td {
+  border-top: 1px solid #ddd;
+}
+tr:nth-child(2n+1) > td {
+  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+}
+/* Use style rules to govern display of the TOC. */
+@media screen and (max-width: 1023px) {
+  #toc nav { display: none; }
+  #toc.active nav { display: block; }
+}
+/* Add support for keepWithNext */
+.keepWithNext {
+  break-after: avoid-page;
+  break-after: avoid-page;
+}
+/* Add support for keepWithPrevious */
+.keepWithPrevious {
+  break-before: avoid-page;
+}
+/* Change the approach to avoiding breaks inside artwork etc. */
+figure, pre, table, .artwork, .sourcecode  {
+  break-before: auto;
+  break-after: auto;
+}
+/* Avoid breaks between <dt> and <dd> */
+dl {
+  break-before: auto;
+  break-inside: auto;
+}
+dt {
+  break-before: auto;
+  break-after: avoid-page;
+}
+dd {
+  break-before: avoid-page;
+  break-after: auto;
+  orphans: 3;
+  widows: 3
+}
+span.break, dd.break {
+  margin-bottom: 0;
+  min-height: 0;
+  break-before: auto;
+  break-inside: auto;
+  break-after: auto;
+}
+/* Undo break-before ToC */
+@media print {
+  #toc {
+    break-before: auto;
+  }
+}
+/* Text in compact lists should not get extra bottim margin space,
+   since that would makes the list not compact */
+ul.compact p, .ulCompact p,
+ol.compact p, .olCompact p {
+ margin: 0;
+}
+/* But the list as a whole needs the extra space at the end */
+section ul.compact,
+section .ulCompact,
+section ol.compact,
+section .olCompact {
+  margin-bottom: 1em;                    /* same as p not within ul.compact etc. */
+}
+/* The tt and code background above interferes with for instance table cell
+   backgrounds.  Changed to something a bit more selective. */
+tt, code {
+  background-color: transparent;
+}
+p tt, p code, li tt, li code {
+  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+}
+/* Tweak the pre margin -- 0px doesn't come out well */
+pre {
+   margin-top: 0.5px;
+}
+/* Tweak the comact list text */
+ul.compact, .ulCompact,
+ol.compact, .olCompact,
+dl.compact, .dlCompact {
+  line-height: normal;
+}
+/* Don't add top margin for nested lists */
+li > ul, li > ol, li > dl,
+dd > ul, dd > ol, dd > dl,
+dl > dd > dl {
+  margin-top: initial;
+}
+/* Elements that should not be rendered on the same line as a <dt> */
+/* This should match the element list in writer.text.TextWriter.render_dl() */
+dd > div.artwork:first-child,
+dd > aside:first-child,
+dd > figure:first-child,
+dd > ol:first-child,
+dd > div:first-child > pre.sourcecode,
+dd > table:first-child,
+dd > ul:first-child {
+  clear: left;
+}
+/* fix for weird browser behaviour when <dd/> is empty */
+dt+dd:empty::before{
+  content: "\00a0";
+}
+/* Make paragraph spacing inside <li> smaller than in body text, to fit better within the list */
+li > p {
+  margin-bottom: 0.5em
+}
+/* Don't let p margin spill out from inside list items */
+li > p:last-of-type {
+  margin-bottom: 0;
+}
+</style>
+<link href="rfc-local.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css">
+<script type="application/javascript">async function addMetadata(){try{const e=document.styleSheets[0].cssRules;for(let t=0;t<e.length;t++)if(/#identifiers/.exec(e[t].selectorText)){const a=e[t].cssText.replace("#identifiers","#external-updates");document.styleSheets[0].insertRule(a,document.styleSheets[0].cssRules.length)}}catch(e){console.log(e)}const e=document.getElementById("external-metadata");if(e)try{var t,a="",o=function(e){const t=document.getElementsByTagName("meta");for(let a=0;a<t.length;a++)if(t[a].getAttribute("name")===e)return t[a].getAttribute("content");return""}("rfc.number");if(o){t="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc"+o+".json";try{const e=await fetch(t);a=await e.json()}catch(e){t=document.URL.indexOf("html")>=0?document.URL.replace(/html$/,"json"):document.URL+".json";const o=await fetch(t);a=await o.json()}}if(!a)return;e.style.display="block";const s="",d="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc",n="https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search",c="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info",l=a.doc_id.toLowerCase(),i=a.doc_id.slice(0,3).toLowerCase(),f=a.doc_id.slice(3).replace(/^0+/,""),u={status:"Status",obsoletes:"Obsoletes",obsoleted_by:"Obsoleted By",updates:"Updates",updated_by:"Updated By",see_also:"See Also",errata_url:"Errata"};let h="<dl style='overflow:hidden' id='external-updates'>";["status","obsoletes","obsoleted_by","updates","updated_by","see_also","errata_url"].forEach(e=>{if("status"==e){a[e]=a[e].toLowerCase();var t=a[e].split(" "),o=t.length,w="",p=1;for(let e=0;e<o;e++)p<o?w=w+r(t[e])+" ":w+=r(t[e]),p++;a[e]=w}else if("obsoletes"==e||"obsoleted_by"==e||"updates"==e||"updated_by"==e){var g,m="",b=1;g=a[e].length;for(let t=0;t<g;t++)a[e][t]&&(a[e][t]=String(a[e][t]).toLowerCase(),m=b<g?m+"<a href='"+s+"/rfc/".concat(a[e][t])+"'>"+a[e][t].slice(3)+"</a>, ":m+"<a href='"+s+"/rfc/".concat(a[e][t])+"'>"+a[e][t].slice(3)+"</a>",b++);a[e]=m}else if("see_also"==e){var y,L="",C=1;y=a[e].length;for(let t=0;t<y;t++)if(a[e][t]){a[e][t]=String(a[e][t]);var _=a[e][t].slice(0,3),v=a[e][t].slice(3).replace(/^0+/,"");L=C<y?"RFC"!=_?L+"<a href='"+s+"/info/"+_.toLowerCase().concat(v.toLowerCase())+"'>"+_+" "+v+"</a>, ":L+"<a href='"+s+"/info/"+_.toLowerCase().concat(v.toLowerCase())+"'>"+v+"</a>, ":"RFC"!=_?L+"<a href='"+s+"/info/"+_.toLowerCase().concat(v.toLowerCase())+"'>"+_+" "+v+"</a>":L+"<a href='"+s+"/info/"+_.toLowerCase().concat(v.toLowerCase())+"'>"+v+"</a>",C++}a[e]=L}else if("errata_url"==e){var R="";R=a[e]?R+"<a href='"+a[e]+"'>Errata exist</a> | <a href='"+d+"/"+l+"'>Datatracker</a>| <a href='"+n+"/?"+i+"="+f+"&submit="+i+"'>IPR</a> | <a href='"+c+"/"+l+"'>Info page</a>":"<a href='"+d+"/"+l+"'>Datatracker</a> | <a href='"+n+"/?"+i+"="+f+"&submit="+i+"'>IPR</a> | <a href='"+c+"/"+l+"'>Info page</a>",a[e]=R}""!=a[e]?"Errata"==u[e]?h+=`<dt>More info:</dt><dd>${a[e]}</dd>`:h+=`<dt>${u[e]}:</dt><dd>${a[e]}</dd>`:"Errata"==u[e]&&(h+=`<dt>More info:</dt><dd>${a[e]}</dd>`)}),h+="</dl>",e.innerHTML=h}catch(e){console.log(e)}else console.log("Could not locate metadata <div> element");function r(e){return e.charAt(0).toUpperCase()+e.slice(1)}}window.removeEventListener("load",addMetadata),window.addEventListener("load",addMetadata);</script>
+</head>
+<body>
+<script src="metadata.min.js"></script>
+<table class="ears">
+<thead><tr>
+<td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
+<td class="center">JSON Schema Validation</td>
+<td class="right">June 2022</td>
+</tr></thead>
+<tfoot><tr>
+<td class="left">Wright, et al.</td>
+<td class="center">Expires 18 December 2022</td>
+<td class="right">[Page]</td>
+</tr></tfoot>
+</table>
+<div id="external-metadata" class="document-information"></div>
+<div id="internal-metadata" class="document-information">
+<dl id="identifiers">
+<dt class="label-workgroup">Workgroup:</dt>
+<dd class="workgroup">Internet Engineering Task Force</dd>
+<dt class="label-internet-draft">Internet-Draft:</dt>
+<dd class="internet-draft">draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-01</dd>
+<dt class="label-published">Published:</dt>
+<dd class="published">
+<time datetime="2022-06-16" class="published">16 June 2022</time>
+    </dd>
+<dt class="label-intended-status">Intended Status:</dt>
+<dd class="intended-status">Informational</dd>
+<dt class="label-expires">Expires:</dt>
+<dd class="expires"><time datetime="2022-12-18">18 December 2022</time></dd>
+<dt class="label-authors">Authors:</dt>
+<dd class="authors">
+<div class="author">
+      <div class="author-name">A. Wright, <span class="editor">Ed.</span>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="author">
+      <div class="author-name">H. Andrews, <span class="editor">Ed.</span>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="author">
+      <div class="author-name">B. Hutton, <span class="editor">Ed.</span>
+</div>
+<div class="org">Postman</div>
+</div>
+</dd>
+</dl>
+</div>
+<h1 id="title">JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON</h1>
+<section id="section-abstract">
+      <h2 id="abstract"><a href="#abstract" class="selfRef">Abstract</a></h2>
+<p id="section-abstract-1">
+                JSON Schema (application/schema+json) has several purposes, one of which is JSON
+                instance validation.
+                This document specifies a vocabulary for JSON Schema to describe the meaning of JSON
+                documents, provide hints for user interfaces working with JSON data, and to make
+                assertions about what a valid document must look like.<a href="#section-abstract-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section class="note" id="section-note.1">
+      <h2 id="name-note-to-readers">
+<a href="#name-note-to-readers" class="section-name selfRef">Note to Readers</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-note.1-1">
+                The issues list for this draft can be found at
+                <span><a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues">https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues</a></span>.<a href="#section-note.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-note.1-2">
+                For additional information, see <span><a href="https://json-schema.org/">https://json-schema.org/</a></span>.<a href="#section-note.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-note.1-3">
+                To provide feedback, use this issue tracker, the communication methods listed on the
+                homepage, or email the document editors.<a href="#section-note.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<div id="status-of-memo">
+<section id="section-boilerplate.1">
+        <h2 id="name-status-of-this-memo">
+<a href="#name-status-of-this-memo" class="section-name selfRef">Status of This Memo</a>
+        </h2>
+<p id="section-boilerplate.1-1">
+        This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
+        provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.<a href="#section-boilerplate.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-boilerplate.1-2">
+        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 <span><a href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/">https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/</a></span>.<a href="#section-boilerplate.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-boilerplate.1-3">
+        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."<a href="#section-boilerplate.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-boilerplate.1-4">
+        This Internet-Draft will expire on 18 December 2022.<a href="#section-boilerplate.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="copyright">
+<section id="section-boilerplate.2">
+        <h2 id="name-copyright-notice">
+<a href="#name-copyright-notice" class="section-name selfRef">Copyright Notice</a>
+        </h2>
+<p id="section-boilerplate.2-1">
+            Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
+            document authors. All rights reserved.<a href="#section-boilerplate.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-boilerplate.2-2">
+            This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
+            Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
+            (<span><a href="https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info">https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info</a></span>) 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 Revised BSD License text as described in
+            Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
+            warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.<a href="#section-boilerplate.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="toc">
+<section id="section-toc.1">
+        <a href="#" onclick="scroll(0,0)" class="toplink">▲</a><h2 id="name-table-of-contents">
+<a href="#name-table-of-contents" class="section-name selfRef">Table of Contents</a>
+        </h2>
+<nav class="toc"><ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.1">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.1.1" class="keepWithNext"><a href="#section-1" class="xref">1</a>.  <a href="#name-introduction" class="xref">Introduction</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.2">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.2.1" class="keepWithNext"><a href="#section-2" class="xref">2</a>.  <a href="#name-conventions-and-terminology" class="xref">Conventions and Terminology</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.3">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.3.1" class="keepWithNext"><a href="#section-3" class="xref">3</a>.  <a href="#name-overview" class="xref">Overview</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.1"><a href="#section-4" class="xref">4</a>.  <a href="#name-interoperability-considerat" class="xref">Interoperability Considerations</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.1.1"><a href="#section-4.1" class="xref">4.1</a>.  <a href="#name-validation-of-string-instan" class="xref">Validation of String Instances</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.1"><a href="#section-4.2" class="xref">4.2</a>.  <a href="#name-validation-of-numeric-insta" class="xref">Validation of Numeric Instances</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.1"><a href="#section-4.3" class="xref">4.3</a>.  <a href="#name-regular-expressions" class="xref">Regular Expressions</a></p>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.5">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.5.1"><a href="#section-5" class="xref">5</a>.  <a href="#name-meta-schema" class="xref">Meta-Schema</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.1"><a href="#section-6" class="xref">6</a>.  <a href="#name-a-vocabulary-for-structural" class="xref">A Vocabulary for Structural Validation</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.1.1"><a href="#section-6.1" class="xref">6.1</a>.  <a href="#name-validation-keywords-for-any" class="xref">Validation Keywords for Any Instance Type</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.1.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.1.2.1.1"><a href="#section-6.1.1" class="xref">6.1.1</a>.  <a href="#name-type" class="xref">type</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.1.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.1.2.2.1"><a href="#section-6.1.2" class="xref">6.1.2</a>.  <a href="#name-enum" class="xref">enum</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.1.2.3">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.1.2.3.1"><a href="#section-6.1.3" class="xref">6.1.3</a>.  <a href="#name-const" class="xref">const</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2.1"><a href="#section-6.2" class="xref">6.2</a>.  <a href="#name-validation-keywords-for-num" class="xref">Validation Keywords for Numeric Instances (number and integer)</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2.2.1.1"><a href="#section-6.2.1" class="xref">6.2.1</a>.  <a href="#name-multipleof" class="xref">multipleOf</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2.2.2.1"><a href="#section-6.2.2" class="xref">6.2.2</a>.  <a href="#name-maximum" class="xref">maximum</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2.2.3">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2.2.3.1"><a href="#section-6.2.3" class="xref">6.2.3</a>.  <a href="#name-exclusivemaximum" class="xref">exclusiveMaximum</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2.2.4">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2.2.4.1"><a href="#section-6.2.4" class="xref">6.2.4</a>.  <a href="#name-minimum" class="xref">minimum</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2.2.5">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2.2.5.1"><a href="#section-6.2.5" class="xref">6.2.5</a>.  <a href="#name-exclusiveminimum" class="xref">exclusiveMinimum</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.3">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.3.1"><a href="#section-6.3" class="xref">6.3</a>.  <a href="#name-validation-keywords-for-str" class="xref">Validation Keywords for Strings</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.3.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.3.2.1.1"><a href="#section-6.3.1" class="xref">6.3.1</a>.  <a href="#name-maxlength" class="xref">maxLength</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.3.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.3.2.2.1"><a href="#section-6.3.2" class="xref">6.3.2</a>.  <a href="#name-minlength" class="xref">minLength</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.3.2.3">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.3.2.3.1"><a href="#section-6.3.3" class="xref">6.3.3</a>.  <a href="#name-pattern" class="xref">pattern</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4.1"><a href="#section-6.4" class="xref">6.4</a>.  <a href="#name-validation-keywords-for-arr" class="xref">Validation Keywords for Arrays</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4.2.1.1"><a href="#section-6.4.1" class="xref">6.4.1</a>.  <a href="#name-maxitems" class="xref">maxItems</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4.2.2.1"><a href="#section-6.4.2" class="xref">6.4.2</a>.  <a href="#name-minitems" class="xref">minItems</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4.2.3">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4.2.3.1"><a href="#section-6.4.3" class="xref">6.4.3</a>.  <a href="#name-uniqueitems" class="xref">uniqueItems</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4.2.4">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4.2.4.1"><a href="#section-6.4.4" class="xref">6.4.4</a>.  <a href="#name-maxcontains" class="xref">maxContains</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4.2.5">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4.2.5.1"><a href="#section-6.4.5" class="xref">6.4.5</a>.  <a href="#name-mincontains" class="xref">minContains</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.5">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.5.1"><a href="#section-6.5" class="xref">6.5</a>.  <a href="#name-validation-keywords-for-obj" class="xref">Validation Keywords for Objects</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.5.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.5.2.1.1"><a href="#section-6.5.1" class="xref">6.5.1</a>.  <a href="#name-maxproperties" class="xref">maxProperties</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.5.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.5.2.2.1"><a href="#section-6.5.2" class="xref">6.5.2</a>.  <a href="#name-minproperties" class="xref">minProperties</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.5.2.3">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.5.2.3.1"><a href="#section-6.5.3" class="xref">6.5.3</a>.  <a href="#name-required" class="xref">required</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.5.2.4">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.5.2.4.1"><a href="#section-6.5.4" class="xref">6.5.4</a>.  <a href="#name-dependentrequired" class="xref">dependentRequired</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.1"><a href="#section-7" class="xref">7</a>.  <a href="#name-vocabularies-for-semantic-c" class="xref">Vocabularies for Semantic Content With "format"</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.1.1"><a href="#section-7.1" class="xref">7.1</a>.  <a href="#name-foreword" class="xref">Foreword</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.2.1"><a href="#section-7.2" class="xref">7.2</a>.  <a href="#name-implementation-requirements" class="xref">Implementation Requirements</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.2.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.2.2.1.1"><a href="#section-7.2.1" class="xref">7.2.1</a>.  <a href="#name-format-annotation-vocabular" class="xref">Format-Annotation Vocabulary</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.2.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.2.2.2.1"><a href="#section-7.2.2" class="xref">7.2.2</a>.  <a href="#name-format-assertion-vocabulary" class="xref">Format-Assertion Vocabulary</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.2.2.3">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.2.2.3.1"><a href="#section-7.2.3" class="xref">7.2.3</a>.  <a href="#name-custom-format-attributes" class="xref">Custom format attributes</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.1"><a href="#section-7.3" class="xref">7.3</a>.  <a href="#name-defined-formats" class="xref">Defined Formats</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.1">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.1.1"><a href="#section-7.3.1" class="xref">7.3.1</a>.  <a href="#name-dates-times-and-duration" class="xref">Dates, Times, and Duration</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.2">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.2.1"><a href="#section-7.3.2" class="xref">7.3.2</a>.  <a href="#name-email-addresses" class="xref">Email Addresses</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.3">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.3.1"><a href="#section-7.3.3" class="xref">7.3.3</a>.  <a href="#name-hostnames" class="xref">Hostnames</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.4">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.4.1"><a href="#section-7.3.4" class="xref">7.3.4</a>.  <a href="#name-ip-addresses" class="xref">IP Addresses</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.5">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.5.1"><a href="#section-7.3.5" class="xref">7.3.5</a>.  <a href="#name-resource-identifiers" class="xref">Resource Identifiers</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.6">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.6.1"><a href="#section-7.3.6" class="xref">7.3.6</a>.  <a href="#name-uri-template" class="xref">uri-template</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.7">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.7.1"><a href="#section-7.3.7" class="xref">7.3.7</a>.  <a href="#name-json-pointers" class="xref">JSON Pointers</a></p>
+</li>
+                  <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.8">
+                    <p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.2.8.1"><a href="#section-7.3.8" class="xref">7.3.8</a>.  <a href="#name-regex" class="xref">regex</a></p>
+</li>
+                </ul>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.1"><a href="#section-8" class="xref">8</a>.  <a href="#name-a-vocabulary-for-the-conten" class="xref">A Vocabulary for the Contents of String-Encoded Data</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1.1"><a href="#section-8.1" class="xref">8.1</a>.  <a href="#name-foreword-2" class="xref">Foreword</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2.1"><a href="#section-8.2" class="xref">8.2</a>.  <a href="#name-implementation-requirements-2" class="xref">Implementation Requirements</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.3">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.3.1"><a href="#section-8.3" class="xref">8.3</a>.  <a href="#name-contentencoding" class="xref">contentEncoding</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.4">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.4.1"><a href="#section-8.4" class="xref">8.4</a>.  <a href="#name-contentmediatype" class="xref">contentMediaType</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.5">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.5.1"><a href="#section-8.5" class="xref">8.5</a>.  <a href="#name-contentschema" class="xref">contentSchema</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.6">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.6.1"><a href="#section-8.6" class="xref">8.6</a>.  <a href="#name-example" class="xref">Example</a></p>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.1"><a href="#section-9" class="xref">9</a>.  <a href="#name-a-vocabulary-for-basic-meta" class="xref">A Vocabulary for Basic Meta-Data Annotations</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1.1"><a href="#section-9.1" class="xref">9.1</a>.  <a href="#name-title-and-description" class="xref">"title" and "description"</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.2.1"><a href="#section-9.2" class="xref">9.2</a>.  <a href="#name-default" class="xref">"default"</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.3">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.3.1"><a href="#section-9.3" class="xref">9.3</a>.  <a href="#name-deprecated" class="xref">"deprecated"</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.4">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.4.1"><a href="#section-9.4" class="xref">9.4</a>.  <a href="#name-readonly-and-writeonly" class="xref">"readOnly" and "writeOnly"</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.5">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.5.1"><a href="#section-9.5" class="xref">9.5</a>.  <a href="#name-examples" class="xref">"examples"</a></p>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.10.1"><a href="#section-10" class="xref">10</a>. <a href="#name-security-considerations" class="xref">Security Considerations</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.11">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.11.1"><a href="#section-11" class="xref">11</a>. <a href="#name-references" class="xref">References</a></p>
+<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
+<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.1">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.1.1"><a href="#section-11.1" class="xref">11.1</a>.  <a href="#name-normative-references" class="xref">Normative References</a></p>
+</li>
+              <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.2">
+                <p id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.2.1"><a href="#section-11.2" class="xref">11.2</a>.  <a href="#name-informative-references" class="xref">Informative References</a></p>
+</li>
+            </ul>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.12.1"><a href="#appendix-A" class="xref">Appendix A</a>.  <a href="#name-keywords-moved-from-validat" class="xref">Keywords Moved from Validation to Core</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.13">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.13.1"><a href="#appendix-B" class="xref">Appendix B</a>.  <a href="#name-acknowledgments" class="xref">Acknowledgments</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.14">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.14.1"><a href="#appendix-C" class="xref">Appendix C</a>.  <a href="#name-changelog" class="xref">ChangeLog</a></p>
+</li>
+          <li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.15">
+            <p id="section-toc.1-1.15.1"><a href="#appendix-D" class="xref"></a><a href="#name-authors-addresses" class="xref">Authors' Addresses</a></p>
+</li>
+        </ul>
+</nav>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-1">
+      <h2 id="name-introduction">
+<a href="#section-1" class="section-number selfRef">1. </a><a href="#name-introduction" class="section-name selfRef">Introduction</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-1-1">
+                JSON Schema can be used to require that a given JSON document (an instance)
+                satisfies a certain number of criteria. These criteria are asserted by using
+                keywords described in this specification. In addition, a set of keywords
+                is also defined to assist in interactive user interface instance generation.<a href="#section-1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-1-2">
+                This specification will use the concepts, syntax, and terminology defined
+                by the <span><a href="#json-schema" class="xref">JSON Schema core</a> [<a href="#json-schema" class="xref">json-schema</a>]</span> specification.<a href="#section-1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-2">
+      <h2 id="name-conventions-and-terminology">
+<a href="#section-2" class="section-number selfRef">2. </a><a href="#name-conventions-and-terminology" class="section-name selfRef">Conventions and Terminology</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-2-1">
+                
+
+                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 <span><a href="#RFC2119" class="xref">RFC 2119</a> [<a href="#RFC2119" class="xref">RFC2119</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-2-2">
+                This specification uses the term "container instance" to refer to both array and
+                object instances. It uses the term "children instances" to refer to array elements
+                or object member values.<a href="#section-2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-2-3">
+                Elements in an array value are said to be unique if no two elements of this array
+                are <span><a href="#json-schema" class="xref">equal</a> [<a href="#json-schema" class="xref">json-schema</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-3">
+      <h2 id="name-overview">
+<a href="#section-3" class="section-number selfRef">3. </a><a href="#name-overview" class="section-name selfRef">Overview</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-3-1">
+                JSON Schema validation asserts constraints on the structure of instance data.
+                An instance location that satisfies all asserted constraints is then
+                annotated with any keywords that contain non-assertion information,
+                such as descriptive metadata and usage hints.  If all locations within
+                the instance satisfy all asserted constraints, then the instance is
+                said to be valid against the schema.<a href="#section-3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-3-2">
+                Each schema object is independently evaluated against each instance location
+                to which it applies.  This greatly simplifies the implementation requirements
+                for validators by ensuring that they do not need to maintain state across
+                the document-wide validation process.<a href="#section-3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-3-3">
+                This specification defines a set of assertion keywords, as well as a small vocabulary
+                of metadata keywords that can be used to annotate the JSON instance with
+                useful information.  The <a href="#format" class="xref">Section 7</a> keyword is intended primarily
+                as an annotation, but can optionally be used as an assertion.  The
+                <a href="#content" class="xref">Section 8</a> keywords are annotations for working with documents
+                embedded as JSON strings.<a href="#section-3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-4">
+      <h2 id="name-interoperability-considerat">
+<a href="#section-4" class="section-number selfRef">4. </a><a href="#name-interoperability-considerat" class="section-name selfRef">Interoperability Considerations</a>
+      </h2>
+<section id="section-4.1">
+        <h3 id="name-validation-of-string-instan">
+<a href="#section-4.1" class="section-number selfRef">4.1. </a><a href="#name-validation-of-string-instan" class="section-name selfRef">Validation of String Instances</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-4.1-1">
+                    It should be noted that the nul character (\u0000) is valid in a JSON string. An
+                    instance to validate may contain a string value with this character, regardless
+                    of the ability of the underlying programming language to deal with such data.<a href="#section-4.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-4.2">
+        <h3 id="name-validation-of-numeric-insta">
+<a href="#section-4.2" class="section-number selfRef">4.2. </a><a href="#name-validation-of-numeric-insta" class="section-name selfRef">Validation of Numeric Instances</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-4.2-1">
+                    The JSON specification allows numbers with arbitrary precision, and JSON Schema
+                    does not add any such bounds.
+                    This means that numeric instances processed by JSON Schema can be arbitrarily large and/or
+                    have an arbitrarily long decimal part, regardless of the ability of the
+                    underlying programming language to deal with such data.<a href="#section-4.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<div id="regexInterop">
+<section id="section-4.3">
+        <h3 id="name-regular-expressions">
+<a href="#section-4.3" class="section-number selfRef">4.3. </a><a href="#name-regular-expressions" class="section-name selfRef">Regular Expressions</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-4.3-1">
+                    Keywords that use regular expressions, or constrain the instance value
+                    to be a regular expression, are subject to the interoperability
+                    considerations for regular expressions in the
+                    <span><a href="#json-schema" class="xref">JSON Schema Core</a> [<a href="#json-schema" class="xref">json-schema</a>]</span> specification.<a href="#section-4.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+</section>
+<div id="meta-schema">
+<section id="section-5">
+      <h2 id="name-meta-schema">
+<a href="#section-5" class="section-number selfRef">5. </a><a href="#name-meta-schema" class="section-name selfRef">Meta-Schema</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-5-1">
+                The current URI for the default JSON Schema dialect meta-schema is
+                <span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema</a></span>.
+                For schema author convenience, this meta-schema describes a dialect
+                consisting of all vocabularies
+                defined in this specification and the JSON Schema Core specification,
+                as well as two former keywords which are reserved for a transitional period.
+                Individual vocabulary and vocabulary meta-schema URIs are given for
+                each section below.  Certain vocabularies are optional to support, which
+                is explained in detail in the relevant sections.<a href="#section-5-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-5-2">
+                Updated vocabulary and meta-schema URIs MAY be published between
+                specification drafts in order to correct errors.  Implementations
+                SHOULD consider URIs dated after this specification draft and
+                before the next to indicate the same syntax and semantics
+                as those listed here.<a href="#section-5-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-6">
+      <h2 id="name-a-vocabulary-for-structural">
+<a href="#section-6" class="section-number selfRef">6. </a><a href="#name-a-vocabulary-for-structural" class="section-name selfRef">A Vocabulary for Structural Validation</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-6-1">
+                Validation keywords in a schema impose requirements for successful validation of an
+                instance.  These keywords are all assertions without any annotation behavior.<a href="#section-6-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6-2">
+                Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" SHOULD be considered to
+                require this vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.<a href="#section-6-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6-3">
+                The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Validation vocabulary, is:
+                &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/validation&gt;.<a href="#section-6-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6-4">
+                The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is:
+                <span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/validation">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/validation</a></span>.<a href="#section-6-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div id="general">
+<section id="section-6.1">
+        <h3 id="name-validation-keywords-for-any">
+<a href="#section-6.1" class="section-number selfRef">6.1. </a><a href="#name-validation-keywords-for-any" class="section-name selfRef">Validation Keywords for Any Instance Type</a>
+        </h3>
+<section id="section-6.1.1">
+          <h4 id="name-type">
+<a href="#section-6.1.1" class="section-number selfRef">6.1.1. </a><a href="#name-type" class="section-name selfRef">type</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.1.1-1">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be either a string or an array. If it is
+                        an array, elements of the array MUST be strings and MUST be unique.<a href="#section-6.1.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.1.1-2">
+                        String values MUST be one of the six primitive types
+                        ("null", "boolean", "object", "array", "number", or "string"),
+                        or "integer" which matches any number with a zero fractional part.<a href="#section-6.1.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.1.1-3">
+                        If the value of "type" is a string, then an instance validates successfully if
+                        its type matches the type represented by the value of the string.
+
+                        If the value of "type" is an array, then an instance validates successfully if
+                        its type matches any of the types indicated by the strings in the array.<a href="#section-6.1.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<div id="enum">
+<section id="section-6.1.2">
+          <h4 id="name-enum">
+<a href="#section-6.1.2" class="section-number selfRef">6.1.2. </a><a href="#name-enum" class="section-name selfRef">enum</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.1.2-1">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be an array. This array SHOULD have at
+                        least one element. Elements in the array SHOULD be unique.<a href="#section-6.1.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.1.2-2">
+                        An instance validates successfully against this keyword if its value is
+                        equal to one of the elements in this keyword's array value.<a href="#section-6.1.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.1.2-3">
+                        Elements in the array might be of any type, including null.<a href="#section-6.1.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-6.1.3">
+          <h4 id="name-const">
+<a href="#section-6.1.3" class="section-number selfRef">6.1.3. </a><a href="#name-const" class="section-name selfRef">const</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.1.3-1">
+                        The value of this keyword MAY be of any type, including null.<a href="#section-6.1.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.1.3-2">
+                        Use of this keyword is functionally equivalent to an
+                        <span><a href="#enum" class="xref">"enum"</a> (<a href="#enum" class="xref">Section 6.1.2</a>)</span> with a single value.<a href="#section-6.1.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.1.3-3">
+                        An instance validates successfully against this keyword if its value is
+                        equal to the value of the keyword.<a href="#section-6.1.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="numeric">
+<section id="section-6.2">
+        <h3 id="name-validation-keywords-for-num">
+<a href="#section-6.2" class="section-number selfRef">6.2. </a><a href="#name-validation-keywords-for-num" class="section-name selfRef">Validation Keywords for Numeric Instances (number and integer)</a>
+        </h3>
+<section id="section-6.2.1">
+          <h4 id="name-multipleof">
+<a href="#section-6.2.1" class="section-number selfRef">6.2.1. </a><a href="#name-multipleof" class="section-name selfRef">multipleOf</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.2.1-1">
+                        The value of "multipleOf" MUST be a number, strictly greater than 0.<a href="#section-6.2.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.2.1-2">
+                        A numeric instance is valid only if division by this keyword's value results in
+                        an integer.<a href="#section-6.2.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-6.2.2">
+          <h4 id="name-maximum">
+<a href="#section-6.2.2" class="section-number selfRef">6.2.2. </a><a href="#name-maximum" class="section-name selfRef">maximum</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.2.2-1">
+                        The value of "maximum" MUST be a number, representing an inclusive upper limit
+                        for a numeric instance.<a href="#section-6.2.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.2.2-2">
+                        If the instance is a number, then this keyword validates only if the instance is
+                        less than or exactly equal to "maximum".<a href="#section-6.2.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-6.2.3">
+          <h4 id="name-exclusivemaximum">
+<a href="#section-6.2.3" class="section-number selfRef">6.2.3. </a><a href="#name-exclusivemaximum" class="section-name selfRef">exclusiveMaximum</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.2.3-1">
+                        The value of "exclusiveMaximum" MUST be a number, representing an exclusive upper
+                        limit for a numeric instance.<a href="#section-6.2.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.2.3-2">
+                        If the instance is a number, then the instance is valid only if it has a value
+                        strictly less than (not equal to) "exclusiveMaximum".<a href="#section-6.2.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-6.2.4">
+          <h4 id="name-minimum">
+<a href="#section-6.2.4" class="section-number selfRef">6.2.4. </a><a href="#name-minimum" class="section-name selfRef">minimum</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.2.4-1">
+                        The value of "minimum" MUST be a number, representing an inclusive lower limit
+                        for a numeric instance.<a href="#section-6.2.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.2.4-2">
+                        If the instance is a number, then this keyword validates only if the instance is
+                        greater than or exactly equal to "minimum".<a href="#section-6.2.4-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-6.2.5">
+          <h4 id="name-exclusiveminimum">
+<a href="#section-6.2.5" class="section-number selfRef">6.2.5. </a><a href="#name-exclusiveminimum" class="section-name selfRef">exclusiveMinimum</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.2.5-1">
+                        The value of "exclusiveMinimum" MUST be a number, representing an exclusive lower
+                        limit for a numeric instance.<a href="#section-6.2.5-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.2.5-2">
+                        If the instance is a number, then the instance is valid only if it has a value
+                        strictly greater than (not equal to) "exclusiveMinimum".<a href="#section-6.2.5-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="string">
+<section id="section-6.3">
+        <h3 id="name-validation-keywords-for-str">
+<a href="#section-6.3" class="section-number selfRef">6.3. </a><a href="#name-validation-keywords-for-str" class="section-name selfRef">Validation Keywords for Strings</a>
+        </h3>
+<section id="section-6.3.1">
+          <h4 id="name-maxlength">
+<a href="#section-6.3.1" class="section-number selfRef">6.3.1. </a><a href="#name-maxlength" class="section-name selfRef">maxLength</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.3.1-1">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.<a href="#section-6.3.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.3.1-2">
+                        A string instance is valid against this keyword if its
+                        length is less than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.<a href="#section-6.3.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.3.1-3">
+                        The length of a string instance is defined as the number of its
+                        characters as defined by <span><a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC 8259</a> [<a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC8259</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-6.3.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-6.3.2">
+          <h4 id="name-minlength">
+<a href="#section-6.3.2" class="section-number selfRef">6.3.2. </a><a href="#name-minlength" class="section-name selfRef">minLength</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.3.2-1">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.<a href="#section-6.3.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.3.2-2">
+                        A string instance is valid against this keyword if its
+                        length is greater than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.<a href="#section-6.3.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.3.2-3">
+                        The length of a string instance is defined as the number of its
+                        characters as defined by <span><a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC 8259</a> [<a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC8259</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-6.3.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.3.2-4">
+                        Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of 0.<a href="#section-6.3.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<div id="pattern">
+<section id="section-6.3.3">
+          <h4 id="name-pattern">
+<a href="#section-6.3.3" class="section-number selfRef">6.3.3. </a><a href="#name-pattern" class="section-name selfRef">pattern</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.3.3-1">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be a string. This string SHOULD be a
+                        valid regular expression, according to the ECMA-262 regular expression
+                        dialect.<a href="#section-6.3.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.3.3-2">
+                        A string instance is considered valid if the regular
+                        expression matches the instance successfully. Recall: regular
+                        expressions are not implicitly anchored.<a href="#section-6.3.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-6.4">
+        <h3 id="name-validation-keywords-for-arr">
+<a href="#section-6.4" class="section-number selfRef">6.4. </a><a href="#name-validation-keywords-for-arr" class="section-name selfRef">Validation Keywords for Arrays</a>
+        </h3>
+<section id="section-6.4.1">
+          <h4 id="name-maxitems">
+<a href="#section-6.4.1" class="section-number selfRef">6.4.1. </a><a href="#name-maxitems" class="section-name selfRef">maxItems</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.4.1-1">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.<a href="#section-6.4.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.4.1-2">
+                        An array instance is valid against "maxItems" if its size is
+                        less than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.<a href="#section-6.4.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-6.4.2">
+          <h4 id="name-minitems">
+<a href="#section-6.4.2" class="section-number selfRef">6.4.2. </a><a href="#name-minitems" class="section-name selfRef">minItems</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.4.2-1">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.<a href="#section-6.4.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.4.2-2">
+                        An array instance is valid against "minItems" if its size is
+                        greater than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.<a href="#section-6.4.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.4.2-3">
+                        Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of 0.<a href="#section-6.4.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-6.4.3">
+          <h4 id="name-uniqueitems">
+<a href="#section-6.4.3" class="section-number selfRef">6.4.3. </a><a href="#name-uniqueitems" class="section-name selfRef">uniqueItems</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.4.3-1">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be a boolean.<a href="#section-6.4.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.4.3-2">
+                        If this keyword has boolean value false, the instance validates
+                        successfully. If it has boolean value true, the instance validates
+                        successfully if all of its elements are unique.<a href="#section-6.4.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.4.3-3">
+                        Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of false.<a href="#section-6.4.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-6.4.4">
+          <h4 id="name-maxcontains">
+<a href="#section-6.4.4" class="section-number selfRef">6.4.4. </a><a href="#name-maxcontains" class="section-name selfRef">maxContains</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.4.4-1">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.<a href="#section-6.4.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.4.4-2">
+                        If "contains" is not present within the same schema object,
+                        then this keyword has no effect.<a href="#section-6.4.4-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.4.4-3">
+                        An instance array is valid against "maxContains" in two ways, depending on
+                        the form of the annotation result of an adjacent
+                        <span><a href="#json-schema" class="xref">"contains"</a> [<a href="#json-schema" class="xref">json-schema</a>]</span> keyword. The first way is if
+                        the annotation result is an array and the length of that array is less than
+                        or equal to the "maxContains" value. The second way is if the annotation
+                        result is a boolean "true" and the instance array length is less than or
+                        equal to the "maxContains" value.<a href="#section-6.4.4-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-6.4.5">
+          <h4 id="name-mincontains">
+<a href="#section-6.4.5" class="section-number selfRef">6.4.5. </a><a href="#name-mincontains" class="section-name selfRef">minContains</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.4.5-1">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.<a href="#section-6.4.5-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.4.5-2">
+                        If "contains" is not present within the same schema object,
+                        then this keyword has no effect.<a href="#section-6.4.5-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.4.5-3">
+                        An instance array is valid against "minContains" in two ways, depending on
+                        the form of the annotation result of an adjacent
+                        <span><a href="#json-schema" class="xref">"contains"</a> [<a href="#json-schema" class="xref">json-schema</a>]</span> keyword. The first way is if
+                        the annotation result is an array and the length of that array is greater
+                        than or equal to the "minContains" value. The second way is if the
+                        annotation result is a boolean "true" and the instance array length is
+                        greater than or equal to the "minContains" value.<a href="#section-6.4.5-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.4.5-4">
+                        A value of 0 is allowed, but is only useful for setting a range
+                        of occurrences from 0 to the value of "maxContains". A value of
+                        0 causes "minContains" and "contains" to always pass validation
+                        (but validation can still fail against a "maxContains" keyword).<a href="#section-6.4.5-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.4.5-5">
+                        Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of 1.<a href="#section-6.4.5-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+<section id="section-6.5">
+        <h3 id="name-validation-keywords-for-obj">
+<a href="#section-6.5" class="section-number selfRef">6.5. </a><a href="#name-validation-keywords-for-obj" class="section-name selfRef">Validation Keywords for Objects</a>
+        </h3>
+<section id="section-6.5.1">
+          <h4 id="name-maxproperties">
+<a href="#section-6.5.1" class="section-number selfRef">6.5.1. </a><a href="#name-maxproperties" class="section-name selfRef">maxProperties</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.5.1-1">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.<a href="#section-6.5.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.5.1-2">
+                        An object instance is valid against "maxProperties" if its
+                        number of properties is less than, or equal to, the value of this
+                        keyword.<a href="#section-6.5.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-6.5.2">
+          <h4 id="name-minproperties">
+<a href="#section-6.5.2" class="section-number selfRef">6.5.2. </a><a href="#name-minproperties" class="section-name selfRef">minProperties</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.5.2-1">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.<a href="#section-6.5.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.5.2-2">
+                        An object instance is valid against "minProperties" if its
+                        number of properties is greater than, or equal to, the value of this
+                        keyword.<a href="#section-6.5.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.5.2-3">
+                        Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of 0.<a href="#section-6.5.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-6.5.3">
+          <h4 id="name-required">
+<a href="#section-6.5.3" class="section-number selfRef">6.5.3. </a><a href="#name-required" class="section-name selfRef">required</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.5.3-1">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be an array.
+                        Elements of this array, if any, MUST be strings, and MUST be unique.<a href="#section-6.5.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.5.3-2">
+                        An object instance is valid against this keyword if every item in the array is
+                        the name of a property in the instance.<a href="#section-6.5.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.5.3-3">
+                        Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty array.<a href="#section-6.5.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-6.5.4">
+          <h4 id="name-dependentrequired">
+<a href="#section-6.5.4" class="section-number selfRef">6.5.4. </a><a href="#name-dependentrequired" class="section-name selfRef">dependentRequired</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-6.5.4-1">
+                        The value of this keyword MUST be an object.  Properties in
+                        this object, if any, MUST be arrays.  Elements in each array,
+                        if any, MUST be strings, and MUST be unique.<a href="#section-6.5.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.5.4-2">
+                        This keyword specifies properties that are required if a specific
+                        other property is present.  Their requirement is dependent on the
+                        presence of the other property.<a href="#section-6.5.4-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.5.4-3">
+                        Validation succeeds if, for each name that appears in both
+                        the instance and as a name within this keyword's value, every
+                        item in the corresponding array is also the name of a property
+                        in the instance.<a href="#section-6.5.4-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-6.5.4-4">
+                        Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty object.<a href="#section-6.5.4-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+</section>
+<div id="format">
+<section id="section-7">
+      <h2 id="name-vocabularies-for-semantic-c">
+<a href="#section-7" class="section-number selfRef">7. </a><a href="#name-vocabularies-for-semantic-c" class="section-name selfRef">Vocabularies for Semantic Content With "format"</a>
+      </h2>
+<section id="section-7.1">
+        <h3 id="name-foreword">
+<a href="#section-7.1" class="section-number selfRef">7.1. </a><a href="#name-foreword" class="section-name selfRef">Foreword</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-7.1-1">
+                    Structural validation alone may be insufficient to allow an application to correctly
+                    utilize certain values. The "format" annotation keyword is defined to allow schema
+                    authors to convey semantic information for a fixed subset of values which are
+                    accurately described by authoritative resources, be they RFCs or other external
+                    specifications.<a href="#section-7.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.1-2">
+                    The value of this keyword is called a format attribute. It MUST be a string. A
+                    format attribute can generally only validate a given set of instance types. If
+                    the type of the instance to validate is not in this set, validation for this
+                    format attribute and instance SHOULD succeed.  All format attributes defined
+                    in this section apply to strings, but a format attribute can be specified
+                    to apply to any instance types defined in the data model defined in the
+                    <span><a href="#json-schema" class="xref">core JSON Schema.</a> [<a href="#json-schema" class="xref">json-schema</a>]</span>
+          <span class="cref">
+                        Note that the "type" keyword in this specification defines an "integer" type
+                        which is not part of the data model. Therefore a format attribute can be
+                        limited to numbers, but not specifically to integers. However, a numeric
+                        format can be used alongside the "type" keyword with a value of "integer",
+                        or could be explicitly defined to always pass if the number is not an integer,
+                        which produces essentially the same behavior as only applying to integers.
+          </span><a href="#section-7.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.1-3">
+                    The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Format-Annotation vocabulary, is:
+                    &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/format-annotation&gt;. The current
+                    URI for the corresponding meta-schema is:
+                    <span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/format-annotation">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/format-annotation</a></span>.
+                    Implementing support for this vocabulary is REQUIRED.<a href="#section-7.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.1-4">
+                    In addition to the Format-Annotation vocabulary, a secondary vocabulary is available
+                    for custom meta-schemas that defines "format" as an assertion. The URI for the
+                    Format-Assertion vocabulary, is:
+                    &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/format-assertion&gt;. The current
+                    URI for the corresponding meta-schema is:
+                    <span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/format-assertion">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/format-assertion</a></span>.
+                    Implementing support for the Format-Assertion vocabulary is OPTIONAL.<a href="#section-7.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.1-5">
+                    Specifying both the Format-Annotation and the Format-Assertion vocabularies is functionally
+                    equivalent to specifying only the Format-Assertion vocabulary since its requirements
+                    are a superset of the Format-Annotation vocabulary.<a href="#section-7.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.2">
+        <h3 id="name-implementation-requirements">
+<a href="#section-7.2" class="section-number selfRef">7.2. </a><a href="#name-implementation-requirements" class="section-name selfRef">Implementation Requirements</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-7.2-1">
+                    The "format" keyword functions as defined by the vocabulary which is referenced.<a href="#section-7.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-7.2.1">
+          <h4 id="name-format-annotation-vocabular">
+<a href="#section-7.2.1" class="section-number selfRef">7.2.1. </a><a href="#name-format-annotation-vocabular" class="section-name selfRef">Format-Annotation Vocabulary</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-7.2.1-1">
+                        The value of format MUST be collected as an annotation, if the implementation
+                        supports annotation collection. This enables application-level validation when
+                        schema validation is unavailable or inadequate.<a href="#section-7.2.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.2.1-2">
+                        Implementations MAY still treat "format" as an assertion in addition to an
+                        annotation and attempt to validate the value's conformance to the specified
+                        semantics. The implementation MUST provide options to enable and disable such
+                        evaluation and MUST be disabled by default. Implementations SHOULD document
+                        their level of support for such validation.
+                        <span class="cref">
+                            Specifying the Format-Annotation vocabulary and enabling validation in an
+                            implementation should not be viewed as being equivalent to specifying
+                            the Format-Assertion vocabulary since implementations are not required to
+                            provide full validation support when the Format-Assertion vocabulary
+                            is not specified.
+            </span><a href="#section-7.2.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.2.1-3">
+                        When the implementation is configured for assertion behavior, it:<a href="#section-7.2.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ul class="normal ulEmpty">
+<li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-7.2.1-4.1">
+                                SHOULD provide an implementation-specific best effort validation
+                                for each format attribute defined below;<a href="#section-7.2.1-4.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-7.2.1-4.2">
+                                MAY choose to implement validation of any or all format attributes
+                                as a no-op by always producing a validation result of true;<a href="#section-7.2.1-4.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+<p id="section-7.2.1-5">
+                        <span class="cref">
+                            This matches the current reality of implementations, which provide
+                            widely varying levels of validation, including no validation at all,
+                            for some or all format attributes.  It is also designed to encourage
+                            relying only on the annotation behavior and performing semantic
+                            validation in the application, which is the recommended best practice.
+            </span><a href="#section-7.2.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.2.2">
+          <h4 id="name-format-assertion-vocabulary">
+<a href="#section-7.2.2" class="section-number selfRef">7.2.2. </a><a href="#name-format-assertion-vocabulary" class="section-name selfRef">Format-Assertion Vocabulary</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-7.2.2-1">
+                        When the Format-Assertion vocabulary is declared with a value of true,
+                        implementations MUST provide full validation support for all of the formats
+                        defined by this specificaion. Implementations that cannot provide full
+                        validation support MUST refuse to process the schema.<a href="#section-7.2.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.2.2-2">
+                        An implementation that supports the Format-Assertion vocabulary:<a href="#section-7.2.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<ul class="normal ulEmpty">
+<li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-7.2.2-3.1">
+                                MUST still collect "format" as an annotation if the implementation
+                                supports annotation collection;<a href="#section-7.2.2-3.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-7.2.2-3.2">
+                                MUST evaluate "format" as an assertion;<a href="#section-7.2.2-3.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal ulEmpty" id="section-7.2.2-3.3">
+                                MUST implement syntactic validation for all format attributes defined
+                                in this specification, and for any additional format attributes that
+                                it recognizes, such that there exist possible instance values
+                                of the correct type that will fail validation.<a href="#section-7.2.2-3.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+<p id="section-7.2.2-4">
+                        The requirement for minimal validation of format attributes is intentionally
+                        vague and permissive, due to the complexity involved in many of the attributes.
+                        Note in particular that the requirement is limited to syntactic checking; it is
+                        not to be expected that an implementation would send an email, attempt to connect
+                        to a URL, or otherwise check the existence of an entity identified by a format
+                        instance.
+                        <span class="cref">
+                            The expectation is that for simple formats such as date-time, syntactic
+                            validation will be thorough.  For a complex format such as email addresses,
+                            which are the amalgamation of various standards and numerous adjustments
+                            over time, with obscure and/or obsolete rules that may or may not be
+                            restricted by other applications making use of the value, a minimal validation
+                            is sufficient.  For example, an instance string that does not contain
+                            an "@" is clearly not a valid email address, and an "email" or "hostname"
+                            containing characters outside of 7-bit ASCII is likewise clearly invalid.
+            </span><a href="#section-7.2.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.2.2-5">
+                        It is RECOMMENDED that implementations use a common parsing library for each format,
+                        or a well-known regular expression.  Implementations SHOULD clearly document
+                        how and to what degree each format attribute is validated.<a href="#section-7.2.2-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.2.2-6">
+                        The <span><a href="#meta-schema" class="xref">standard core and validation meta-schema</a> (<a href="#meta-schema" class="xref">Section 5</a>)</span>
+                        includes this vocabulary in its "$vocabulary" keyword with a value of false,
+                        since by default implementations are not required to support this keyword
+                        as an assertion.  Supporting the format vocabulary with a value of true is
+                        understood to greatly increase code size and in some cases execution time,
+                        and will not be appropriate for all implementations.<a href="#section-7.2.2-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.2.3">
+          <h4 id="name-custom-format-attributes">
+<a href="#section-7.2.3" class="section-number selfRef">7.2.3. </a><a href="#name-custom-format-attributes" class="section-name selfRef">Custom format attributes</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-7.2.3-1">
+                        Implementations MAY support custom format attributes. Save for agreement between
+                        parties, schema authors SHALL NOT expect a peer implementation to support such
+                        custom format attributes. An implementation MUST NOT fail to collect unknown formats
+                        as annotations.  When the Format-Assertion vocabulary is specified, implementations
+                        MUST fail upon encountering unknown formats.<a href="#section-7.2.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.2.3-2">
+                        Vocabularies do not support specifically declaring different value sets for keywords.
+                        Due to this limitation, and the historically uneven implementation of this keyword,
+                        it is RECOMMENDED to define additional keywords in a custom vocabulary rather than
+                        additional format attributes if interoperability is desired.<a href="#section-7.2.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.3">
+        <h3 id="name-defined-formats">
+<a href="#section-7.3" class="section-number selfRef">7.3. </a><a href="#name-defined-formats" class="section-name selfRef">Defined Formats</a>
+        </h3>
+<section id="section-7.3.1">
+          <h4 id="name-dates-times-and-duration">
+<a href="#section-7.3.1" class="section-number selfRef">7.3.1. </a><a href="#name-dates-times-and-duration" class="section-name selfRef">Dates, Times, and Duration</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-7.3.1-1">
+                        These attributes apply to string instances.<a href="#section-7.3.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.3.1-2">
+                        Date and time format names are derived from
+                        <span><a href="#RFC3339" class="xref">RFC 3339, section 5.6</a> [<a href="#RFC3339" class="xref">RFC3339</a>]</span>.
+                        The duration format is from the ISO 8601 ABNF as given
+                        in Appendix A of RFC 3339.<a href="#section-7.3.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.3.1-3">
+                        Implementations supporting formats SHOULD implement support for
+                        the following attributes:<a href="#section-7.3.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-7.3.1-4">
+            <dt id="section-7.3.1-4.1">date-time:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.1-4.2">
+                                A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is
+                                a valid representation according to the "date-time' ABNF rule
+                                (referenced above)<a href="#section-7.3.1-4.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-7.3.1-4.3">date:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.1-4.4">
+                                A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is
+                                a valid representation according to the "full-date" ABNF rule
+                                (referenced above)<a href="#section-7.3.1-4.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-7.3.1-4.5">time:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.1-4.6">
+                                A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is
+                                a valid representation according to the "full-time" ABNF rule
+                                (referenced above)<a href="#section-7.3.1-4.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-7.3.1-4.7">duration:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.1-4.8">
+                                A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is
+                                a valid representation according to the "duration" ABNF rule
+                                (referenced above)<a href="#section-7.3.1-4.8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+<p id="section-7.3.1-5">
+                        Implementations MAY support additional attributes using the other
+                        format names defined anywhere in that RFC.  If "full-date" or "full-time"
+                        are implemented, the corresponding short form ("date" or "time"
+                        respectively) MUST be implemented, and MUST behave identically.
+                        Implementations SHOULD NOT define extension attributes
+                        with any name matching an RFC 3339 format unless it validates
+                        according to the rules of that format.
+                        <span class="cref">
+                            There is not currently consensus on the need for supporting
+                            all RFC 3339 formats, so this approach of reserving the
+                            namespace will encourage experimentation without committing
+                            to the entire set.  Either the format implementation requirements
+                            will become more flexible in general, or these will likely
+                            either be promoted to fully specified attributes or dropped.
+            </span><a href="#section-7.3.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.3.2">
+          <h4 id="name-email-addresses">
+<a href="#section-7.3.2" class="section-number selfRef">7.3.2. </a><a href="#name-email-addresses" class="section-name selfRef">Email Addresses</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-7.3.2-1">
+                        These attributes apply to string instances.<a href="#section-7.3.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.3.2-2">
+                        A string instance is valid against these attributes if it is a valid
+                        Internet email address as follows:<a href="#section-7.3.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-7.3.2-3">
+            <dt id="section-7.3.2-3.1">email:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.2-3.2">
+                                As defined by the "Mailbox" ABNF rule in
+                                <span><a href="#RFC5321" class="xref">RFC 5321, section 4.1.2</a> [<a href="#RFC5321" class="xref">RFC5321</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-7.3.2-3.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-7.3.2-3.3">idn-email:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.2-3.4">
+                                As defined by the extended "Mailbox" ABNF rule in
+                                <span><a href="#RFC6531" class="xref">RFC 6531, section 3.3</a> [<a href="#RFC6531" class="xref">RFC6531</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-7.3.2-3.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+<p id="section-7.3.2-4">
+                        Note that all strings valid against the "email" attribute are also
+                        valid against the "idn-email" attribute.<a href="#section-7.3.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.3.3">
+          <h4 id="name-hostnames">
+<a href="#section-7.3.3" class="section-number selfRef">7.3.3. </a><a href="#name-hostnames" class="section-name selfRef">Hostnames</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-7.3.3-1">
+                        These attributes apply to string instances.<a href="#section-7.3.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.3.3-2">
+                        A string instance is valid against these attributes if it is a valid
+                        representation for an Internet hostname as follows:<a href="#section-7.3.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-7.3.3-3">
+            <dt id="section-7.3.3-3.1">hostname:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.3-3.2">
+                                As defined by <span><a href="#RFC1123" class="xref">RFC 1123, section 2.1</a> [<a href="#RFC1123" class="xref">RFC1123</a>]</span>,
+                                including host names produced using the Punycode algorithm
+                                specified in <span><a href="#RFC5891" class="xref">RFC 5891, section 4.4</a> [<a href="#RFC5891" class="xref">RFC5891</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-7.3.3-3.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-7.3.3-3.3">idn-hostname:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.3-3.4">
+                                As defined by either RFC 1123 as for hostname, or an
+                                internationalized hostname as defined by
+                                <span><a href="#RFC5890" class="xref">RFC 5890, section 2.3.2.3</a> [<a href="#RFC5890" class="xref">RFC5890</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-7.3.3-3.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+<p id="section-7.3.3-4">
+                        Note that all strings valid against the "hostname" attribute are also
+                        valid against the "idn-hostname" attribute.<a href="#section-7.3.3-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.3.4">
+          <h4 id="name-ip-addresses">
+<a href="#section-7.3.4" class="section-number selfRef">7.3.4. </a><a href="#name-ip-addresses" class="section-name selfRef">IP Addresses</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-7.3.4-1">
+                        These attributes apply to string instances.<a href="#section-7.3.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.3.4-2">
+                        A string instance is valid against these attributes if it is a valid
+                        representation of an IP address as follows:<a href="#section-7.3.4-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-7.3.4-3">
+            <dt id="section-7.3.4-3.1">ipv4:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.4-3.2">
+                                An IPv4 address according to the "dotted-quad" ABNF
+                                syntax as defined in
+                                <span><a href="#RFC2673" class="xref">RFC 2673, section 3.2</a> [<a href="#RFC2673" class="xref">RFC2673</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-7.3.4-3.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-7.3.4-3.3">ipv6:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.4-3.4">
+                                An IPv6 address as defined in
+                                <span><a href="#RFC4291" class="xref">RFC 4291, section 2.2</a> [<a href="#RFC4291" class="xref">RFC4291</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-7.3.4-3.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.3.5">
+          <h4 id="name-resource-identifiers">
+<a href="#section-7.3.5" class="section-number selfRef">7.3.5. </a><a href="#name-resource-identifiers" class="section-name selfRef">Resource Identifiers</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-7.3.5-1">
+                        These attributes apply to string instances.<a href="#section-7.3.5-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-7.3.5-2">
+            <dt id="section-7.3.5-2.1">uri:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.5-2.2">
+                                A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is
+                                a valid URI, according to <span>[<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-7.3.5-2.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-7.3.5-2.3">uri-reference:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.5-2.4">
+                                A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid URI
+                                Reference (either a URI or a relative-reference),
+                                according to <span>[<a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-7.3.5-2.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-7.3.5-2.5">iri:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.5-2.6">
+                                A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is
+                                a valid IRI, according to <span>[<a href="#RFC3987" class="xref">RFC3987</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-7.3.5-2.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-7.3.5-2.7">iri-reference:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.5-2.8">
+                                A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid IRI
+                                Reference (either an IRI or a relative-reference),
+                                according to <span>[<a href="#RFC3987" class="xref">RFC3987</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-7.3.5-2.8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-7.3.5-2.9">uuid:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.5-2.10">
+                                A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid
+                                string representation of a UUID, according to <span>[<a href="#RFC4122" class="xref">RFC4122</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-7.3.5-2.10" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+<p id="section-7.3.5-3">
+                        Note that all valid URIs are valid IRIs, and all valid URI References are
+                        also valid IRI References.<a href="#section-7.3.5-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.3.5-4">
+                        Note also that the "uuid" format is for plain UUIDs, not UUIDs in URNs.  An example
+                        is "f81d4fae-7dec-11d0-a765-00a0c91e6bf6".  For UUIDs as URNs, use the "uri" format,
+                        with a "pattern" regular expression of "^urn:uuid:" to indicate the URI scheme and
+                        URN namespace.<a href="#section-7.3.5-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.3.6">
+          <h4 id="name-uri-template">
+<a href="#section-7.3.6" class="section-number selfRef">7.3.6. </a><a href="#name-uri-template" class="section-name selfRef">uri-template</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-7.3.6-1">
+                        This attribute applies to string instances.<a href="#section-7.3.6-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.3.6-2">
+                        A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid URI Template
+                        (of any level), according to <span>[<a href="#RFC6570" class="xref">RFC6570</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-7.3.6-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.3.6-3">
+                        Note that URI Templates may be used for IRIs; there is no separate
+                        IRI Template specification.<a href="#section-7.3.6-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.3.7">
+          <h4 id="name-json-pointers">
+<a href="#section-7.3.7" class="section-number selfRef">7.3.7. </a><a href="#name-json-pointers" class="section-name selfRef">JSON Pointers</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-7.3.7-1">
+                        These attributes apply to string instances.<a href="#section-7.3.7-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-7.3.7-2">
+            <dt id="section-7.3.7-2.1">json-pointer:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.7-2.2">
+                                A string instance is valid against this attribute if it
+                                is a valid JSON string representation of a JSON Pointer,
+                                according to <span><a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901, section 5</a> [<a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC6901</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-7.3.7-2.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+            <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="section-7.3.7-2.3">relative-json-pointer:</dt>
+            <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-7.3.7-2.4">
+                                A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid
+                                <span><a href="#relative-json-pointer" class="xref">Relative JSON Pointer</a> [<a href="#relative-json-pointer" class="xref">relative-json-pointer</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-7.3.7-2.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+          <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+<p id="section-7.3.7-3">
+                        To allow for both absolute and relative JSON Pointers, use "anyOf" or
+                        "oneOf" to indicate support for either format.<a href="#section-7.3.7-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-7.3.8">
+          <h4 id="name-regex">
+<a href="#section-7.3.8" class="section-number selfRef">7.3.8. </a><a href="#name-regex" class="section-name selfRef">regex</a>
+          </h4>
+<p id="section-7.3.8-1">
+                        This attribute applies to string instances.<a href="#section-7.3.8-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.3.8-2">
+                        A regular expression, which SHOULD be valid according to the
+                        <span><a href="#ecma262" class="xref">ECMA-262</a> [<a href="#ecma262" class="xref">ecma262</a>]</span> regular expression dialect.<a href="#section-7.3.8-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-7.3.8-3">
+                        Implementations that validate formats MUST accept at least the subset of
+                        ECMA-262 defined in the <span><a href="#regexInterop" class="xref">Regular Expressions</a> (<a href="#regexInterop" class="xref">Section 4.3</a>)</span>
+                        section of this specification, and SHOULD accept all valid ECMA-262 expressions.<a href="#section-7.3.8-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+</section>
+</div>
+<div id="content">
+<section id="section-8">
+      <h2 id="name-a-vocabulary-for-the-conten">
+<a href="#section-8" class="section-number selfRef">8. </a><a href="#name-a-vocabulary-for-the-conten" class="section-name selfRef">A Vocabulary for the Contents of String-Encoded Data</a>
+      </h2>
+<section id="section-8.1">
+        <h3 id="name-foreword-2">
+<a href="#section-8.1" class="section-number selfRef">8.1. </a><a href="#name-foreword-2" class="section-name selfRef">Foreword</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-8.1-1">
+                    Annotations defined in this section indicate that an instance contains
+                    non-JSON data encoded in a JSON string.<a href="#section-8.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1-2">
+                    These properties provide additional information required to interpret JSON data
+                    as rich multimedia documents.  They describe the type of content, how it is encoded,
+                    and/or how it may be validated.  They do not function as validation assertions;
+                    a malformed string-encoded document MUST NOT cause the containing instance
+                    to be considered invalid.<a href="#section-8.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1-3">
+                    Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" SHOULD be considered to
+                    require this vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.<a href="#section-8.1-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1-4">
+                    The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Content vocabulary, is:
+                    &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/content&gt;.<a href="#section-8.1-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.1-5">
+                    The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is:
+                    <span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/content">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/content</a></span>.<a href="#section-8.1-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-8.2">
+        <h3 id="name-implementation-requirements-2">
+<a href="#section-8.2" class="section-number selfRef">8.2. </a><a href="#name-implementation-requirements-2" class="section-name selfRef">Implementation Requirements</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-8.2-1">
+                    Due to security and performance concerns, as well as the open-ended nature of
+                    possible content types, implementations MUST NOT automatically decode, parse,
+                    and/or validate the string contents by default.  This additionally supports
+                    the use case of embedded documents intended for processing by a different
+                    consumer than that which processed the containing document.<a href="#section-8.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2-2">
+                    All keywords in this section apply only to strings, and have no
+                    effect on other data types.<a href="#section-8.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2-3">
+                    Implementations MAY offer the ability to decode, parse, and/or validate
+                    the string contents automatically.  However, it MUST NOT perform these
+                    operations by default, and MUST provide the validation result of each
+                    string-encoded document separately from the enclosing document.  This
+                    process SHOULD be equivalent to fully evaluating the instance against
+                    the original schema, followed by using the annotations to decode, parse,
+                    and/or validate each string-encoded document.
+                    <span class="cref">
+                        For now, the exact mechanism of performing and returning parsed
+                        data and/or validation results from such an automatic decoding, parsing,
+                        and validating feature is left unspecified.  Should such a feature
+                        prove popular, it may be specified more thoroughly in a future draft.
+          </span><a href="#section-8.2-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.2-4">
+                    See also the <span><a href="#security" class="xref">Security Considerations</a> (<a href="#security" class="xref">Section 10</a>)</span>
+                    sections for possible vulnerabilities introduced by automatically
+                    processing the instance string according to these keywords.<a href="#section-8.2-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-8.3">
+        <h3 id="name-contentencoding">
+<a href="#section-8.3" class="section-number selfRef">8.3. </a><a href="#name-contentencoding" class="section-name selfRef">contentEncoding</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-8.3-1">
+                    If the instance value is a string, this property defines that the string
+                    SHOULD be interpreted as encoded binary data and decoded using the encoding
+                    named by this property.<a href="#section-8.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.3-2">
+                    Possible values indicating base 16, 32, and 64 encodings with several
+                    variations are listed in <span><a href="#RFC4648" class="xref">RFC 4648</a> [<a href="#RFC4648" class="xref">RFC4648</a>]</span>.  Additionally,
+                    sections 6.7 and 6.8 of <span><a href="#RFC2045" class="xref">RFC 2045</a> [<a href="#RFC2045" class="xref">RFC2045</a>]</span> provide
+                    encodings used in MIME. This keyword is derived from MIME's
+                    Content-Transfer-Encoding header, which was designed to map binary data
+                    into ASCII characters.  It is not related to HTTP's Content-Encoding header,
+                    which is used to encode (e.g. compress or encrypt)
+                    the content of HTTP request and responses.<a href="#section-8.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.3-3">
+                    As "base64" is defined in both RFCs, the definition
+                    from RFC 4648 SHOULD be assumed unless the string is specifically intended
+                    for use in a MIME context.  Note that all of these encodings result in
+                    strings consisting only of 7-bit ASCII characters.  Therefore, this keyword
+                    has no meaning for strings containing characters outside of that range.<a href="#section-8.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.3-4">
+                    If this keyword is absent, but "contentMediaType" is present, this
+                    indicates that the encoding is the identity encoding, meaning that
+                    no transformation was needed in order to represent the content in
+                    a UTF-8 string.<a href="#section-8.3-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.3-5">
+                    The value of this property MUST be a string.<a href="#section-8.3-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-8.4">
+        <h3 id="name-contentmediatype">
+<a href="#section-8.4" class="section-number selfRef">8.4. </a><a href="#name-contentmediatype" class="section-name selfRef">contentMediaType</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-8.4-1">
+                    If the instance is a string, this property indicates the media type
+                    of the contents of the string.  If "contentEncoding" is present,
+                    this property describes the decoded string.<a href="#section-8.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.4-2">
+                    The value of this property MUST be a string, which MUST be a media type,
+                    as defined by <span><a href="#RFC2046" class="xref">RFC 2046</a> [<a href="#RFC2046" class="xref">RFC2046</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-8.4-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-8.5">
+        <h3 id="name-contentschema">
+<a href="#section-8.5" class="section-number selfRef">8.5. </a><a href="#name-contentschema" class="section-name selfRef">contentSchema</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-8.5-1">
+                    If the instance is a string, and if "contentMediaType" is present, this
+                    property contains a schema which describes the structure of the string.<a href="#section-8.5-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.5-2">
+                    This keyword MAY be used with any media type that can be mapped into
+                    JSON Schema's data model.<a href="#section-8.5-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.5-3">
+                    The value of this property MUST be a valid JSON schema. It SHOULD be ignored if
+                    "contentMediaType" is not present.<a href="#section-8.5-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-8.6">
+        <h3 id="name-example">
+<a href="#section-8.6" class="section-number selfRef">8.6. </a><a href="#name-example" class="section-name selfRef">Example</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-8.6-1" class="keepWithNext">
+                        Here is an example schema, illustrating the use of "contentEncoding" and
+                        "contentMediaType":<a href="#section-8.6-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-8.6-2">
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": "string",
+    "contentEncoding": "base64",
+    "contentMediaType": "image/png"
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#section-8.6-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="section-8.6-3" class="keepWithPrevious">
+                        Instances described by this schema are expected to be strings,
+                        and their values should be interpretable as base64-encoded PNG images.<a href="#section-8.6-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.6-4" class="keepWithNext">
+                        Another example:<a href="#section-8.6-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-8.6-5">
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": "string",
+    "contentMediaType": "text/html"
+}
+
+</pre><a href="#section-8.6-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="section-8.6-6" class="keepWithPrevious">
+                        Instances described by this schema are expected to be strings containing HTML,
+                        using whatever character set the JSON string was decoded into.
+                        Per section 8.1 of
+                        <span><a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC 8259</a> [<a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC8259</a>]</span>, outside of an entirely closed
+                        system, this MUST be UTF-8.<a href="#section-8.6-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-8.6-7" class="keepWithNext">
+                        This example describes a JWT that is MACed using the HMAC SHA-256
+                        algorithm, and requires the "iss" and "exp" fields in its claim set.<a href="#section-8.6-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-8.6-8">
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": "string",
+    "contentMediaType": "application/jwt",
+    "contentSchema": {
+        "type": "array",
+        "minItems": 2,
+        "prefixItems": [
+            {
+                "const": {
+                    "typ": "JWT",
+                    "alg": "HS256"
+                }
+            },
+            {
+                "type": "object",
+                "required": ["iss", "exp"],
+                "properties": {
+                    "iss": {"type": "string"},
+                    "exp": {"type": "integer"}
+                }
+            }
+        ]
+    }
+}
+</pre><a href="#section-8.6-8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</div>
+<p id="section-8.6-9" class="keepWithPrevious">
+                        Note that "contentEncoding" does not appear.  While the "application/jwt"
+                        media type makes use of base64url encoding, that is defined by the media
+                        type, which determines how the JWT string is decoded into a list of two
+                        JSON data structures: first the header, and then the payload.  Since the
+                        JWT media type ensures that the JWT can be represented in a JSON string,
+                        there is no need for further encoding or decoding.<a href="#section-8.6-9" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-9">
+      <h2 id="name-a-vocabulary-for-basic-meta">
+<a href="#section-9" class="section-number selfRef">9. </a><a href="#name-a-vocabulary-for-basic-meta" class="section-name selfRef">A Vocabulary for Basic Meta-Data Annotations</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-9-1">
+                These general-purpose annotation keywords provide commonly used information
+                for documentation and user interface display purposes.  They are not intended
+                to form a comprehensive set of features.  Rather, additional vocabularies
+                can be defined for more complex annotation-based applications.<a href="#section-9-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9-2">
+                Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" SHOULD be considered to
+                require this vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.<a href="#section-9-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9-3">
+                The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Meta-Data vocabulary, is:
+                &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/meta-data&gt;.<a href="#section-9-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9-4">
+                The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is:
+                <span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/meta-data">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/meta-data</a></span>.<a href="#section-9-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<section id="section-9.1">
+        <h3 id="name-title-and-description">
+<a href="#section-9.1" class="section-number selfRef">9.1. </a><a href="#name-title-and-description" class="section-name selfRef">"title" and "description"</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-9.1-1">
+                    The value of both of these keywords MUST be a string.<a href="#section-9.1-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.1-2">
+                    Both of these keywords can be used to decorate a user interface with
+                    information about the data produced by this user interface. A title will
+                    preferably be short, whereas a description will provide explanation about
+                    the purpose of the instance described by this schema.<a href="#section-9.1-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-9.2">
+        <h3 id="name-default">
+<a href="#section-9.2" class="section-number selfRef">9.2. </a><a href="#name-default" class="section-name selfRef">"default"</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-9.2-1">
+                    There are no restrictions placed on the value of this keyword.  When
+                    multiple occurrences of this keyword are applicable to a single
+                    sub-instance, implementations SHOULD remove duplicates.<a href="#section-9.2-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.2-2">
+                    This keyword can be used to supply a default JSON value associated with a
+                    particular schema. It is RECOMMENDED that a default value be valid against
+                    the associated schema.<a href="#section-9.2-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-9.3">
+        <h3 id="name-deprecated">
+<a href="#section-9.3" class="section-number selfRef">9.3. </a><a href="#name-deprecated" class="section-name selfRef">"deprecated"</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-9.3-1">
+                    The value of this keyword MUST be a boolean.  When multiple occurrences
+                    of this keyword are applicable to a single sub-instance, applications
+                    SHOULD consider the instance location to be deprecated if any occurrence
+                    specifies a true value.<a href="#section-9.3-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.3-2">
+                    If "deprecated" has a value of boolean true, it indicates that applications
+                    SHOULD refrain from usage of the declared property. It MAY mean the property
+                    is going to be removed in the future.<a href="#section-9.3-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.3-3">
+                    A root schema containing "deprecated" with a value of true indicates that
+                    the entire resource being described MAY be removed in the future.<a href="#section-9.3-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.3-4">
+                    The "deprecated" keyword applies to each instance location to which the
+                    schema object containing the keyword successfully applies.  This can
+                    result in scenarios where every array item or object property
+                    is deprecated even though the containing array or object is not.<a href="#section-9.3-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.3-5">
+                    Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of false.<a href="#section-9.3-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-9.4">
+        <h3 id="name-readonly-and-writeonly">
+<a href="#section-9.4" class="section-number selfRef">9.4. </a><a href="#name-readonly-and-writeonly" class="section-name selfRef">"readOnly" and "writeOnly"</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-9.4-1">
+                    The value of these keywords MUST be a boolean.  When multiple occurrences
+                    of these keywords are applicable to a single sub-instance, the resulting
+                    behavior SHOULD be as for a true value if any occurrence specifies a true value,
+                    and SHOULD be as for a false value otherwise.<a href="#section-9.4-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.4-2">
+                    If "readOnly" has a value of boolean true, it indicates that the value
+                    of the instance is managed exclusively by the owning authority, and
+                    attempts by an application to modify the value of this property are
+                    expected to be ignored or rejected by that owning authority.<a href="#section-9.4-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.4-3">
+                    An instance document that is marked as "readOnly" for the entire document
+                    MAY be ignored if sent to the owning authority, or MAY result in an
+                    error, at the authority's discretion.<a href="#section-9.4-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.4-4">
+                    If "writeOnly" has a value of boolean true, it indicates that the value
+                    is never present when the instance is retrieved from the owning authority.
+                    It can be present when sent to the owning authority to update or create
+                    the document (or the resource it represents), but it will not be included
+                    in any updated or newly created version of the instance.<a href="#section-9.4-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.4-5">
+                    An instance document that is marked as "writeOnly" for the entire document
+                    MAY be returned as a blank document of some sort, or MAY produce an error
+                    upon retrieval, or have the retrieval request ignored, at the authority's
+                    discretion.<a href="#section-9.4-5" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.4-6">
+                    For example, "readOnly" would be used to mark a database-generated serial
+                    number as read-only, while "writeOnly" would be used to mark a password
+                    input field.<a href="#section-9.4-6" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.4-7">
+                    These keywords can be used to assist in user interface instance generation.
+                    In particular, an application MAY choose to use a widget that hides
+                    input values as they are typed for write-only fields.<a href="#section-9.4-7" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.4-8">
+                    Omitting these keywords has the same behavior as values of false.<a href="#section-9.4-8" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="section-9.5">
+        <h3 id="name-examples">
+<a href="#section-9.5" class="section-number selfRef">9.5. </a><a href="#name-examples" class="section-name selfRef">"examples"</a>
+        </h3>
+<p id="section-9.5-1">
+                    The value of this keyword MUST be an array.
+                    There are no restrictions placed on the values within the array.
+                    When multiple occurrences of this keyword are applicable to a single
+                    sub-instance, implementations MUST provide a flat array of all
+                    values rather than an array of arrays.<a href="#section-9.5-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.5-2">
+                    This keyword can be used to provide sample JSON values associated with a
+                    particular schema, for the purpose of illustrating usage.  It is
+                    RECOMMENDED that these values be valid against the associated schema.<a href="#section-9.5-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-9.5-3">
+                    Implementations MAY use the value(s) of "default", if present, as
+                    an additional example.  If "examples" is absent, "default"
+                    MAY still be used in this manner.<a href="#section-9.5-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</section>
+<div id="security">
+<section id="section-10">
+      <h2 id="name-security-considerations">
+<a href="#section-10" class="section-number selfRef">10. </a><a href="#name-security-considerations" class="section-name selfRef">Security Considerations</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="section-10-1">
+                JSON Schema validation defines a vocabulary for JSON Schema core and concerns all
+                the security considerations listed there.<a href="#section-10-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10-2">
+                JSON Schema validation allows the use of Regular Expressions, which have numerous
+                different (often incompatible) implementations.
+                Some implementations allow the embedding of arbitrary code, which is outside the
+                scope of JSON Schema and MUST NOT be permitted.
+                Regular expressions can often also be crafted to be extremely expensive to compute
+                (with so-called "catastrophic backtracking"), resulting in a denial-of-service
+                attack.<a href="#section-10-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10-3">
+                Implementations that support validating or otherwise evaluating instance
+                string data based on "contentEncoding" and/or "contentMediaType" are at
+                risk of evaluating data in an unsafe way based on misleading information.
+                Applications can mitigate this risk by only performing such processing
+                when a relationship between the schema and instance is established
+                (e.g., they share the same authority).<a href="#section-10-3" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="section-10-4">
+                Processing a media type or encoding is subject to the security considerations
+                of that media type or encoding.  For example, the security considerations
+                of <span><a href="#RFC4329" class="xref">RFC 4329 Scripting Media Types</a> [<a href="#RFC4329" class="xref">RFC4329</a>]</span> apply when
+                processing JavaScript or ECMAScript encoded within a JSON string.<a href="#section-10-4" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+</div>
+<section id="section-11">
+      <h2 id="name-references">
+<a href="#section-11" class="section-number selfRef">11. </a><a href="#name-references" class="section-name selfRef">References</a>
+      </h2>
+<section id="section-11.1">
+        <h3 id="name-normative-references">
+<a href="#section-11.1" class="section-number selfRef">11.1. </a><a href="#name-normative-references" class="section-name selfRef">Normative References</a>
+        </h3>
+<dl class="references">
+<dt id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Bradner, S.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">BCP 14</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 2119</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC2119</span>, <time datetime="1997-03" class="refDate">March 1997</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC1123">[RFC1123]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Braden, R., Ed.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Requirements for Internet Hosts - Application and Support"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">STD 3</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 1123</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC1123</span>, <time datetime="1989-10" class="refDate">October 1989</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1123">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1123</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC2045">[RFC2045]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Freed, N.</span> and <span class="refAuthor">N. Borenstein</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 2045</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC2045</span>, <time datetime="1996-11" class="refDate">November 1996</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2045">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2045</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC2046">[RFC2046]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Freed, N.</span> and <span class="refAuthor">N. Borenstein</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 2046</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC2046</span>, <time datetime="1996-11" class="refDate">November 1996</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2046">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2046</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC2673">[RFC2673]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Crawford, M.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Binary Labels in the Domain Name System"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 2673</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC2673</span>, <time datetime="1999-08" class="refDate">August 1999</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2673">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2673</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC3339">[RFC3339]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Klyne, G.</span> and <span class="refAuthor">C. Newman</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 3339</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC3339</span>, <time datetime="2002-07" class="refDate">July 2002</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3339">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3339</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC3986">[RFC3986]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Berners-Lee, T.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Fielding, R.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">L. Masinter</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">STD 66</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 3986</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC3986</span>, <time datetime="2005-01" class="refDate">January 2005</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC3987">[RFC3987]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Duerst, M.</span> and <span class="refAuthor">M. Suignard</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs)"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 3987</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC3987</span>, <time datetime="2005-01" class="refDate">January 2005</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3987">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3987</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC4122">[RFC4122]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Leach, P.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Mealling, M.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">R. Salz</span>, <span class="refTitle">"A Universally Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 4122</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC4122</span>, <time datetime="2005-07" class="refDate">July 2005</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4122">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4122</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC4291">[RFC4291]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Hinden, R.</span> and <span class="refAuthor">S. Deering</span>, <span class="refTitle">"IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 4291</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC4291</span>, <time datetime="2006-02" class="refDate">February 2006</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4291">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4291</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC4648">[RFC4648]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Josefsson, S.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data Encodings"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 4648</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC4648</span>, <time datetime="2006-10" class="refDate">October 2006</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4648">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4648</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC5321">[RFC5321]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Klensin, J.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Simple Mail Transfer Protocol"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 5321</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC5321</span>, <time datetime="2008-10" class="refDate">October 2008</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5321">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5321</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC5890">[RFC5890]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Klensin, J.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 5890</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC5890</span>, <time datetime="2010-08" class="refDate">August 2010</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5890">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5890</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC5891">[RFC5891]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Klensin, J.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Internationalized Domain Names in Applications (IDNA): Protocol"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 5891</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC5891</span>, <time datetime="2010-08" class="refDate">August 2010</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5891">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5891</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC6570">[RFC6570]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Gregorio, J.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Fielding, R.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Hadley, M.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Nottingham, M.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">D. Orchard</span>, <span class="refTitle">"URI Template"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 6570</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC6570</span>, <time datetime="2012-03" class="refDate">March 2012</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6570">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6570</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC6531">[RFC6531]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Yao, J.</span> and <span class="refAuthor">W. Mao</span>, <span class="refTitle">"SMTP Extension for Internationalized Email"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 6531</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC6531</span>, <time datetime="2012-02" class="refDate">February 2012</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6531">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6531</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC6901">[RFC6901]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Bryan, P., Ed.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Zyp, K.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">M. Nottingham, Ed.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Pointer"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 6901</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC6901</span>, <time datetime="2013-04" class="refDate">April 2013</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6901">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6901</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="RFC8259">[RFC8259]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Bray, T., Ed.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">STD 90</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 8259</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC8259</span>, <time datetime="2017-12" class="refDate">December 2017</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="ecma262">[ecma262]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refTitle">"ECMA-262, 11th edition specification"</span>, <time datetime="2020-06" class="refDate">June 2020</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/11.0">https://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/11.0</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="relative-json-pointer">[relative-json-pointer]</dt>
+        <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Luff, G.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Andrews, H.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">B. Hutton, Ed.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Relative JSON Pointers"</span>, <span class="refContent">Work in Progress</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">Internet-Draft, draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01</span>, <time datetime="2020-12" class="refDate">December 2020</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="json-schema">[json-schema]</dt>
+      <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Wright, A.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Andrews, H.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Hutton, B.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">G. Dennis</span>, <span class="refTitle">"JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents"</span>, <span class="refContent">Work in Progress</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">Internet-Draft, draft-bhutton-json-schema-01</span>, <time datetime="2022-06" class="refDate">June 2022</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-01">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-01</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+</section>
+<section id="section-11.2">
+        <h3 id="name-informative-references">
+<a href="#section-11.2" class="section-number selfRef">11.2. </a><a href="#name-informative-references" class="section-name selfRef">Informative References</a>
+        </h3>
+<dl class="references">
+<dt id="RFC4329">[RFC4329]</dt>
+      <dd>
+<span class="refAuthor">Hoehrmann, B.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Scripting Media Types"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 4329</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC4329</span>, <time datetime="2006-04" class="refDate">April 2006</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4329">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4329</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
+<dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+</section>
+</section>
+<section id="appendix-A">
+      <h2 id="name-keywords-moved-from-validat">
+<a href="#appendix-A" class="section-number selfRef">Appendix A. </a><a href="#name-keywords-moved-from-validat" class="section-name selfRef">Keywords Moved from Validation to Core</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="appendix-A-1">
+                Several keywords have been moved from this document into the
+                <span><a href="#json-schema" class="xref">Core Specification</a> [<a href="#json-schema" class="xref">json-schema</a>]</span> as of this draft, in some
+                cases with re-naming or other changes.  This affects the following former
+                validation keywords:<a href="#appendix-A-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="appendix-A-2">
+        <dt id="appendix-A-2.1">"definitions"</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-2.2">
+                        Renamed to "$defs" to match "$ref" and be shorter to type.
+                        Schema vocabulary authors SHOULD NOT define a "definitions" keyword
+                        with different behavior in order to avoid invalidating schemas that
+                        still use the older name.  While "definitions" is absent in the
+                        single-vocabulary meta-schemas referenced by this document, it
+                        remains present in the default meta-schema, and implementations
+                        SHOULD assume that "$defs" and "definitions" have the same
+                        behavior when that meta-schema is used.<a href="#appendix-A-2.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-2.3">"allOf", "anyOf", "oneOf", "not", "if", "then", "else",                                  "items", "additionalItems", "contains", "propertyNames",                                  "properties", "patternProperties", "additionalProperties"</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-2.4">
+                        All of these keywords apply subschemas to the instance and combine
+                        their results, without asserting any conditions of their own.
+                        Without assertion keywords, these applicators can only cause assertion
+                        failures by using the false boolean schema, or by inverting the result
+                        of the true boolean schema (or equivalent schema objects).
+                        For this reason, they are better defined as a generic mechanism on which
+                        validation, hyper-schema, and extension vocabularies can all be based.<a href="#appendix-A-2.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-A-2.5">"dependencies"</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-A-2.6">
+                        This keyword had two different modes of behavior, which made it
+                        relatively challenging to implement and reason about.
+                        The schema form has been moved to Core and renamed to
+                        "dependentSchemas", as part of the applicator vocabulary.
+                        It is analogous to "properties", except that instead of applying
+                        its subschema to the property value, it applies it to the object
+                        containing the property.
+                        The property name array form is retained here and renamed to
+                        "dependentRequired", as it is an assertion which is a shortcut
+                        for the conditional use of the "required" assertion keyword.<a href="#appendix-A-2.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</dd>
+      <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+</section>
+<section id="appendix-B">
+      <h2 id="name-acknowledgments">
+<a href="#appendix-B" class="section-number selfRef">Appendix B. </a><a href="#name-acknowledgments" class="section-name selfRef">Acknowledgments</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="appendix-B-1">
+                Thanks to
+                Gary Court,
+                Francis Galiegue,
+                Kris Zyp,
+                and Geraint Luff
+                for their work on the initial drafts of JSON Schema.<a href="#appendix-B-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<p id="appendix-B-2">
+                Thanks to
+                Jason Desrosiers,
+                Daniel Perrett,
+                Erik Wilde,
+                Evgeny Poberezkin,
+                Brad Bowman,
+                Gowry Sankar,
+                Donald Pipowitch,
+                Dave Finlay,
+                Denis Laxalde,
+                Phil Sturgeon,
+                Shawn Silverman,
+                and Karen Etheridge
+                for their submissions and patches to the document.<a href="#appendix-B-2" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+</section>
+<section id="appendix-C">
+      <h2 id="name-changelog">
+<a href="#appendix-C" class="section-number selfRef">Appendix C. </a><a href="#name-changelog" class="section-name selfRef">ChangeLog</a>
+      </h2>
+<p id="appendix-C-1">
+                <span class="cref">This section to be removed before leaving Internet-Draft status.</span><a href="#appendix-C-1" class="pilcrow">¶</a></p>
+<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="appendix-C-2">
+        <dt id="appendix-C-2.1">draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-01</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-C-2.2">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.2.1.1">Improve and clarify the "minContains" keyword explanation<a href="#appendix-C-2.2.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.2.1.2">Remove the use of "production" in favour of "ABNF rule"<a href="#appendix-C-2.2.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-C-2.3">draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-00</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-C-2.4">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.4.1.1">Correct email format RFC reference to 5321 instead of 5322<a href="#appendix-C-2.4.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.4.1.2">Clarified the set and meaning of "contentEncoding" values<a href="#appendix-C-2.4.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.4.1.3">Reference ECMA-262, 11th edition for regular expression support<a href="#appendix-C-2.4.1.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.4.1.4">Split "format" into an annotation only vocabulary and an assertion vocabulary<a href="#appendix-C-2.4.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.4.1.5">Clarify "deprecated" when applicable to arrays<a href="#appendix-C-2.4.1.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-C-2.5">draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-02</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-C-2.6">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.6.1.1">Grouped keywords into formal vocabularies<a href="#appendix-C-2.6.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.6.1.2">Update "format" implementation requirements in terms of vocabularies<a href="#appendix-C-2.6.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.6.1.3">By default, "format" MUST NOT be validated, although validation can be enabled<a href="#appendix-C-2.6.1.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.6.1.4">A vocabulary declaration can be used to require "format" validation<a href="#appendix-C-2.6.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.6.1.5">Moved "definitions" to the core spec as "$defs"<a href="#appendix-C-2.6.1.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.6.1.6">Moved applicator keywords to the core spec<a href="#appendix-C-2.6.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.6.1.7">Renamed the array form of "dependencies" to "dependentRequired", moved the schema form to the core spec<a href="#appendix-C-2.6.1.7" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.6.1.8">Specified all "content*" keywords as annotations, not assertions<a href="#appendix-C-2.6.1.8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.6.1.9">Added "contentSchema" to allow applying a schema to a string-encoded document<a href="#appendix-C-2.6.1.9" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.6.1.10">Also allow RFC 4648 encodings in "contentEncoding"<a href="#appendix-C-2.6.1.10" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.6.1.11">Added "minContains" and "maxContains"<a href="#appendix-C-2.6.1.11" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.6.1.12">Update RFC reference for "hostname" and "idn-hostname"<a href="#appendix-C-2.6.1.12" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.6.1.13">Add "uuid" and "duration" formats<a href="#appendix-C-2.6.1.13" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-C-2.7">draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-C-2.8">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.8.1.1">This draft is purely a clarification with no functional changes<a href="#appendix-C-2.8.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.8.1.2">Provided the general principle behind ignoring annotations under "not" and similar cases<a href="#appendix-C-2.8.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.8.1.3">Clarified "if"/"then"/"else" validation interactions<a href="#appendix-C-2.8.1.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.8.1.4">Clarified "if"/"then"/"else" behavior for annotation<a href="#appendix-C-2.8.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.8.1.5">Minor formatting and cross-referencing improvements<a href="#appendix-C-2.8.1.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-C-2.9">draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-00</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-C-2.10">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.10.1.1">Added "if"/"then"/"else"<a href="#appendix-C-2.10.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.10.1.2">Classify keywords as assertions or annotations per the core spec<a href="#appendix-C-2.10.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.10.1.3">Warn of possibly removing "dependencies" in the future<a href="#appendix-C-2.10.1.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.10.1.4">Grouped validation keywords into sub-sections for readability<a href="#appendix-C-2.10.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.10.1.5">Moved "readOnly" from hyper-schema to validation meta-data<a href="#appendix-C-2.10.1.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.10.1.6">Added "writeOnly"<a href="#appendix-C-2.10.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.10.1.7">Added string-encoded media section, with former hyper-schema "media" keywords<a href="#appendix-C-2.10.1.7" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.10.1.8">Restored "regex" format (removal was unintentional)<a href="#appendix-C-2.10.1.8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.10.1.9">Added "date" and "time" formats, and reserved additional RFC 3339 format names<a href="#appendix-C-2.10.1.9" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.10.1.10">I18N formats: "iri", "iri-reference", "idn-hostname", "idn-email"<a href="#appendix-C-2.10.1.10" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.10.1.11">Clarify that "json-pointer" format means string encoding, not URI fragment<a href="#appendix-C-2.10.1.11" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.10.1.12">Fixed typo that inverted the meaning of "minimum" and "exclusiveMinimum"<a href="#appendix-C-2.10.1.12" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.10.1.13">Move format syntax references into Normative References<a href="#appendix-C-2.10.1.13" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.10.1.14">JSON is a normative requirement<a href="#appendix-C-2.10.1.14" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-C-2.11">draft-wright-json-schema-validation-01</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-C-2.12">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.12.1.1">Standardized on hyphenated format names with full words ("uriref" becomes "uri-reference")<a href="#appendix-C-2.12.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.12.1.2">Add the formats "uri-template" and "json-pointer"<a href="#appendix-C-2.12.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.12.1.3">Changed "exclusiveMaximum"/"exclusiveMinimum" from boolean modifiers of "maximum"/"minimum" to independent numeric fields.<a href="#appendix-C-2.12.1.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.12.1.4">Split the additionalItems/items into two sections<a href="#appendix-C-2.12.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.12.1.5">Reworked properties/patternProperties/additionalProperties definition<a href="#appendix-C-2.12.1.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.12.1.6">Added "examples" keyword<a href="#appendix-C-2.12.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.12.1.7">Added "contains" keyword<a href="#appendix-C-2.12.1.7" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.12.1.8">Allow empty "required" and "dependencies" arrays<a href="#appendix-C-2.12.1.8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.12.1.9">Fixed "type" reference to primitive types<a href="#appendix-C-2.12.1.9" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.12.1.10">Added "const" keyword<a href="#appendix-C-2.12.1.10" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.12.1.11">Added "propertyNames" keyword<a href="#appendix-C-2.12.1.11" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-C-2.13">draft-wright-json-schema-validation-00</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-C-2.14">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.14.1.1">Added additional security considerations<a href="#appendix-C-2.14.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.14.1.2">Removed reference to "latest version" meta-schema, use numbered version instead<a href="#appendix-C-2.14.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.14.1.3">Rephrased many keyword definitions for brevity<a href="#appendix-C-2.14.1.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.14.1.4">Added "uriref" format that also allows relative URI references<a href="#appendix-C-2.14.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+        <dd class="break"></dd>
+<dt id="appendix-C-2.15">draft-fge-json-schema-validation-00</dt>
+        <dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="appendix-C-2.16">
+          <ul class="normal">
+<li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.16.1.1">Initial draft.<a href="#appendix-C-2.16.1.1" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.16.1.2">Salvaged from draft v3.<a href="#appendix-C-2.16.1.2" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.16.1.3">Redefine the "required" keyword.<a href="#appendix-C-2.16.1.3" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.16.1.4">Remove "extends", "disallow"<a href="#appendix-C-2.16.1.4" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.16.1.5">Add "anyOf", "allOf", "oneOf", "not", "definitions", "minProperties",
+                            "maxProperties".<a href="#appendix-C-2.16.1.5" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.16.1.6">"dependencies" member values can no longer be single strings; at
+                            least one element is required in a property dependency array.<a href="#appendix-C-2.16.1.6" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.16.1.7">Rename "divisibleBy" to "multipleOf".<a href="#appendix-C-2.16.1.7" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.16.1.8">"type" arrays can no longer have schemas; remove "any" as a possible
+                            value.<a href="#appendix-C-2.16.1.8" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.16.1.9">Rework the "format" section; make support optional.<a href="#appendix-C-2.16.1.9" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.16.1.10">"format": remove attributes "phone", "style", "color"; rename
+                            "ip-address" to "ipv4"; add references for all attributes.<a href="#appendix-C-2.16.1.10" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.16.1.11">Provide algorithms to calculate schema(s) for array/object
+                            instances.<a href="#appendix-C-2.16.1.11" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+            <li class="normal" id="appendix-C-2.16.1.12">Add interoperability considerations.<a href="#appendix-C-2.16.1.12" class="pilcrow">¶</a>
+</li>
+          </ul>
+</dd>
+      <dd class="break"></dd>
+</dl>
+</section>
+<div id="authors-addresses">
+<section id="appendix-D">
+      <h2 id="name-authors-addresses">
+<a href="#name-authors-addresses" class="section-name selfRef">Authors' Addresses</a>
+      </h2>
+<address class="vcard">
+        <div dir="auto" class="left"><span class="fn nameRole">Austin Wright (<span class="role">editor</span>)</span></div>
+<div class="email">
+<span>Email:</span>
+<a href="mailto:aaa@bzfx.net" class="email">aaa@bzfx.net</a>
+</div>
+</address>
+<address class="vcard">
+        <div dir="auto" class="left"><span class="fn nameRole">Henry Andrews (<span class="role">editor</span>)</span></div>
+<div class="email">
+<span>Email:</span>
+<a href="mailto:andrews_henry@yahoo.com" class="email">andrews_henry@yahoo.com</a>
+</div>
+</address>
+<address class="vcard">
+        <div dir="auto" class="left"><span class="fn nameRole">Ben Hutton (<span class="role">editor</span>)</span></div>
+<div dir="auto" class="left"><span class="org">Postman</span></div>
+<div class="email">
+<span>Email:</span>
+<a href="mailto:ben@jsonschema.dev" class="email">ben@jsonschema.dev</a>
+</div>
+<div class="url">
+<span>URI:</span>
+<a href="https://jsonschema.dev" class="url">https://jsonschema.dev</a>
+</div>
+</address>
+</section>
+</div>
+<script>const toc = document.getElementById("toc");
+toc.querySelector("h2").addEventListener("click", e => {
+  toc.classList.toggle("active");
+});
+toc.querySelector("nav").addEventListener("click", e => {
+  toc.classList.remove("active");
+});
+</script>
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/links b/draft/2020-12/links
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..f36c1c0d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/links
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../_includes/draft/2020-12/links.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/meta/applicator b/draft/2020-12/meta/applicator
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..8fd44f54
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/meta/applicator
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2020-12/meta/applicator.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/meta/content b/draft/2020-12/meta/content
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..784c2c5e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/meta/content
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2020-12/meta/content.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/meta/core b/draft/2020-12/meta/core
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..acdf0634
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/meta/core
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2020-12/meta/core.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/meta/format-annotation b/draft/2020-12/meta/format-annotation
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..1264ea08
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/meta/format-annotation
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2020-12/meta/format-annotation.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/meta/format-assertion b/draft/2020-12/meta/format-assertion
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..b31c612b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/meta/format-assertion
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2020-12/meta/format-assertion.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/meta/hyper-schema b/draft/2020-12/meta/hyper-schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..29e3d6ac
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/meta/hyper-schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2020-12/meta/hyper-schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/meta/meta-data b/draft/2020-12/meta/meta-data
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..49e5296e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/meta/meta-data
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2020-12/meta/meta-data.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/meta/unevaluated b/draft/2020-12/meta/unevaluated
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..fbd3c938
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/meta/unevaluated
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2020-12/meta/unevaluated.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/meta/validation b/draft/2020-12/meta/validation
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..90f062f1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/meta/validation
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2020-12/meta/validation.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/obsolete/json-schema-core.html b/draft/2020-12/obsolete/json-schema-core.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..3feb6057
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/obsolete/json-schema-core.html
@@ -0,0 +1,2530 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
+  "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
+<head profile="http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/">
+  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" />
+
+  <title>JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents</title>
+
+  <style type="text/css" title="Xml2Rfc (sans serif)">
+  /*<![CDATA[*/
+	  a {
+	  text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+      /* info code from SantaKlauss at http://www.madaboutstyle.com/tooltip2.html */
+      a.info {
+          /* This is the key. */
+          position: relative;
+          z-index: 24;
+          text-decoration: none;
+      }
+      a.info:hover {
+          z-index: 25;
+          color: #FFF; background-color: #900;
+      }
+      a.info span { display: none; }
+      a.info:hover span.info {
+          /* The span will display just on :hover state. */
+          display: block;
+          position: absolute;
+          font-size: smaller;
+          top: 2em; left: -5em; width: 15em;
+          padding: 2px; border: 1px solid #333;
+          color: #900; background-color: #EEE;
+          text-align: left;
+      }
+	  a.smpl {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  a:hover {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  a:active {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  address {
+	  margin-top: 1em;
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  body {
+	  color: black;
+	  font-family: verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  max-width: 55em;
+	  
+	  }
+	  cite {
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  dd {
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  dl {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.empty {
+	  list-style-type: none;
+	  }
+	  ul.empty li {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  dl p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  dt {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  h1 {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h1.np {
+	  page-break-before: always;
+	  }
+	  h1 a {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  }
+	  h2 {
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 15pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h2 a, h3 a, h4 a, h5 a, h6 a {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  img {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  }
+	  li {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  p {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  pre {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  background-color: lightyellow;
+	  padding: .25em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text2 {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f0f0f0;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.inline {
+	  background-color: white;
+	  padding: 0em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.drawing {
+	  border-style: solid;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  padding: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table.tt {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt td {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full td {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt th {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full th {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers th {
+	  border-style: none none inset none;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.left {
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.right {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.center {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  caption {
+	  caption-side: bottom;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+	  border-spacing: 1px;
+	  width: 95%;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.top {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  td.topnowrap {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap; 
+	  }
+	  table.header td {
+	  background-color: gray;
+	  width: 50%;
+	  }
+	  table.header a {
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.reference {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap;
+	  padding-right: 1em;
+	  }
+	  thead {
+	  display:table-header-group;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc, ul.toc ul {
+	  list-style: none;
+	  margin-left: 1.5em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  padding-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li {
+	  line-height: 150%;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li li {
+	  line-height: normal;
+	  font-weight: normal;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  li.excluded {
+	  font-size: 0pt;
+	  }
+	  ul p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	
+	  .comment {
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	  .center {
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .error {
+	  color: red;
+	  font-style: italic;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .figure {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  }
+	  .filename {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .fn {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .hidden {
+	  display: none;
+	  }
+	  .left {
+	  text-align: left;
+	  }
+	  .right {
+	  text-align: right;
+	  }
+	  .title {
+	  color: #990000;
+	  font-size: 18pt;
+	  line-height: 18pt;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  margin-top: 36pt;
+	  }
+	  .vcardline {
+	  display: block;
+	  }
+	  .warning {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	
+	
+	  @media print {
+	  .noprint {
+		display: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  a {
+		color: black;
+		text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+		width: 90%;
+	  }
+	
+	  td.header {
+		width: 50%;
+		color: black;
+		background-color: white;
+		vertical-align: top;
+		font-size: 12pt;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.toc a::after {
+		content: leader('.') target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.ind li li a {
+		content: target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  .print2col {
+		column-count: 2;
+		-moz-column-count: 2;
+		column-fill: auto;
+	  }
+	  }
+	
+	  @page {
+	  @top-left {
+		   content: "Internet-Draft"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-right {
+		   content: "December 2010"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-center {
+		   content: "Abbreviated Title";
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-left {
+		   content: "Doe"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-center {
+		   content: "Expires June 2011"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-right {
+		   content: "[Page " counter(page) "]"; 
+	  } 
+	  }
+	
+	  @page:first { 
+		@top-left {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-right {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-center {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+	  }
+  /*]]>*/
+  </style>
+
+  <link href="#rfc.toc" rel="Contents">
+<link href="#rfc.section.1" rel="Chapter" title="1 Introduction">
+<link href="#rfc.section.2" rel="Chapter" title="2 Conventions and Terminology">
+<link href="#rfc.section.3" rel="Chapter" title="3 Overview">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4" rel="Chapter" title="4 Definitions">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.1" rel="Chapter" title="4.1 JSON Document">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.2" rel="Chapter" title="4.2 Instance">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="4.2.1 Instance Data Model">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="4.2.2 Instance Equality">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.2.3" rel="Chapter" title="4.2.3 Non-JSON Instances">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3" rel="Chapter" title="4.3 JSON Schema Documents">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="4.3.1 JSON Schema Objects and Keywords">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="4.3.2 Boolean JSON Schemas">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3.3" rel="Chapter" title="4.3.3 Schema Vocabularies">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3.4" rel="Chapter" title="4.3.4 Meta-Schemas">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3.5" rel="Chapter" title="4.3.5 Root Schema and Subschemas and Resources">
+<link href="#rfc.section.5" rel="Chapter" title="5 Fragment Identifiers">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6" rel="Chapter" title="6 General Considerations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.1 Range of JSON Values">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.2 Programming Language Independence">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.3 Mathematical Integers">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.4 Regular Expressions">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.5 Extending JSON Schema">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7" rel="Chapter" title="7 Keyword Behaviors">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.1 Lexical Scope and Dynamic Scope">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.2 Keyword Interactions">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.3 Default Behaviors">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.4" rel="Chapter" title="7.4 Identifiers">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.5" rel="Chapter" title="7.5 Applicators">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.5.1 Referenced and Referencing Schemas">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.6" rel="Chapter" title="7.6 Assertions">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.6.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.6.1 Assertions and Instance Primitive Types">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.7" rel="Chapter" title="7.7 Annotations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.7.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.7.1 Collecting Annotations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.8" rel="Chapter" title="7.8 Reserved Locations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.9" rel="Chapter" title="7.9 Loading Instance Data">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8" rel="Chapter" title="8 The JSON Schema Core Vocabulary">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1" rel="Chapter" title="8.1 Meta-Schemas and Vocabularies">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1.1" rel="Chapter" title='8.1.1 The "$schema" Keyword'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1.2" rel="Chapter" title='8.1.2 The "$vocabulary" Keyword'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1.3" rel="Chapter" title="8.1.3 Updates to Meta-Schema and Vocabulary URIs">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2" rel="Chapter" title="8.2 Base URI, Anchors, and Dereferencing">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2.1" rel="Chapter" title='8.2.1 The "$id" Keyword'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="8.2.2 Defining location-independent identifiers">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2.3" rel="Chapter" title="8.2.3 Schema References">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2.4" rel="Chapter" title='8.2.4 Schema Re-Use With "$defs"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.3" rel="Chapter" title='8.3 Comments With "$comment"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9" rel="Chapter" title="9 Loading and Processing Schemas">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.1" rel="Chapter" title="9.1 Loading a Schema">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.1.1" rel="Chapter" title="9.1.1 Initial Base URI">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.1.2" rel="Chapter" title="9.1.2 Loading a referenced schema">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.1.3" rel="Chapter" title="9.1.3 Detecting a Meta-Schema">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.2" rel="Chapter" title="9.2 Dereferencing">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="9.2.1 JSON Pointer fragments and embedded schema resources">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.3" rel="Chapter" title="9.3 Compound Documents">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="9.3.1 Bundling">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="9.3.2 Differing and Default Dialects">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.3.3" rel="Chapter" title="9.3.3 Validating">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.4" rel="Chapter" title="9.4 Caveats">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.4.1" rel="Chapter" title="9.4.1 Guarding Against Infinite Recursion">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.4.2" rel="Chapter" title="9.4.2 References to Possible Non-Schemas">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.5" rel="Chapter" title="9.5 Associating Instances and Schemas">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="9.5.1 Usage for Hypermedia">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10" rel="Chapter" title="10 A Vocabulary for Applying Subschemas">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.1" rel="Chapter" title="10.1 Keyword Independence">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.2" rel="Chapter" title="10.2 Keywords for Applying Subschemas in Place">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="10.2.1 Keywords for Applying Subschemas With Logic">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="10.2.2 Keywords for Applying Subschemas Conditionally">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.3" rel="Chapter" title="10.3 Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Child Instances">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="10.3.1 Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Arrays">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="10.3.2 Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Objects">
+<link href="#rfc.section.11" rel="Chapter" title="11 A Vocabulary for Unevaluated Locations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.11.1" rel="Chapter" title="11.1 Keyword Independence">
+<link href="#rfc.section.11.2" rel="Chapter" title="11.2 unevaluatedItems">
+<link href="#rfc.section.11.3" rel="Chapter" title="11.3 unevaluatedProperties">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12" rel="Chapter" title="12 Output Formatting">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.1" rel="Chapter" title="12.1 Format">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.2" rel="Chapter" title="12.2 Output Formats">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.3" rel="Chapter" title="12.3 Minimum Information">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="12.3.1 Keyword Relative Location">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="12.3.2 Keyword Absolute Location">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.3.3" rel="Chapter" title="12.3.3 Instance Location">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.3.4" rel="Chapter" title="12.3.4 Error or Annotation">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.3.5" rel="Chapter" title="12.3.5 Nested Results">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.4" rel="Chapter" title="12.4 Output Structure">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.4.1" rel="Chapter" title="12.4.1 Flag">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.4.2" rel="Chapter" title="12.4.2 Basic">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.4.3" rel="Chapter" title="12.4.3 Detailed">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.4.4" rel="Chapter" title="12.4.4 Verbose">
+<link href="#rfc.section.12.4.5" rel="Chapter" title="12.4.5 Output validation schemas">
+<link href="#rfc.section.13" rel="Chapter" title="13 Security Considerations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.14" rel="Chapter" title="14 IANA Considerations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.14.1" rel="Chapter" title="14.1 application/schema+json">
+<link href="#rfc.section.14.2" rel="Chapter" title="14.2 application/schema-instance+json">
+<link href="#rfc.references" rel="Chapter" title="15 References">
+<link href="#rfc.references.1" rel="Chapter" title="15.1 Normative References">
+<link href="#rfc.references.2" rel="Chapter" title="15.2 Informative References">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A" rel="Chapter" title="A Schema identification examples">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.B" rel="Chapter" title="B Manipulating schema documents and references">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.B.1" rel="Chapter" title="B.1 Bundling schema resources into a single document">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.B.2" rel="Chapter" title="B.2 Reference removal is not always safe">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.C" rel="Chapter" title="C Example of recursive schema extension">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.D" rel="Chapter" title="D Working with vocabularies">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.D.1" rel="Chapter" title="D.1 Best practices for vocabulary and meta-schema authors">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.D.2" rel="Chapter" title="D.2 Example meta-schema with vocabulary declarations">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.E" rel="Chapter" title="E References and generative use cases">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.F" rel="Chapter" title="F Acknowledgments">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.G" rel="Chapter" title="G ChangeLog">
+<link href="#rfc.authors" rel="Chapter">
+
+
+  <meta name="generator" content="xml2rfc version 2.30.0 - https://tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc" />
+  <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" />
+
+  <meta name="dct.creator" content="Wright, A., Ed., Andrews, H., Ed., Hutton, B., Ed., and G. Dennis" />
+  <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-bhutton-json-schema-00" />
+  <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2020-28" />
+  <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Schema defines the media type &quot;application/schema+json&quot;, a JSON-based format for describing the structure of JSON data.  JSON Schema asserts what a JSON document must look like, ways to extract information from it, and how to interact with it.  The &quot;application/schema-instance+json&quot; media type provides additional feature-rich integration with &quot;application/schema+json&quot; beyond what can be offered for &quot;application/json&quot; documents.  " />
+  <meta name="description" content="JSON Schema defines the media type &quot;application/schema+json&quot;, a JSON-based format for describing the structure of JSON data.  JSON Schema asserts what a JSON document must look like, ways to extract information from it, and how to interact with it.  The &quot;application/schema-instance+json&quot; media type provides additional feature-rich integration with &quot;application/schema+json&quot; beyond what can be offered for &quot;application/json&quot; documents.  " />
+
+</head>
+
+<body>
+
+  <table class="header">
+    <tbody>
+    
+    	<tr>
+<td class="left">Internet Engineering Task Force</td>
+<td class="right">A. Wright, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
+<td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Intended status: Informational</td>
+<td class="right">H. Andrews, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Expires: August 1, 2021</td>
+<td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left"></td>
+<td class="right">B. Hutton, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left"></td>
+<td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left"></td>
+<td class="right">G. Dennis</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left"></td>
+<td class="right">January 28, 2020</td>
+</tr>
+
+    	
+    </tbody>
+  </table>
+
+  <p class="title">JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents<br />
+  <span class="filename">draft-bhutton-json-schema-00</span></p>
+  
+  <h1 id="rfc.abstract"><a href="#rfc.abstract">Abstract</a></h1>
+<p>JSON Schema defines the media type "application/schema+json", a JSON-based format for describing the structure of JSON data.  JSON Schema asserts what a JSON document must look like, ways to extract information from it, and how to interact with it.  The "application/schema-instance+json" media type provides additional feature-rich integration with "application/schema+json" beyond what can be offered for "application/json" documents.  </p>
+<h1><a>Note to Readers</a></h1>
+<p>The issues list for this draft can be found at <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues">https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>For additional information, see <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/">https://json-schema.org/</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>To provide feedback, use this issue tracker, the communication methods listed on the homepage, or email the document editors.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.status"><a href="#rfc.status">Status of This Memo</a></h1>
+<p>This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.</p>
+<p>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/.</p>
+<p>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."</p>
+<p>This Internet-Draft will expire on August 1, 2021.</p>
+<h1 id="rfc.copyrightnotice"><a href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a></h1>
+<p>Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors.  All rights reserved.</p>
+<p>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.</p>
+
+  
+  <hr class="noprint" />
+  <h1 class="np" id="rfc.toc"><a href="#rfc.toc">Table of Contents</a></h1>
+  <ul class="toc">
+
+  	<li>1.   <a href="#rfc.section.1">Introduction</a>
+</li>
+<li>2.   <a href="#rfc.section.2">Conventions and Terminology</a>
+</li>
+<li>3.   <a href="#rfc.section.3">Overview</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.   <a href="#rfc.section.4">Definitions</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>4.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.1">JSON Document</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.2">Instance</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>4.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.2.1">Instance Data Model</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.2.2">Instance Equality</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.2.3">Non-JSON Instances</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>4.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3">JSON Schema Documents</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>4.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3.1">JSON Schema Objects and Keywords</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3.2">Boolean JSON Schemas</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.3.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3.3">Schema Vocabularies</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.3.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3.4">Meta-Schemas</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.3.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3.5">Root Schema and Subschemas and Resources</a>
+</li>
+</ul></ul><li>5.   <a href="#rfc.section.5">Fragment Identifiers</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6">General Considerations</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1">Range of JSON Values</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2">Programming Language Independence</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3">Mathematical Integers</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4">Regular Expressions</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5">Extending JSON Schema</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7">Keyword Behaviors</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.1">Lexical Scope and Dynamic Scope</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2">Keyword Interactions</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3">Default Behaviors</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.4">Identifiers</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.5">Applicators</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.5.1">Referenced and Referencing Schemas</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>7.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.6">Assertions</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.6.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.6.1">Assertions and Instance Primitive Types</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>7.7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.7">Annotations</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.7.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.7.1">Collecting Annotations</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>7.8.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.8">Reserved Locations</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.9.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.9">Loading Instance Data</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>8.   <a href="#rfc.section.8">The JSON Schema Core Vocabulary</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>8.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1">Meta-Schemas and Vocabularies</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>8.1.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1.1">The "$schema" Keyword</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.1.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1.2">The "$vocabulary" Keyword</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.1.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1.3">Updates to Meta-Schema and Vocabulary URIs</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>8.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2">Base URI, Anchors, and Dereferencing</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>8.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2.1">The "$id" Keyword</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2.2">Defining location-independent identifiers</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2.3">Schema References</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.2.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2.4">Schema Re-Use With "$defs"</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>8.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.3">Comments With "$comment"</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>9.   <a href="#rfc.section.9">Loading and Processing Schemas</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>9.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.1">Loading a Schema</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>9.1.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.1.1">Initial Base URI</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.1.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.1.2">Loading a referenced schema</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.1.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.1.3">Detecting a Meta-Schema</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>9.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.2">Dereferencing</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>9.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.2.1">JSON Pointer fragments and embedded schema resources</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>9.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.3">Compound Documents</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>9.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.3.1">Bundling</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.3.2">Differing and Default Dialects</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.3.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.3.3">Validating</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>9.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.4">Caveats</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>9.4.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.4.1">Guarding Against Infinite Recursion</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.4.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.4.2">References to Possible Non-Schemas</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>9.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.5">Associating Instances and Schemas</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>9.5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.5.1">Usage for Hypermedia</a>
+</li>
+</ul></ul><li>10.   <a href="#rfc.section.10">A Vocabulary for Applying Subschemas</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>10.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.1">Keyword Independence</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.2">Keywords for Applying Subschemas in Place</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>10.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.2.1">Keywords for Applying Subschemas With Logic</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.2.2">Keywords for Applying Subschemas Conditionally</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>10.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.3">Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Child Instances</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>10.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.3.1">Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Arrays</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.10.3.2">Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Objects</a>
+</li>
+</ul></ul><li>11.   <a href="#rfc.section.11">A Vocabulary for Unevaluated Locations</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>11.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.11.1">Keyword Independence</a>
+</li>
+<li>11.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.11.2">unevaluatedItems</a>
+</li>
+<li>11.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.11.3">unevaluatedProperties</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>12.   <a href="#rfc.section.12">Output Formatting</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>12.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.1">Format</a>
+</li>
+<li>12.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.2">Output Formats</a>
+</li>
+<li>12.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.3">Minimum Information</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>12.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.3.1">Keyword Relative Location</a>
+</li>
+<li>12.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.3.2">Keyword Absolute Location</a>
+</li>
+<li>12.3.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.3.3">Instance Location</a>
+</li>
+<li>12.3.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.3.4">Error or Annotation</a>
+</li>
+<li>12.3.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.3.5">Nested Results</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>12.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.4">Output Structure</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>12.4.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.4.1">Flag</a>
+</li>
+<li>12.4.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.4.2">Basic</a>
+</li>
+<li>12.4.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.4.3">Detailed</a>
+</li>
+<li>12.4.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.4.4">Verbose</a>
+</li>
+<li>12.4.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.12.4.5">Output validation schemas</a>
+</li>
+</ul></ul><li>13.   <a href="#rfc.section.13">Security Considerations</a>
+</li>
+<li>14.   <a href="#rfc.section.14">IANA Considerations</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>14.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.14.1">application/schema+json</a>
+</li>
+<li>14.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.14.2">application/schema-instance+json</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>15.   <a href="#rfc.references">References</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>15.1.   <a href="#rfc.references.1">Normative References</a>
+</li>
+<li>15.2.   <a href="#rfc.references.2">Informative References</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>Appendix A.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Schema identification examples</a>
+</li>
+<li>Appendix B.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.B">Manipulating schema documents and references</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>B.1.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.B.1">Bundling schema resources into a single document</a>
+</li>
+<li>B.2.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.B.2">Reference removal is not always safe</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>Appendix C.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.C">Example of recursive schema extension</a>
+</li>
+<li>Appendix D.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.D">Working with vocabularies</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>D.1.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.D.1">Best practices for vocabulary and meta-schema authors</a>
+</li>
+<li>D.2.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.D.2">Example meta-schema with vocabulary declarations</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>Appendix E.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.E">References and generative use cases</a>
+</li>
+<li>Appendix F.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.F">Acknowledgments</a>
+</li>
+<li>Appendix G.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.G">ChangeLog</a>
+</li>
+<li><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a>
+</li>
+
+
+  </ul>
+
+  <h1 id="rfc.section.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.1">1.</a> Introduction</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.1">JSON Schema is a JSON media type for defining the structure of JSON data. JSON Schema is intended to define validation, documentation, hyperlink navigation, and interaction control of JSON data.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.2">This specification defines JSON Schema core terminology and mechanisms, including pointing to another JSON Schema by reference, dereferencing a JSON Schema reference, specifying the dialect being used, specifying a dialect's vocabulary requirements, and defining the expected output.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.3">Other specifications define the vocabularies that perform assertions about validation, linking, annotation, navigation, and interaction.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.2">2.</a> Conventions and Terminology</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.1">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 <a href="#RFC2119" class="xref">RFC 2119</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.2">The terms "JSON", "JSON text", "JSON value", "member", "element", "object", "array", "number", "string", "boolean", "true", "false", and "null" in this document are to be interpreted as defined in <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC 8259</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.3">3.</a> Overview</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.1">This document proposes a new media type "application/schema+json" to identify a JSON Schema for describing JSON data.  It also proposes a further optional media type, "application/schema-instance+json", to provide additional integration features.  JSON Schemas are themselves JSON documents.  This, and related specifications, define keywords allowing authors to describe JSON data in several ways.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.2">JSON Schema uses keywords to assert constraints on JSON instances or annotate those instances with additional information.  Additional keywords are used to apply assertions and annotations to more complex JSON data structures, or based on some sort of condition.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.3">To facilitate re-use, keywords can be organized into vocabularies. A vocabulary consists of a list of keywords, together with their syntax and semantics.  A dialect is defined as a set of vocabularies and their required support identified in a meta-schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.4">JSON Schema can be extended either by defining additional vocabularies, or less formally by defining additional keywords outside of any vocabulary.  Unrecognized individual keywords simply have their values collected as annotations, while the behavior with respect to an unrecognized vocabulary can be controlled when declaring which vocabularies are in use.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.5">This document defines a core vocabulary that MUST be supported by any implementation, and cannot be disabled.  Its keywords are each prefixed with a "$" character to emphasize their required nature.  This vocabulary is essential to the functioning of the "application/schema+json" media type, and is used to bootstrap the loading of other vocabularies.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.6">Additionally, this document defines a RECOMMENDED vocabulary of keywords for applying subschemas conditionally, and for applying subschemas to the contents of objects and arrays.  Either this vocabulary or one very much like it is required to write schemas for non-trivial JSON instances, whether those schemas are intended for assertion validation, annotation, or both.  While not part of the required core vocabulary, for maximum interoperability this additional vocabulary is included in this document and its use is strongly encouraged.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.7">Further vocabularies for purposes such as structural validation or hypermedia annotation are defined in other documents.  These other documents each define a dialect collecting the standard sets of vocabularies needed to write schemas for that document's purpose.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4">4.</a> Definitions</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.1">4.1.</a> JSON Document</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.1">A JSON document is an information resource (series of octets) described by the application/json media type.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.2">In JSON Schema, the terms "JSON document", "JSON text", and "JSON value" are interchangeable because of the data model it defines.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.3">JSON Schema is only defined over JSON documents. However, any document or memory structure that can be parsed into or processed according to the JSON Schema data model can be interpreted against a JSON Schema, including media types like <a href="#RFC7049" class="xref">CBOR</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.2">4.2.</a> Instance</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.p.1">A JSON document to which a schema is applied is known as an "instance".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.p.2">JSON Schema is defined over "application/json" or compatible documents, including media types with the "+json" structured syntax suffix.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.p.3">Among these, this specification defines the "application/schema-instance+json" media type which defines handling for fragments in the URI.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.2.1">4.2.1.</a> Instance Data Model</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.1.p.1">JSON Schema interprets documents according to a data model. A JSON value interpreted according to this data model is called an "instance".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.1.p.2">An instance has one of six primitive types, and a range of possible values depending on the type: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>null:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A JSON "null" value</dd>
+<dt>boolean:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A "true" or "false" value, from the JSON "true" or "false" value</dd>
+<dt>object:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">An unordered set of properties mapping a string to an instance, from the JSON "object" value</dd>
+<dt>array:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">An ordered list of instances, from the JSON "array" value</dd>
+<dt>number:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">An arbitrary-precision, base-10 decimal number value, from the JSON "number" value</dd>
+<dt>string:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string of Unicode code points, from the JSON "string" value</dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.1.p.3">Whitespace and formatting concerns, including different lexical representations of numbers that are equal within the data model, are thus outside the scope of JSON Schema.  JSON Schema <a href="#vocabulary" class="xref">vocabularies</a> that wish to work with such differences in lexical representations SHOULD define keywords to precisely interpret formatted strings within the data model rather than relying on having the original JSON representation Unicode characters available.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.1.p.4">Since an object cannot have two properties with the same key, behavior for a JSON document that tries to define two properties with the same key in a single object is undefined.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.1.p.5">Note that JSON Schema vocabularies are free to define their own extended type system.  This should not be confused with the core data model types defined here.  As an example, "integer" is a reasonable type for a vocabulary to define as a value for a keyword, but the data model makes no distinction between integers and other numbers.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.2.2">4.2.2.</a> Instance Equality</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.2.p.1">Two JSON instances are said to be equal if and only if they are of the same type and have the same value according to the data model. Specifically, this means: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>both are null; or</li>
+<li>both are true; or</li>
+<li>both are false; or</li>
+<li>both are strings, and are the same codepoint-for-codepoint; or</li>
+<li>both are numbers, and have the same mathematical value; or</li>
+<li>both are arrays, and have an equal value item-for-item; or</li>
+<li>both are objects, and each property in one has exactly one property with a key equal to the other's, and that other property has an equal value.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.2.p.2">Implied in this definition is that arrays must be the same length, objects must have the same number of members, properties in objects are unordered, there is no way to define multiple properties with the same key, and mere formatting differences (indentation, placement of commas, trailing zeros) are insignificant.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.2.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.2.3">4.2.3.</a> Non-JSON Instances</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.3.p.1">It is possible to use JSON Schema with a superset of the JSON Schema data model, where an instance may be outside any of the six JSON data types.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.3.p.2">In this case, annotations still apply; but most validation keywords will not be useful, as they will always pass or always fail.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.3.p.3">A custom vocabulary may define support for a superset of the core data model.  The schema itself may only be expressible in this superset; for example, to make use of the "const" keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.3">4.3.</a> <a href="#schema-document" id="schema-document">JSON Schema Documents</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.p.1">A JSON Schema document, or simply a schema, is a JSON document used to describe an instance.  A schema can itself be interpreted as an instance, but SHOULD always be given the media type "application/schema+json" rather than "application/schema-instance+json".  The "application/schema+json" media type is defined to offer a superset of the fragment identifier syntax and semantics provided by "application/schema-instance+json".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.p.2">A JSON Schema MUST be an object or a boolean.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.3.1">4.3.1.</a> JSON Schema Objects and Keywords</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.1">Object properties that are applied to the instance are called keywords, or schema keywords.  Broadly speaking, keywords fall into one of five categories: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>identifiers:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">control schema identification through setting the schema's canonical URI and/or changing how the base URI is determined </dd>
+<dt>assertions:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">produce a boolean result when applied to an instance </dd>
+<dt>annotations:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">attach information to an instance for application use </dd>
+<dt>applicators:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">apply one or more subschemas to a particular location in the instance, and combine or modify their results </dd>
+<dt>reserved locations:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">do not directly affect results, but reserve a place for a specific purpose to ensure interoperability </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.2">Keywords may fall into multiple categories, although applicators SHOULD only produce assertion results based on their subschemas' results.  They should not define additional constraints independent of their subschemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.3">Keywords which are properties within the same schema object are referred to as adjacent keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.4">Extension keywords, meaning those defined outside of this document and its companions, are free to define other behaviors as well.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.5">A JSON Schema MAY contain properties which are not schema keywords.  Unknown keywords SHOULD be treated as annotations, where the value of the keyword is the value of the annotation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.1.p.6">An empty schema is a JSON Schema with no properties, or only unknown properties.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.3.2">4.3.2.</a> Boolean JSON Schemas</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.2.p.1">The boolean schema values "true" and "false" are trivial schemas that always produce themselves as assertion results, regardless of the instance value.  They never produce annotation results.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.2.p.2">These boolean schemas exist to clarify schema author intent and facilitate schema processing optimizations.  They behave identically to the following schema objects (where "not" is part of the subschema application vocabulary defined in this document).  </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>true:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">Always passes validation, as if the empty schema {} </dd>
+<dt>false:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">Always fails validation, as if the schema { "not": {} } </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> While the empty schema object is unambiguous, there are many possible equivalents to the "false" schema.  Using the boolean values ensures that the intent is clear to both human readers and implementations.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.3.3">4.3.3.</a> Schema Vocabularies</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.3.p.1">A schema vocabulary, or simply a vocabulary, is a set of keywords, their syntax, and their semantics.  A vocabulary is generally organized around a particular purpose.  Different uses of JSON Schema, such as validation, hypermedia, or user interface generation, will involve different sets of vocabularies.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.3.p.2">Vocabularies are the primary unit of re-use in JSON Schema, as schema authors can indicate what vocabularies are required or optional in order to process the schema.  Since vocabularies are identified by URIs in the meta-schema, generic implementations can load extensions to support previously unknown vocabularies.  While keywords can be supported outside of any vocabulary, there is no analogous mechanism to indicate individual keyword usage.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.3.4">4.3.4.</a> Meta-Schemas</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.4.p.1">A schema that itself describes a schema is called a meta-schema.  Meta-schemas are used to validate JSON Schemas and specify which vocabularies they are using.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.4.p.2">Typically, a meta-schema will specify a set of vocabularies, and validate schemas that conform to the syntax of those vocabularies.  However, meta-schemas and vocabularies are separate in order to allow meta-schemas to validate schema conformance more strictly or more loosely than the vocabularies' specifications call for.  Meta-schemas may also describe and validate additional keywords that are not part of a formal vocabulary.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.3.5">4.3.5.</a> <a href="#root" id="root">Root Schema and Subschemas and Resources</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.5.p.1">A JSON Schema resource is a schema which is <a href="#RFC6596" class="xref">canonically</a> identified by an <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">absolute URI</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.5.p.2">The root schema is the schema that comprises the entire JSON document in question.  The root schema is always a schema resource, where the URI is determined as described in section <a href="#initial-base" class="xref">9.1.1</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.5.p.3">Some keywords take schemas themselves, allowing JSON Schemas to be nested: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "title": "root",
+    "items": {
+        "title": "array item"
+    }
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.5.p.4">In this example document, the schema titled "array item" is a subschema, and the schema titled "root" is the root schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.5.p.5">As with the root schema, a subschema is either an object or a boolean.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.5.p.6">As discussed in section <a href="#id-keyword" class="xref">8.2.1</a>, a JSON Schema document can contain multiple JSON Schema resources.  When used without qualification, the term "root schema" refers to the document's root schema.  In some cases, resource root schemas are discussed.  A resource's root schema is its top-level schema object, which would also be a document root schema if the resource were to be extracted to a standalone JSON Schema document.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.5.p.7">Whether multiple schema resources are embedded or linked with a reference, they are processed in the same way, with the same available behaviors.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.5">5.</a> <a href="#fragments" id="fragments">Fragment Identifiers</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.1">In accordance with section 3.1 of <a href="#RFC6839" class="xref">RFC 6839</a>, the syntax and semantics of fragment identifiers specified for any +json media type SHOULD be as specified for "application/json".  (At publication of this document, there is no fragment identification syntax defined for "application/json".) </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.2">Additionally, the "application/schema+json" media type supports two fragment identifier structures: plain names and JSON Pointers.  The "application/schema-instance+json" media type supports one fragment identifier structure: JSON Pointers.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.3">The use of JSON Pointers as URI fragment identifiers is described in <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901</a>.  For "application/schema+json", which supports two fragment identifier syntaxes, fragment identifiers matching the JSON Pointer syntax, including the empty string, MUST be interpreted as JSON Pointer fragment identifiers.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.4">Per the W3C's <a href="#W3C.WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025" class="xref">best practices for fragment identifiers</a>, plain name fragment identifiers in "application/schema+json" are reserved for referencing locally named schemas.  All fragment identifiers that do not match the JSON Pointer syntax MUST be interpreted as plain name fragment identifiers.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.5">Defining and referencing a plain name fragment identifier within an "application/schema+json" document are specified in the <a href="#anchor" class="xref">"$anchor" keyword</a> section.  </p>
+<p></p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6">6.</a> General Considerations</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.1">6.1.</a> Range of JSON Values</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.p.1">An instance may be any valid JSON value as defined by <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">JSON</a>.  JSON Schema imposes no restrictions on type: JSON Schema can describe any JSON value, including, for example, null.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2">6.2.</a> <a href="#language" id="language">Programming Language Independence</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.p.1">JSON Schema is programming language agnostic, and supports the full range of values described in the data model.  Be aware, however, that some languages and JSON parsers may not be able to represent in memory the full range of values describable by JSON.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.3">6.3.</a> <a href="#integers" id="integers">Mathematical Integers</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.p.1">Some programming languages and parsers use different internal representations for floating point numbers than they do for integers.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.p.2">For consistency, integer JSON numbers SHOULD NOT be encoded with a fractional part.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4">6.4.</a> <a href="#regex" id="regex">Regular Expressions</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.1">Keywords MAY use regular expressions to express constraints, or constrain the instance value to be a regular expression.  These regular expressions SHOULD be valid according to the regular expression dialect described in <a href="#ecma262" class="xref">ECMA-262, section 21.2.1</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.2">Regular expressions SHOULD be built with the "u" flag (or equivalent) to provide Unicode support, or processed in such a way which provides Unicode support as defined by ECMA-262.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.3">Furthermore, given the high disparity in regular expression constructs support, schema authors SHOULD limit themselves to the following regular expression tokens: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>individual Unicode characters, as defined by the <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">JSON specification</a>;</li>
+<li>simple character classes ([abc]), range character classes ([a-z]);</li>
+<li>complemented character classes ([^abc], [^a-z]);</li>
+<li>simple quantifiers: "+" (one or more), "*" (zero or more), "?" (zero or one), and their lazy versions ("+?", "*?", "??");</li>
+<li>range quantifiers: "{x}" (exactly x occurrences), "{x,y}" (at least x, at most y, occurrences), {x,} (x occurrences or more), and their lazy versions;</li>
+<li>the beginning-of-input ("^") and end-of-input ("$") anchors;</li>
+<li>simple grouping ("(...)") and alternation ("|").</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.p.4">Finally, implementations MUST NOT take regular expressions to be anchored, neither at the beginning nor at the end. This means, for instance, the pattern "es" matches "expression".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5">6.5.</a> <a href="#extending" id="extending">Extending JSON Schema</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.p.1">Additional schema keywords and schema vocabularies MAY be defined by any entity.  Save for explicit agreement, schema authors SHALL NOT expect these additional keywords and vocabularies to be supported by implementations that do not explicitly document such support.  Implementations SHOULD treat keywords they do not support as annotations, where the value of the keyword is the value of the annotation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.p.2">Implementations MAY provide the ability to register or load handlers for vocabularies that they do not support directly.  The exact mechanism for registering and implementing such handlers is implementation-dependent.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7">7.</a> Keyword Behaviors</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.1">JSON Schema keywords fall into several general behavior categories.  Assertions validate that an instance satisfies constraints, producing a boolean result.  Annotations attach information that applications may use in any way they see fit.  Applicators apply subschemas to parts of the instance and combine their results.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.2">Extension keywords SHOULD stay within these categories, keeping in mind that annotations in particular are extremely flexible.  Complex behavior is usually better delegated to applications on the basis of annotation data than implemented directly as schema keywords.  However, extension keywords MAY define other behaviors for specialized purposes.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.3">Evaluating an instance against a schema involves processing all of the keywords in the schema against the appropriate locations within the instance.  Typically, applicator keywords are processed until a schema object with no applicators (and therefore no subschemas) is reached.  The appropriate location in the instance is evaluated against the assertion and annotation keywords in the schema object, and their results are gathered into the parent schema according to the rules of the applicator.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.4">Evaluation of a parent schema object can complete once all of its subschemas have been evaluated, although in some circumstances evaluation may be short-circuited due to assertion results.  When annotations are being collected, some assertion result short-circuiting is not possible due to the need to examine all subschemas for annotation collection, including those that cannot further change the assertion result.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.1">7.1.</a> <a href="#scopes" id="scopes">Lexical Scope and Dynamic Scope</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.1">While most JSON Schema keywords can be evaluated on their own, or at most need to take into account the values or results of adjacent keywords in the same schema object, a few have more complex behavior.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.2">The lexical scope of a keyword is determined by the nested JSON data structure of objects and arrays.  The largest such scope is an entire schema document.  The smallest scope is a single schema object with no subschemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.3">Keywords MAY be defined with a partial value, such as a URI-reference, which must be resolved against another value, such as another URI-reference or a full URI, which is found through the lexical structure of the JSON document.  The "$id", "$ref", and "$dynamicRef" core keywords, and the "base" JSON Hyper-Schema keyword, are examples of this sort of behavior.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.4">Note that some keywords, such as "$schema", apply to the lexical scope of the entire schema resource, and therefore MUST only appear in a schema resource's root schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.5">Other keywords may take into account the dynamic scope that exists during the evaluation of a schema, typically together with an instance document.  The outermost dynamic scope is the schema object at which processing begins, even if it is not a schema resource root.  The path from this root schema to any particular keyword (that includes any "$ref" and "$dynamicRef" keywords that may have been resolved) is considered the keyword's "validation path." </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.6">Lexical and dynamic scopes align until a reference keyword is encountered.  While following the reference keyword moves processing from one lexical scope into a different one, from the perspective of dynamic scope, following a reference is no different from descending into a subschema present as a value.  A keyword on the far side of that reference that resolves information through the dynamic scope will consider the originating side of the reference to be their dynamic parent, rather than examining the local lexically enclosing parent.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.7">The concept of dynamic scope is primarily used with "$dynamicRef" and "$dynamicAnchor", and should be considered an advanced feature and used with caution when defining additional keywords.  It also appears when reporting errors and collected annotations, as it may be possible to revisit the same lexical scope repeatedly with different dynamic scopes.  In such cases, it is important to inform the user of the dynamic path that produced the error or annotation.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.2">7.2.</a> Keyword Interactions</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.1">Keyword behavior MAY be defined in terms of the annotation results of <a href="#root" class="xref">subschemas</a> and/or adjacent keywords (keywords within the same schema object) and their subschemas.  Such keywords MUST NOT result in a circular dependency.  Keywords MAY modify their behavior based on the presence or absence of another keyword in the same <a href="#schema-document" class="xref">schema object</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3">7.3.</a> Default Behaviors</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.1">A missing keyword MUST NOT produce a false assertion result, MUST NOT produce annotation results, and MUST NOT cause any other schema to be evaluated as part of its own behavioral definition.  However, given that missing keywords do not contribute annotations, the lack of annotation results may indirectly change the behavior of other keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.2">In some cases, the missing keyword assertion behavior of a keyword is identical to that produced by a certain value, and keyword definitions SHOULD note such values where known.  However, even if the value which produces the default behavior would produce annotation results if present, the default behavior still MUST NOT result in annotations.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.3">Because annotation collection can add significant cost in terms of both computation and memory, implementations MAY opt out of this feature.  Keywords that are specified in terms of collected annotations SHOULD describe reasonable alternate approaches when appropriate.  This approach is demonstrated by the "<a href="#items" class="xref">items</a>" and "<a href="#additionalProperties" class="xref">additionalProperties</a>" keywords in this document.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.p.4">Note that when no such alternate approach is possible for a keyword, implementations that do not support annotation collections will not be able to support those keywords or vocabularies that contain them.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.4">7.4.</a> <a href="#identifiers" id="identifiers">Identifiers</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.1">Identifiers set the canonical URI of a schema, or affect how such URIs are resolved in <a href="#references" class="xref">references</a>, or both.  The Core vocabulary defined in this document defines several identifying keywords, most notably "$id".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.2">Canonical schema URIs MUST NOT change while processing an instance, but keywords that affect URI-reference resolution MAY have behavior that is only fully determined at runtime.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.4.p.3">While custom identifier keywords are possible, vocabulary designers should take care not to disrupt the functioning of core keywords. For example, the "$dynamicAnchor" keyword in this specification limits its URI resolution effects to the matching "$dynamicRef" keyword, leaving the behavior of "$ref" undisturbed.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.5">7.5.</a> <a href="#applicators" id="applicators">Applicators</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.1">Applicators allow for building more complex schemas than can be accomplished with a single schema object.  Evaluation of an instance against a <a href="#schema-document" class="xref">schema document</a> begins by applying the <a href="#root" class="xref">root schema</a> to the complete instance document.  From there, keywords known as applicators are used to determine which additional schemas are applied.  Such schemas may be applied in-place to the current location, or to a child location.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.2">The schemas to be applied may be present as subschemas comprising all or part of the keyword's value.  Alternatively, an applicator may refer to a schema elsewhere in the same schema document, or in a different one.  The mechanism for identifying such referenced schemas is defined by the keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.p.3">Applicator keywords also define how subschema or referenced schema boolean <a href="#assertions" class="xref">assertion</a> results are modified and/or combined to produce the boolean result of the applicator.  Applicators may apply any boolean logic operation to the assertion results of subschemas, but MUST NOT introduce new assertion conditions of their own.  </p>
+<p><a href="#annotations" class="xref">Annotation</a> results are preserved along with the instance location and the location of the schema keyword, so that applications can decide how to interpret multiple values.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.5.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.5.1">7.5.1.</a> <a href="#referenced" id="referenced">Referenced and Referencing Schemas</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.1.p.1">As noted in <a href="#applicators" class="xref">Section 7.5</a>, an applicator keyword may refer to a schema to be applied, rather than including it as a subschema in the applicator's value.  In such situations, the schema being applied is known as the referenced schema, while the schema containing the applicator keyword is the referencing schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.1.p.2">While root schemas and subschemas are static concepts based on a schema's position within a schema document, referenced and referencing schemas are dynamic.  Different pairs of schemas may find themselves in various referenced and referencing arrangements during the evaluation of an instance against a schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.5.1.p.3">For some by-reference applicators, such as <a href="#ref" class="xref">"$ref"</a>, the referenced schema can be determined by static analysis of the schema document's lexical scope.  Others, such as "$dynamicRef" (with "$dynamicAnchor"), may make use of dynamic scoping, and therefore only be resolvable in the process of evaluating the schema with an instance.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.6">7.6.</a> <a href="#assertions" id="assertions">Assertions</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.p.1">JSON Schema can be used to assert constraints on a JSON document, which either passes or fails the assertions.  This approach can be used to validate conformance with the constraints, or document what is needed to satisfy them.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.p.2">JSON Schema implementations produce a single boolean result when evaluating an instance against schema assertions.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.p.3">An instance can only fail an assertion that is present in the schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.6.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.6.1">7.6.1.</a> Assertions and Instance Primitive Types</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.1.p.1">Most assertions only constrain values within a certain primitive type.  When the type of the instance is not of the type targeted by the keyword, the instance is considered to conform to the assertion.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.1.p.2">For example, the "maxLength" keyword from the companion <a href="#json-schema-validation" class="xref">validation vocabulary</a>: will only restrict certain strings (that are too long) from being valid.  If the instance is a number, boolean, null, array, or object, then it is valid against this assertion.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.6.1.p.3">This behavior allows keywords to be used more easily with instances that can be of multiple primitive types.  The companion validation vocabulary also includes a "type" keyword which can independently restrict the instance to one or more primitive types.  This allows for a concise expression of use cases such as a function that might return either a string of a certain length or a null value: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": ["string", "null"],
+    "maxLength": 255
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<p>If "maxLength" also restricted the instance type to be a string, then this would be substantially more cumbersome to express because the example as written would not actually allow null values.  Each keyword is evaluated separately unless explicitly specified otherwise, so if "maxLength" restricted the instance to strings, then including "null" in "type" would not have any useful effect.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.7">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.7">7.7.</a> <a href="#annotations" id="annotations">Annotations</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.p.1">JSON Schema can annotate an instance with information, whenever the instance validates against the schema object containing the annotation, and all of its parent schema objects.  The information can be a simple value, or can be calculated based on the instance contents.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.p.2">Annotations are attached to specific locations in an instance.  Since many subschemas can be applied to any single location, applications may need to decide how to handle differing annotation values being attached to the same instance location by the same schema keyword in different schema objects.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.p.3">Unlike assertion results, annotation data can take a wide variety of forms, which are provided to applications to use as they see fit.  JSON Schema implementations are not expected to make use of the collected information on behalf of applications.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.p.4">Unless otherwise specified, the value of an annotation keyword is the keyword's value.  However, other behaviors are possible.  For example, <a href="#json-hyper-schema" class="xref">JSON Hyper-Schema's</a> "links" keyword is a complex annotation that produces a value based in part on the instance data.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.p.5">While "short-circuit" evaluation is possible for assertions, collecting annotations requires examining all schemas that apply to an instance location, even if they cannot change the overall assertion result.  The only exception is that subschemas of a schema object that has failed validation MAY be skipped, as annotations are not retained for failing schemas.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.7.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.7.1">7.7.1.</a> Collecting Annotations</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.p.1">Annotations are collected by keywords that explicitly define annotation-collecting behavior.  Note that boolean schemas cannot produce annotations as they do not make use of keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.p.2">A collected annotation MUST include the following information: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>The name of the keyword that produces the annotation </li>
+<li>The instance location to which it is attached, as a JSON Pointer </li>
+<li>The schema location path, indicating how reference keywords such as "$ref" were followed to reach the absolute schema location.  </li>
+<li>The absolute schema location of the attaching keyword, as a URI.  This MAY be omitted if it is the same as the schema location path from above.  </li>
+<li>The attached value(s) </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.7.1.1">7.7.1.1.</a> Distinguishing Among Multiple Values</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1.p.1">Applications MAY make decisions on which of multiple annotation values to use based on the schema location that contributed the value.  This is intended to allow flexible usage.  Collecting the schema location facilitates such usage.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1.p.2">For example, consider this schema, which uses annotations and assertions from the <a href="#json-schema-validation" class="xref">Validation specification</a>: </p>
+<p>Note that some lines are wrapped for clarity.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "title": "Feature list",
+    "type": "array",
+    "prefixItems": [
+        {
+            "title": "Feature A",
+            "properties": {
+                "enabled": {
+                    "$ref": "#/$defs/enabledToggle",
+                    "default": true
+                }
+            }
+        },
+        {
+            "title": "Feature B",
+            "properties": {
+                "enabled": {
+                    "description": "If set to null, Feature B
+                                    inherits the enabled
+                                    value from Feature A",
+                    "$ref": "#/$defs/enabledToggle"
+                }
+            }
+        }
+    ],
+    "$defs": {
+        "enabledToggle": {
+            "title": "Enabled",
+            "description": "Whether the feature is enabled (true),
+                            disabled (false), or under
+                            automatic control (null)",
+            "type": ["boolean", "null"],
+            "default": null
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+                            </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1.p.3">In this example, both Feature A and Feature B make use of the re-usable "enabledToggle" schema.  That schema uses the "title", "description", and "default" annotations.  Therefore the application has to decide how to handle the additional "default" value for Feature A, and the additional "description" value for Feature B.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1.p.4">The application programmer and the schema author need to agree on the usage.  For this example, let's assume that they agree that the most specific "default" value will be used, and any additional, more generic "default" values will be silently ignored.  Let's also assume that they agree that all "description" text is to be used, starting with the most generic, and ending with the most specific.  This requires the schema author to write descriptions that work when combined in this way.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1.p.5">The application can use the schema location path to determine which values are which.  The values in the feature's immediate "enabled" property schema are more specific, while the values under the re-usable schema that is referenced to with "$ref" are more generic.  The schema location path will show whether each value was found by crossing a "$ref" or not.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1.p.6">Feature A will therefore use a default value of true, while Feature B will use the generic default value of null.  Feature A will only have the generic description from the "enabledToggle" schema, while Feature B will use that description, and also append its locally defined description that explains how to interpret a null value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.1.p.7">Note that there are other reasonable approaches that a different application might take.  For example, an application may consider the presence of two different values for "default" to be an error, regardless of their schema locations.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.7.1.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.7.1.2">7.7.1.2.</a> Annotations and Assertions</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.2.p.1">Schema objects that produce a false assertion result MUST NOT produce any annotation results, whether from their own keywords or from keywords in subschemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.2.p.2">Note that the overall schema results may still include annotations collected from other schema locations.  Given this schema: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "oneOf": [
+        {
+            "title": "Integer Value",
+            "type": "integer"
+        },
+        {
+            "title": "String Value",
+            "type": "string"
+        }
+    ]
+}
+
+                            </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.2.p.3">Against the instance <samp>"This is a string"</samp>, the title annotation "Integer Value" is discarded because the type assertion in that schema object fails.  The title annotation "String Value" is kept, as the instance passes the string type assertions.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.7.1.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.7.1.3">7.7.1.3.</a> Annotations and Applicators</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.7.1.3.p.1">In addition to possibly defining annotation results of their own, applicator keywords aggregate the annotations collected in their subschema(s) or referenced schema(s).  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.8">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.8">7.8.</a> Reserved Locations</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.8.p.1">A fourth category of keywords simply reserve a location to hold re-usable components or data of interest to schema authors that is not suitable for re-use.  These keywords do not affect validation or annotation results.  Their purpose in the core vocabulary is to ensure that locations are available for certain purposes and will not be redefined by extension keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.8.p.2">While these keywords do not directly affect results, as explained in section <a href="#non-schemas" class="xref">9.4.2</a> unrecognized extension keywords that reserve locations for re-usable schemas may have undesirable interactions with references in certain circumstances.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.9">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.9">7.9.</a> Loading Instance Data</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.9.p.1">While none of the vocabularies defined as part of this or the associated documents define a keyword which may target and/or load instance data, it is possible that other vocabularies may wish to do so.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.9.p.2">Keywords MAY be defined to use JSON Pointers or Relative JSON Pointers to examine parts of an instance outside the current evaluation location.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.9.p.3">Keywords that allow adjusting the location using a Relative JSON Pointer SHOULD default to using the current location if a default is desireable.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8">8.</a> The JSON Schema Core Vocabulary</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.1">Keywords declared in this section, which all begin with "$", make up the JSON Schema Core vocabulary.  These keywords are either required in order to process any schema or meta-schema, including those split across multiple documents, or exist to reserve keywords for purposes that require guaranteed interoperability.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.2">The Core vocabulary MUST be considered mandatory at all times, in order to bootstrap the processing of further vocabularies.  Meta-schemas that use the <a href="#vocabulary" class="xref">"$vocabulary"</a> keyword to declare the vocabularies in use MUST explicitly list the Core vocabulary, which MUST have a value of true indicating that it is required.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.3">The behavior of a false value for this vocabulary (and only this vocabulary) is undefined, as is the behavior when "$vocabulary" is present but the Core vocabulary is not included.  However, it is RECOMMENDED that implementations detect these cases and raise an error when they occur.  It is not meaningful to declare that a meta-schema optionally uses Core.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.4">Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" MUST be considered to require the Core vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.5">The current URI for the Core vocabulary is: &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/core&gt;.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.6">The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/core">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/core</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.7">While the "$" prefix is not formally reserved for the Core vocabulary, it is RECOMMENDED that extension keywords (in vocabularies or otherwise) begin with a character other than "$" to avoid possible future collisions.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1">8.1.</a> <a href="#vocabulary" id="vocabulary">Meta-Schemas and Vocabularies</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.1">Two concepts, meta-schemas and vocabularies, are used to inform an implementation how to interpret a schema.  Every schema has a meta-schema, which can be declared using the "$schema" keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.2">The meta-schema serves two purposes: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>Declaring the vocabularies in use</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">The "$vocabulary" keyword, when it appears in a meta-schema, declares which vocabularies are available to be used in schemas that refer to that meta-schema.  Vocabularies define keyword semantics, as well as their general syntax.  </dd>
+<dt>Describing valid schema syntax</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A schema MUST successfully validate against its meta-schema, which constrains the syntax of the available keywords.  The syntax described is expected to be compatible with the vocabularies declared; while it is possible to describe an incompatible syntax, such a meta-schema would be unlikely to be useful.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.3">Meta-schemas are separate from vocabularies to allow for vocabularies to be combined in different ways, and for meta-schema authors to impose additional constraints such as forbidding certain keywords, or performing unusually strict syntactical validation, as might be done during a development and testing cycle.  Each vocabulary typically identifies a meta-schema consisting only of the vocabulary's keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.4">Meta-schema authoring is an advanced usage of JSON Schema, so the design of meta-schema features emphasizes flexibility over simplicity.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1.1">8.1.1.</a> <a href="#keyword-schema" id="keyword-schema">The "$schema" Keyword</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.1.p.1">The "$schema" keyword is both used as a JSON Schema dialect identifier and as the identifier of a resource which is itself a JSON Schema, which describes the set of valid schemas written for this particular dialect.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.1.p.2">The value of this keyword MUST be a <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">URI</a> (containing a scheme) and this URI MUST be normalized.  The current schema MUST be valid against the meta-schema identified by this URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.1.p.3">If this URI identifies a retrievable resource, that resource SHOULD be of media type "application/schema+json".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.1.p.4">The "$schema" keyword SHOULD be used in the document root schema object, and MAY be used in the root schema objects of embedded schema resources.  It MUST NOT appear in non-resource root schema objects.  If absent from the document root schema, the resulting behavior is implementation-defined.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.1.p.5">Values for this property are defined elsewhere in this and other documents, and by other parties.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1.2">8.1.2.</a> The "$vocabulary" Keyword</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.p.1">The "$vocabulary" keyword is used in meta-schemas to identify the vocabularies available for use in schemas described by that meta-schema.  It is also used to indicate whether each vocabulary is required or optional, in the sense that an implementation MUST understand the required vocabularies in order to successfully process the schema. Together, this information forms a dialect. Any vocabulary that is understood by the implementation MUST be processed in a manner consistent with the semantic definitions contained within the vocabulary.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.p.2">The value of this keyword MUST be an object.  The property names in the object MUST be URIs (containing a scheme) and this URI MUST be normalized.  Each URI that appears as a property name identifies a specific set of keywords and their semantics.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.p.3">The URI MAY be a URL, but the nature of the retrievable resource is currently undefined, and reserved for future use.  Vocabulary authors MAY use the URL of the vocabulary specification, in a human-readable media type such as text/html or text/plain, as the vocabulary URI.  <a id="CREF1" class="info">[CREF1]<span class="info">Vocabulary documents may be added in forthcoming drafts.  For now, identifying the keyword set is deemed sufficient as that, along with meta-schema validation, is how the current "vocabularies" work today.  Any future vocabulary document format will be specified as a JSON document, so using text/html or other non-JSON formats in the meantime will not produce any future ambiguity.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.p.4">The values of the object properties MUST be booleans.  If the value is true, then implementations that do not recognize the vocabulary MUST refuse to process any schemas that declare this meta-schema with "$schema".  If the value is false, implementations that do not recognize the vocabulary SHOULD proceed with processing such schemas.  The value has no impact if the implementation understands the vocabulary.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.p.5">Per <a href="#extending" class="xref">6.5</a>, unrecognized keywords SHOULD be treated as annotations.  This remains the case for keywords defined by unrecognized vocabularies.  It is not currently possible to distinguish between unrecognized keywords that are defined in vocabularies from those that are not part of any vocabulary.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.p.6">The "$vocabulary" keyword SHOULD be used in the root schema of any schema document intended for use as a meta-schema.  It MUST NOT appear in subschemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.p.7">The "$vocabulary" keyword MUST be ignored in schema documents that are not being processed as a meta-schema.  This allows validating a meta-schema M against its own meta-schema M' without requiring the validator to understand the vocabularies declared by M.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1.2.1">8.1.2.1.</a> Default vocabularies</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.1.p.1">If "$vocabulary" is absent, an implementation MAY determine behavior based on the meta-schema if it is recognized from the URI value of the referring schema's "$schema" keyword.  This is how behavior (such as Hyper-Schema usage) has been recognized prior to the existence of vocabularies.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.1.p.2">If the meta-schema, as referenced by the schema, is not recognized, or is missing, then the behavior is implementation-defined.  If the implementation proceeds with processing the schema, it MUST assume the use of the core vocabulary.  If the implementation is built for a specific purpose, then it SHOULD assume the use of all of the most relevant vocabularies for that purpose.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.1.p.3">For example, an implementation that is a validator SHOULD assume the use of all vocabularies in this specification and the companion Validation specification.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1.2.2">8.1.2.2.</a> Non-inheritability of vocabularies </h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.2.2.p.1">Note that the processing restrictions on "$vocabulary" mean that meta-schemas that reference other meta-schemas using "$ref" or similar keywords do not automatically inherit the vocabulary declarations of those other meta-schemas.  All such declarations must be repeated in the root of each schema document intended for use as a meta-schema.  This is demonstrated in <a href="#example-meta-schema" class="xref">the example meta-schema</a>.  <a id="CREF2" class="info">[CREF2]<span class="info">This requirement allows implementations to find all vocabulary requirement information in a single place for each meta-schema.  As schema extensibility means that there are endless potential ways to combine more fine-grained meta-schemas by reference, requiring implementations to anticipate all possibilities and search for vocabularies in referenced meta-schemas would be overly burdensome.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1.3">8.1.3.</a> Updates to Meta-Schema and Vocabulary URIs</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.3.p.1">Updated vocabulary and meta-schema URIs MAY be published between specification drafts in order to correct errors.  Implementations SHOULD consider URIs dated after this specification draft and before the next to indicate the same syntax and semantics as those listed here.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2">8.2.</a> Base URI, Anchors, and Dereferencing</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.1">To differentiate between schemas in a vast ecosystem, schemas are identified by <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">URI</a>, and can embed references to other schemas by specifying their URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.2">Several keywords can accept a relative <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">URI-reference</a>, or a value used to construct a relative URI-reference.  For these keywords, it is necessary to establish a base URI in order to resolve the reference.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.1">8.2.1.</a> <a href="#id-keyword" id="id-keyword">The "$id" Keyword</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.1.p.1">The "$id" keyword identifies a schema resource with its <a href="#RFC6596" class="xref">canonical</a> URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.1.p.2">Note that this URI is an identifier and not necessarily a network locator.  In the case of a network-addressable URL, a schema need not be downloadable from its canonical URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.1.p.3">If present, the value for this keyword MUST be a string, and MUST represent a valid <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">URI-reference</a>.  This URI-reference SHOULD be normalized, and MUST resolve to an <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">absolute-URI</a> (without a fragment).  Therefore, "$id" MUST NOT contain a non-empty fragment, and SHOULD NOT contain an empty fragment.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.1.p.4">Since an empty fragment in the context of the application/schema+json media type refers to the same resource as the base URI without a fragment, an implementation MAY normalize a URI ending with an empty fragment by removing the fragment.  However, schema authors SHOULD NOT rely on this behavior across implementations.  <a id="CREF3" class="info">[CREF3]<span class="info">This is primarily allowed because older meta-schemas have an empty fragment in their $id (or previously, id).  A future draft may outright forbid even empty fragments in "$id".  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.1.p.5">This URI also serves as the base URI for relative URI-references in keywords within the schema resource, in accordance with <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986 section 5.1.1</a> regarding base URIs embedded in content.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.1.p.6">The presence of "$id" in a subschema indicates that the subschema constitutes a distinct schema resource within a single schema document.  Furthermore, in accordance with <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986 section 5.1.2</a> regarding encapsulating entities, if an "$id" in a subschema is a relative URI-reference, the base URI for resolving that reference is the URI of the parent schema resource.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.1.p.7">If no parent schema object explicitly identifies itself as a resource with "$id", the base URI is that of the entire document, as established by the steps given in the <a href="#initial-base" class="xref">previous section.</a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.1.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.1.1">8.2.1.1.</a> Identifying the root schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.1.1.p.1">The root schema of a JSON Schema document SHOULD contain an "$id" keyword with an <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">absolute-URI</a> (containing a scheme, but no fragment).  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.2">8.2.2.</a> <a href="#anchor" id="anchor">Defining location-independent identifiers</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.1">Using JSON Pointer fragments requires knowledge of the structure of the schema.  When writing schema documents with the intention to provide re-usable schemas, it may be preferable to use a plain name fragment that is not tied to any particular structural location.  This allows a subschema to be relocated without requiring JSON Pointer references to be updated.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.2">The "$anchor" and "$dynamicAnchor" keywords are used to specify such fragments.  They are identifier keywords that can only be used to create plain name fragments, rather than absolute URIs as seen with "$id".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.3">The base URI to which the resulting fragment is appended is the canonical URI of the schema resource containing the "$anchor" or "$dynamicAnchor" in question.  As discussed in the previous section, this is either the nearest "$id" in the same or parent schema object, or the base URI for the document as determined according to RFC 3986.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.4">Separately from the usual usage of URIs, "$dynamicAnchor" indicates that the fragment is an extension point when used with the "$dynamicRef" keyword.  This low-level, advanced feature makes it easier to extend recursive schemas such as the meta-schemas, without imposing any particular semantics on that extension.  See the section on <a href="#dynamic-ref" class="xref">"$dynamicRef"</a> for details.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.5">In most cases, the normal fragment behavior both suffices and is more intuitive.  Therefore it is RECOMMENDED that "$anchor" be used to create plain name fragments unless there is a clear need for "$dynamicAnchor".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.6">If present, the value of this keyword MUST be a string and MUST start with a letter ([A-Za-z]) or underscore ("_"), followed by any number of letters, digits ([0-9]), hyphens ("-"), underscores ("_"), and periods (".").  This matches the US-ASCII part of XML's <a href="#xml-names" class="xref">NCName production</a>.  <a id="CREF4" class="info">[CREF4]<span class="info">Note that the anchor string does not include the "#" character, as it is not a URI-reference.  An "$anchor": "foo" becomes the fragment "#foo" when used in a URI.  See below for full examples.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.7">The effect of specifying the same fragment name multiple times within the same resource, using any combination of "$anchor" and/or "$dynamicAnchor", is undefined.  Implementations MAY raise an error if such usage is detected.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.3">8.2.3.</a> <a href="#references" id="references">Schema References</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.p.1">Several keywords can be used to reference a schema which is to be applied to the current instance location. "$ref" and "$dynamicRef" are applicator keywords, applying the referenced schema to the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.p.2">As the values of "$ref" and "$dynamicRef" are URI References, this allows the possibility to externalise or divide a schema across multiple files, and provides the ability to validate recursive structures through self-reference.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.p.3">The resolved URI produced by these keywords is not necessarily a network locator, only an identifier. A schema need not be downloadable from the address if it is a network-addressable URL, and implementations SHOULD NOT assume they should perform a network operation when they encounter a network-addressable URI.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.3.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.3.1">8.2.3.1.</a> <a href="#ref" id="ref">Direct References with "$ref"</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.1.p.1">The "$ref" keyword is an applicator that is used to reference a statically identified schema.  Its results are the results of the referenced schema.  <a id="CREF5" class="info">[CREF5]<span class="info">Note that this definition of how the results are determined means that other keywords can appear alongside of "$ref" in the same schema object.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.1.p.2">The value of the "$ref" keyword MUST be a string which is a URI-Reference.  Resolved against the current URI base, it produces the URI of the schema to apply.  This resolution is safe to perform on schema load, as the process of evaluating an instance cannot change how the reference resolves.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.3.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.3.2">8.2.3.2.</a> <a href="#dynamic-ref" id="dynamic-ref">Dynamic References with "$dynamicRef"</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.2.p.1">The "$dynamicRef" keyword is an applicator that allows for deferring the full resolution until runtime, at which point it is resolved each time it is encountered while evaluating an instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.2.p.2">Together with "$dynamicAnchor", "$dynamicRef" implements a cooperative extension mechanism that is primarily useful with recursive schemas (schemas that reference themselves).  Both the extension point and the runtime-determined extension target are defined with "$dynamicAnchor", and only exhibit runtime dynamic behavior when referenced with "$dynamicRef".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.2.p.3">The value of the "$dynamicRef" property MUST be a string which is a URI-Reference.  Resolved against the current URI base, it produces the URI used as the starting point for runtime resolution.  This initial resolution is safe to perform on schema load.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.2.p.4">If the initially resolved starting point URI includes a fragment that was created by the "$dynamicAnchor" keyword, the initial URI MUST be replaced by the URI (including the fragment) for the outermost schema resource in the <a href="#scopes" class="xref">dynamic scope</a> that defines an identically named fragment with "$dynamicAnchor".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.2.p.5">Otherwise, its behavior is identical to "$ref", and no runtime resolution is needed.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.3.2.p.6">For a full example using these keyword, see appendix <a href="#recursive-example" class="xref">C</a>.  <a id="CREF6" class="info">[CREF6]<span class="info">The difference between the hyper-schema meta-schema in pre-2019 drafts and an this draft dramatically demonstrates the utility of these keywords.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2.4">8.2.4.</a> <a href="#defs" id="defs">Schema Re-Use With "$defs"</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.p.1">The "$defs" keyword reserves a location for schema authors to inline re-usable JSON Schemas into a more general schema.  The keyword does not directly affect the validation result.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.p.2">This keyword's value MUST be an object.  Each member value of this object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.4.p.3">As an example, here is a schema describing an array of positive integers, where the positive integer constraint is a subschema in "$defs": </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": "array",
+    "items": { "$ref": "#/$defs/positiveInteger" },
+    "$defs": {
+        "positiveInteger": {
+            "type": "integer",
+            "exclusiveMinimum": 0
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.3">8.3.</a> Comments With "$comment"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.1">This keyword reserves a location for comments from schema authors to readers or maintainers of the schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.2">The value of this keyword MUST be a string. Implementations MUST NOT present this string to end users.  Tools for editing schemas SHOULD support displaying and editing this keyword.  The value of this keyword MAY be used in debug or error output which is intended for developers making use of schemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.3">Schema vocabularies SHOULD allow "$comment" within any object containing vocabulary keywords.  Implementations MAY assume "$comment" is allowed unless the vocabulary specifically forbids it.  Vocabularies MUST NOT specify any effect of "$comment" beyond what is described in this specification.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.4">Tools that translate other media types or programming languages to and from application/schema+json MAY choose to convert that media type or programming language's native comments to or from "$comment" values.  The behavior of such translation when both native comments and "$comment" properties are present is implementation-dependent.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.5">Implementations MAY strip "$comment" values at any point during processing.  In particular, this allows for shortening schemas when the size of deployed schemas is a concern.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.6">Implementations MUST NOT take any other action based on the presence, absence, or contents of "$comment" properties.  In particular, the value of "$comment" MUST NOT be collected as an annotation result.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9">9.</a> Loading and Processing Schemas</h1>
+<p></p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.1">9.1.</a> Loading a Schema</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.1.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.1.1">9.1.1.</a> <a href="#initial-base" id="initial-base">Initial Base URI</a>
+</h1>
+<p><a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC3986 Section 5.1</a> defines how to determine the default base URI of a document.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.1.p.2">Informatively, the initial base URI of a schema is the URI at which it was found, whether that was a network location, a local filesystem, or any other situation identifiable by a URI of any known scheme.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.1.p.3">If a schema document defines no explicit base URI with "$id" (embedded in content), the base URI is that determined per <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986 section 5</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.1.p.4">If no source is known, or no URI scheme is known for the source, a suitable implementation-specific default URI MAY be used as described in <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986 Section 5.1.4</a>.  It is RECOMMENDED that implementations document any default base URI that they assume.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.1.p.5">If a schema object is embedded in a document of another media type, then the initial base URI is determined according to the rules of that media type.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.1.p.6">Unless the "$id" keyword described in the next section is present in the root schema, this base URI SHOULD be considered the canonical URI of the schema document's root schema resource.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.1.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.1.2">9.1.2.</a> Loading a referenced schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.2.p.1">The use of URIs to identify remote schemas does not necessarily mean anything is downloaded, but instead JSON Schema implementations SHOULD understand ahead of time which schemas they will be using, and the URIs that identify them.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.2.p.2">When schemas are downloaded, for example by a generic user-agent that does not know until runtime which schemas to download, see <a href="#hypermedia" class="xref">Usage for Hypermedia</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.2.p.3">Implementations SHOULD be able to associate arbitrary URIs with an arbitrary schema and/or automatically associate a schema's "$id"-given URI, depending on the trust that the validator has in the schema.  Such URIs and schemas can be supplied to an implementation prior to processing instances, or may be noted within a schema document as it is processed, producing associations as shown in appendix <a href="#idExamples" class="xref">A</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.2.p.4">A schema MAY (and likely will) have multiple URIs, but there is no way for a URI to identify more than one schema. When multiple schemas try to identify as the same URI, validators SHOULD raise an error condition.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.1.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.1.3">9.1.3.</a> Detecting a Meta-Schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.3.p.1">Implementations MUST recognize a schema as a meta-schema if it is being examined because it was identified as such by another schema's "$schema" keyword.  This means that a single schema document might sometimes be considered a regular schema, and other times be considered a meta-schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.3.p.2">In the case of examining a schema which is its own meta-schema, when an implementation begins processing it as a regular schema, it is processed under those rules.  However, when loaded a second time as a result of checking its own "$schema" value, it is treated as a meta-schema.  So the same document is processed both ways in the course of one session.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.3.p.3">Implementations MAY allow a schema to be explicitly passed as a meta-schema, for implementation-specific purposes, such as pre-loading a commonly used meta-schema and checking its vocabulary support requirements up front.  Meta-schema authors MUST NOT expect such features to be interoperable across implementations.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2">9.2.</a> Dereferencing</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.1">Schemas can be identified by any URI that has been given to them, including a JSON Pointer or their URI given directly by "$id".  In all cases, dereferencing a "$ref" reference involves first resolving its value as a URI reference against the current base URI per <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">RFC 3986</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.2">If the resulting URI identifies a schema within the current document, or within another schema document that has been made available to the implementation, then that schema SHOULD be used automatically.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.3">For example, consider this schema: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "$id": "https://example.net/root.json",
+    "items": {
+        "type": "array",
+        "items": { "$ref": "#item" }
+    },
+    "$defs": {
+        "single": {
+            "$anchor": "item",
+            "type": "object",
+            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "other.json" }
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.4">When an implementation encounters the &lt;#/$defs/single&gt; schema, it resolves the "$anchor" value as a fragment name against the current base URI to form &lt;https://example.net/root.json#item&gt;.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.5">When an implementation then looks inside the &lt;#/items&gt; schema, it encounters the &lt;#item&gt; reference, and resolves this to &lt;https://example.net/root.json#item&gt;, which it has seen defined in this same document and can therefore use automatically.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.6">When an implementation encounters the reference to "other.json", it resolves this to &lt;https://example.net/other.json&gt;, which is not defined in this document.  If a schema with that identifier has otherwise been supplied to the implementation, it can also be used automatically.  <a id="CREF7" class="info">[CREF7]<span class="info">What should implementations do when the referenced schema is not known? Are there circumstances in which automatic network dereferencing is allowed?  A same origin policy?  A user-configurable option?  In the case of an evolving API described by Hyper-Schema, it is expected that new schemas will be added to the system dynamically, so placing an absolute requirement of pre-loading schema documents is not feasible.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2.1">9.2.1.</a> <a href="#embedded" id="embedded">JSON Pointer fragments and embedded schema resources</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.1.p.1">Since JSON Pointer URI fragments are constructed based on the structure of the schema document, an embedded schema resource and its subschemas can be identified by JSON Pointer fragments relative to either its own canonical URI, or relative to the containing resource's URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.1.p.2">Conceptually, a set of linked schema resources should behave identically whether each resource is a separate document connected with <a href="#references" class="xref">schema references</a>, or is structured as a single document with one or more schema resources embedded as subschemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.1.p.3">Since URIs involving JSON Pointer fragments relative to the parent schema resource's URI cease to be valid when the embedded schema is moved to a separate document and referenced, applications and schemas SHOULD NOT use such URIs to identify embedded schema resources or locations within them.  </p>
+<p>Consider the following schema document that contains another schema resource embedded within it: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "$id": "https://example.com/foo",
+    "items": {
+        "$id": "https://example.com/bar",
+        "additionalProperties": { }
+    }
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<p>The URI "https://example.com/foo#/items/additionalProperties" points to the schema of the "additionalProperties" keyword in the embedded resource.  The canonical URI of that schema, however, is "https://example.com/bar#/additionalProperties".  </p>
+<p>Now consider the following two schema resources linked by reference using a URI value for "$ref": </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "$id": "https://example.com/foo",
+    "items": {
+        "$ref": "bar"
+    }
+}
+
+{
+    "$id": "https://example.com/bar",
+    "additionalProperties": { }
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<p>Here we see that the canonical URI for that "additionalProperties" subschema is still valid, while the non-canonical URI with the fragment beginning with "#/items/$ref" now resolves to nothing.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.1.p.4">Note also that "https://example.com/foo#/items" is valid in both arrangements, but resolves to a different value.  This URI ends up functioning similarly to a retrieval URI for a resource.  While valid, examining the resolved value and either using the "$id" (if the value is a subschema), or resolving the reference and using the "$id" of the reference target, is preferable.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.1.p.5">An implementation MAY choose not to support addressing schemas by non-canonical URIs. As such, it is RECOMMENDED that schema authors only use canonical URIs, as using non-canonical URIs may reduce schema interoperability.  <a id="CREF8" class="info">[CREF8]<span class="info">This is to avoid requiring implementations to keep track of a whole stack of possible base URIs and JSON Pointer fragments for each, given that all but one will be fragile if the schema resources are reorganized.  Some have argued that this is easy so there is no point in forbidding it, while others have argued that it complicates schema identification and should be forbidden.  Feedback on this topic is encouraged.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.1.p.6">Further examples of such non-canonical URIs, as well as the appropriate canonical URIs to use instead, are provided in appendix <a href="#idExamples" class="xref">A</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3">9.3.</a> Compound Documents</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.1">A Compound Schema Document is defined as a JSON document (sometimes called a "bundled" schema) which has multiple embedded JSON Schema Resources bundled into the same document to ease transportation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.2">Each embedded Schema Resource MUST be treated as an individual Schema Resource, following standard schema loading and processing requirements, including determining vocabulary support.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3.1">9.3.1.</a> Bundling</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.p.1">The bundling process for creating a Compound Schema Document is defined as taking references (such as "$ref") to an external Schema Resource and embedding the referenced Schema Resources within the referring document. Bundling SHOULD be done in such a way that all URIs (used for referencing) in the base document and any referenced/embedded documents do not require altering.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.p.2">Each embedded JSON Schema Resource MUST identify itself with a URI using the "$id" keyword, and SHOULD make use of the "$schema" keyword to identify the dialect it is using, in the root of the schema resource. It is RECOMMENDED that the URI identifier value of "$id" be an Absolute URI.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.p.3">When the Schema Resource referenced by a by-reference applicator is bundled, it is RECOMMENDED that the Schema Resource be located as a value of a "$defs" object at the containing schema's root.  The key of the "$defs" for the now embedded Schema Resource MAY be the "$id" of the bundled schema or some other form of application defined unique identifer (such as a UUID). This key is not intended to be referenced in JSON Schema, but may be used by an application to aid the bundling process.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.p.4">A Schema Resource MAY be embedded in a location other than "$defs" where the location is defined as a schema value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.p.5">A Bundled Schema Resource MUST NOT be bundled by replacing the schema object from which it was referenced, or by wrapping the Schema Resource in other applicator keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.p.6">In order to produce identical output, references in the containing schema document to the previously external Schema Resources MUST NOT be changed, and now resolve to a schema using the "$id" of an embedded Schema Resource. Such identical output includes validation evaluation and URIs or paths used in resulting annotations or errors.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.1.p.7">While the bundling process will often be the main method for creating a Compound Schema Document, it is also possible and expected that some will be created by hand, potentially without individual Schema Resources existing on their own previously.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3.2">9.3.2.</a> Differing and Default Dialects</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.p.1">When multiple schema resources are present in a single document, schema resources which do not define with which dialect they should be processed MUST be processed with the same dialect as the enclosing resource.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.2.p.2">Since any schema that can be referenced can also be embedded, embedded schema resources MAY specify different processing dialects using the "$schema" values from their enclosing resource.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3.3">9.3.3.</a> Validating</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.3.p.1">Given that a Compound Schema Document may have embedded resources which identify as using different dialects, these documents SHOULD NOT be validated by applying a meta-schema to the Compound Schema Document as an instance. It is RECOMMENDED that an alternate validation process be provided in order to validate Schema Documents. Each Schema Resource SHOULD be separately validated against its associated meta-schema.  <a id="CREF9" class="info">[CREF9]<span class="info">If you know a schema is what's being validated, you can identify if the schemas is a Compound Schema Document or not, by way of use of "$id", which identifies an embedded resource when used not at the document's root.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.3.p.2">A Compound Schema Document in which all embedded resources identify as using the same dialect, or in which "$schema" is omitted and therefore defaults to that of the enclosing resource, MAY be validated by applying the appropriate meta-schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.4">9.4.</a> Caveats</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.4.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.4.1">9.4.1.</a> Guarding Against Infinite Recursion</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.1.p.1">A schema MUST NOT be run into an infinite loop against an instance. For example, if two schemas "#alice" and "#bob" both have an "allOf" property that refers to the other, a naive validator might get stuck in an infinite recursive loop trying to validate the instance.  Schemas SHOULD NOT make use of infinite recursive nesting like this; the behavior is undefined.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.4.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.4.2">9.4.2.</a> <a href="#non-schemas" id="non-schemas">References to Possible Non-Schemas</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.2.p.1">Subschema objects (or booleans) are recognized by their use with known applicator keywords or with location-reserving keywords such as <a href="#defs" class="xref">"$defs"</a> that take one or more subschemas as a value.  These keywords may be "$defs" and the standard applicators from this document, or extension keywords from a known vocabulary, or implementation-specific custom keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.2.p.2">Multi-level structures of unknown keywords are capable of introducing nested subschemas, which would be subject to the processing rules for "$id".  Therefore, having a reference target in such an unrecognized structure cannot be reliably implemented, and the resulting behavior is undefined.  Similarly, a reference target under a known keyword, for which the value is known not to be a schema, results in undefined behavior in order to avoid burdening implementations with the need to detect such targets.  <a id="CREF10" class="info">[CREF10]<span class="info">These scenarios are analogous to fetching a schema over HTTP but receiving a response with a Content-Type other than application/schema+json.  An implementation can certainly try to interpret it as a schema, but the origin server offered no guarantee that it actually is any such thing.  Therefore, interpreting it as such has security implications and may produce unpredictable results.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.2.p.3">Note that single-level custom keywords with identical syntax and semantics to "$defs" do not allow for any intervening "$id" keywords, and therefore will behave correctly under implementations that attempt to use any reference target as a schema.  However, this behavior is implementation-specific and MUST NOT be relied upon for interoperability.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.5">9.5.</a> Associating Instances and Schemas</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.5.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.5.1">9.5.1.</a> <a href="#hypermedia" id="hypermedia">Usage for Hypermedia</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.1.p.1">JSON has been adopted widely by HTTP servers for automated APIs and robots. This section describes how to enhance processing of JSON documents in a more RESTful manner when used with protocols that support media types and <a href="#RFC8288" class="xref">Web linking</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.5.1.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.5.1.1">9.5.1.1.</a> Linking to a Schema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.1.1.p.1">It is RECOMMENDED that instances described by a schema provide a link to a downloadable JSON Schema using the link relation "describedby", as defined by <a href="#W3C.REC-ldp-20150226" class="xref">Linked Data Protocol 1.0, section 8.1</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.1.1.p.2">In HTTP, such links can be attached to any response using the <a href="#RFC8288" class="xref">Link header</a>. An example of such a header would be: </p>
+<pre>
+        
+        Link: &lt;https://example.com/my-hyper-schema&gt;; rel="describedby"
+        
+                            </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.5.1.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.5.1.2">9.5.1.2.</a> Usage Over HTTP</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.1.2.p.1">When used for hypermedia systems over a network, <a href="#RFC7231" class="xref">HTTP</a> is frequently the protocol of choice for distributing schemas. Misbehaving clients can pose problems for server maintainers if they pull a schema over the network more frequently than necessary, when it's instead possible to cache a schema for a long period of time.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.1.2.p.2">HTTP servers SHOULD set long-lived caching headers on JSON Schemas.  HTTP clients SHOULD observe caching headers and not re-request documents within their freshness period.  Distributed systems SHOULD make use of a shared cache and/or caching proxy.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.1.2.p.3">Clients SHOULD set or prepend a User-Agent header specific to the JSON Schema implementation or software product. Since symbols are listed in decreasing order of significance, the JSON Schema library name/version should precede the more generic HTTP library name (if any). For example: </p>
+<pre>
+        
+        User-Agent: product-name/5.4.1 so-cool-json-schema/1.0.2 curl/7.43.0
+        
+                            </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.1.2.p.4">Clients SHOULD be able to make requests with a "From" header so that server operators can contact the owner of a potentially misbehaving script.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10">10.</a> A Vocabulary for Applying Subschemas</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.1">This section defines a vocabulary of applicator keywords that are RECOMMENDED for use as the basis of other vocabularies.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.2">Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" SHOULD be considered to require this vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.3">The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Applicator vocabulary, is: &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/applicator&gt;.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.4">The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/applicator">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/applicator</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.5">Updated vocabulary and meta-schema URIs MAY be published between specification drafts in order to correct errors.  Implementations SHOULD consider URIs dated after this specification draft and before the next to indicate the same syntax and semantics as those listed here.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.1">10.1.</a> Keyword Independence</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.1">Schema keywords typically operate independently, without affecting each other's outcomes.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.1.p.2">For schema author convenience, there are some exceptions among the keywords in this vocabulary: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>"additionalProperties", whose behavior is defined in terms of "properties" and "patternProperties" </li>
+<li>"items", whose behavior is defined in terms of "prefixItems" </li>
+<li>"contains", whose behavior is defined in terms of "minContains" </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.2">10.2.</a> <a href="#in-place" id="in-place">Keywords for Applying Subschemas in Place</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.p.1">These keywords apply subschemas to the same location in the instance as the parent schema is being applied.  They allow combining or modifying the subschema results in various ways.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.p.2">Subschemas of these keywords evaluate the instance completely independently such that the results of one such subschema MUST NOT impact the results of sibling subschemas.  Therefore subschemas may be applied in any order.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.2.1">10.2.1.</a> <a href="#logic" id="logic">Keywords for Applying Subschemas With Logic</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.1.p.1">These keywords correspond to logical operators for combining or modifying the boolean assertion results of the subschemas.  They have no direct impact on annotation collection, although they enable the same annotation keyword to be applied to an instance location with different values.  Annotation keywords define their own rules for combining such values.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2.1.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.2.1.1">10.2.1.1.</a> <a href="#allOf" id="allOf">allOf</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.1.1.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a non-empty array.  Each item of the array MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.1.1.p.2">An instance validates successfully against this keyword if it validates successfully against all schemas defined by this keyword's value.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2.1.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.2.1.2">10.2.1.2.</a> anyOf</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.1.2.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a non-empty array.  Each item of the array MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.1.2.p.2">An instance validates successfully against this keyword if it validates successfully against at least one schema defined by this keyword's value.  Note that when annotations are being collected, all subschemas MUST be examined so that annotations are collected from each subschema that validates successfully.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2.1.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.2.1.3">10.2.1.3.</a> oneOf</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.1.3.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a non-empty array.  Each item of the array MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.1.3.p.2">An instance validates successfully against this keyword if it validates successfully against exactly one schema defined by this keyword's value.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2.1.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.2.1.4">10.2.1.4.</a> <a href="#not" id="not">not</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.1.4.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.1.4.p.2">An instance is valid against this keyword if it fails to validate successfully against the schema defined by this keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.2.2">10.2.2.</a> <a href="#conditional" id="conditional">Keywords for Applying Subschemas Conditionally</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.p.1">Three of these keywords work together to implement conditional application of a subschema based on the outcome of another subschema.  The fourth is a shortcut for a specific conditional case.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.p.2">"if", "then", and "else" MUST NOT interact with each other across subschema boundaries.  In other words, an "if" in one branch of an "allOf" MUST NOT have an impact on a "then" or "else" in another branch.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.p.3">There is no default behavior for "if", "then", or "else" when they are not present.  In particular, they MUST NOT be treated as if present with an empty schema, and when "if" is not present, both "then" and "else" MUST be entirely ignored.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.2.2.1">10.2.2.1.</a> if</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.1.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.1.p.2">This validation outcome of this keyword's subschema has no direct effect on the overall validation result.  Rather, it controls which of the "then" or "else" keywords are evaluated.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.1.p.3">Instances that successfully validate against this keyword's subschema MUST also be valid against the subschema value of the "then" keyword, if present.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.1.p.4">Instances that fail to validate against this keyword's subschema MUST also be valid against the subschema value of the "else" keyword, if present.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.1.p.5">If <a href="#annotations" class="xref">annotations</a> are being collected, they are collected from this keyword's subschema in the usual way, including when the keyword is present without either "then" or "else".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.2.2.2">10.2.2.2.</a> then</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.2.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.2.p.2">When "if" is present, and the instance successfully validates against its subschema, then validation succeeds against this keyword if the instance also successfully validates against this keyword's subschema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.2.p.3">This keyword has no effect when "if" is absent, or when the instance fails to validate against its subschema.  Implementations MUST NOT evaluate the instance against this keyword, for either validation or annotation collection purposes, in such cases.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2.2.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.2.2.3">10.2.2.3.</a> else</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.3.p.1">This keyword's value MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.3.p.2">When "if" is present, and the instance fails to validate against its subschema, then validation succeeds against this keyword if the instance successfully validates against this keyword's subschema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.3.p.3">This keyword has no effect when "if" is absent, or when the instance successfully validates against its subschema.  Implementations MUST NOT evaluate the instance against this keyword, for either validation or annotation collection purposes, in such cases.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.2.2.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.2.2.4">10.2.2.4.</a> dependentSchemas</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.4.p.1">This keyword specifies subschemas that are evaluated if the instance is an object and contains a certain property.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.4.p.2">This keyword's value MUST be an object.  Each value in the object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.4.p.3">If the object key is a property in the instance, the entire instance must validate against the subschema.  Its use is dependent on the presence of the property.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.2.2.4.p.4">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty object.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3">10.3.</a> Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Child Instances</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.p.1">Each of these keywords defines a rule for applying its subschema(s) to child instances, specifically object properties and array items, and combining their results.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3.1">10.3.1.</a> Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Arrays</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3.1.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3.1.1">10.3.1.1.</a> prefixItems</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.1.p.1">The value of "prefixItems" MUST be a non-empty array of valid JSON Schemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.1.p.2">Validation succeeds if each element of the instance validates against the schema at the same position, if any.  This keyword does not constrain the length of the array.  If the array is longer than this keyword's value, this keyword validates only the prefix of matching length.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.1.p.3">This keyword produces an annotation value which is the largest index to which this keyword applied a subschema.  The value MAY be a boolean true if a subschema was applied to every index of the instance, such as is produced by the "items" keyword.  This annotation affects the behavior of "items" and "unevaluatedItems".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.1.p.4">Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as an empty array.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3.1.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3.1.2">10.3.1.2.</a> <a href="#items" id="items">items</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.2.p.1">The value of "items" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.2.p.2">This keyword applies its subschema to all instance elements at indexes greater than the length of the "prefixItems" array in the same schema object, as reported by the annotation result of that "prefixItems" keyword.  If no such annotation result exists, "items" applies its subschema to all instance array elements.  <a id="CREF11" class="info">[CREF11]<span class="info">Note that the behavior of "items" without "prefixItems" is identical to that of the schema form of "items" in prior drafts.  When "prefixItems" is present, the behavior of "items" is identical to the former "additionalItems" keyword.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.2.p.3">If the "items" subschema is applied to any positions within the instance array, it produces an annotation result of boolean true, indicating that all remaining array elements have been evaluated against this keyword's subschema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.2.p.4">Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as an empty schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.2.p.5">Implementations MAY choose to implement or optimize this keyword in another way that produces the same effect, such as by directly checking for the presence and size of a "prefixItems" array.  Implementations that do not support annotation collection MUST do so.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3.1.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3.1.3">10.3.1.3.</a> contains</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.3.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.3.p.2">An array instance is valid against "contains" if at least one of its elements is valid against the given schema. The subschema MUST be applied to every array element even after the first match has been found, in order to collect annotations for use by other keywords.  This is to ensure that all possible annotations are collected.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.3.p.3">Logically, the validation result of applying the value subschema to each item in the array MUST be ORed with "false", resulting in an overall validation result.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.1.3.p.4">This keyword produces an annotation value which is an array of the indexes to which this keyword validates successfully when applying its subschema, in ascending order. The value MAY be a boolean "true" if the subschema validates successfully when applied to every index of the instance. The annotation MUST be present if the instance array to which this keyword's schema applies is empty.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3.2">10.3.2.</a> Keywords for Applying Subschemas to Objects</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3.2.1">10.3.2.1.</a> properties</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.1.p.1">The value of "properties" MUST be an object.  Each value of this object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.1.p.2">Validation succeeds if, for each name that appears in both the instance and as a name within this keyword's value, the child instance for that name successfully validates against the corresponding schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.1.p.3">The annotation result of this keyword is the set of instance property names matched by this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.1.p.4">Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as an empty object.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3.2.2">10.3.2.2.</a> patternProperties</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.2.p.1">The value of "patternProperties" MUST be an object. Each property name of this object SHOULD be a valid regular expression, according to the ECMA-262 regular expression dialect. Each property value of this object MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.2.p.2">Validation succeeds if, for each instance name that matches any regular expressions that appear as a property name in this keyword's value, the child instance for that name successfully validates against each schema that corresponds to a matching regular expression.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.2.p.3">The annotation result of this keyword is the set of instance property names matched by this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.2.p.4">Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as an empty object.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3.2.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3.2.3">10.3.2.3.</a> <a href="#additionalProperties" id="additionalProperties">additionalProperties</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.3.p.1">The value of "additionalProperties" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.3.p.2">The behavior of this keyword depends on the presence and annotation results of "properties" and "patternProperties" within the same schema object.  Validation with "additionalProperties" applies only to the child values of instance names that do not appear in the annotation results of either "properties" or "patternProperties".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.3.p.3">For all such properties, validation succeeds if the child instance validates against the "additionalProperties" schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.3.p.4">The annotation result of this keyword is the set of instance property names validated by this keyword's subschema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.3.p.5">Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as an empty schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.3.p.6">Implementations MAY choose to implement or optimize this keyword in another way that produces the same effect, such as by directly checking the names in "properties" and the patterns in "patternProperties" against the instance property set.  Implementations that do not support annotation collection MUST do so.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10.3.2.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10.3.2.4">10.3.2.4.</a> propertyNames</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.4.p.1">The value of "propertyNames" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.4.p.2">If the instance is an object, this keyword validates if every property name in the instance validates against the provided schema.  Note the property name that the schema is testing will always be a string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.3.2.4.p.3">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.11">
+<a href="#rfc.section.11">11.</a> A Vocabulary for Unevaluated Locations</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.1">The purpose of these keywords is to enable schema authors to apply subschemas to array items or object properties that have not been successfully evaluated against any dynamic-scope subschema of any adjacent keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.2">These instance items or properties may have been unsuccessfully evaluated against one or more adjacent keyword subschemas, such as when an assertion in a branch of an "anyOf" fails.  Such failed evaluations are not considered to contribute to whether or not the item or property has been evaluated.  Only successful evaluations are considered.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.3">If an item in an array or an object property is "successfully evaluated", it is logically considered to be valid in terms of the representation of the object or array that's expected. For example if a subschema represents a car, which requires between 2-4 wheels, and the value of "wheels" is 6, the instance object is not "evaluated" to be a car, and the "wheels" property is considered "unevaluated (successfully as a known thing)", and does not retain any annotations.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.4">Recall that adjacent keywords are keywords within the same schema object, and that the dynamic-scope subschemas include reference targets as well as lexical subschemas.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.5">The behavior of these keywords depend on the annotation results of adjacent keywords that apply to the instance location being validated.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.6">Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" SHOULD be considered to require this vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.7">The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Unevaluated Applicator vocabulary, is: &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/unevaluated&gt;.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.8">The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/unevaluated">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/unevaluated</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.p.9">Updated vocabulary and meta-schema URIs MAY be published between specification drafts in order to correct errors.  Implementations SHOULD consider URIs dated after this specification draft and before the next to indicate the same syntax and semantics as those listed here.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.11.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.11.1">11.1.</a> Keyword Independence</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.1.p.1">Schema keywords typically operate independently, without affecting each other's outcomes. However, the keywords in this vocabulary are notable exceptions: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>"unevaluatedItems", whose behavior is defined in terms of annotations from "prefixItems", "items", "contains", and itself </li>
+<li>"unevaluatedProperties", whose behavior is defined in terms of annotations from "properties", "patternProperties", "additionalProperties" and itself </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.11.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.11.2">11.2.</a> <a href="#unevaluatedItems" id="unevaluatedItems">unevaluatedItems</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.2.p.1">The value of "unevaluatedItems" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.2.p.2">The behavior of this keyword depends on the annotation results of adjacent keywords that apply to the instance location being validated.  Specifically, the annotations from "prefixItems", "items", and "contains", which can come from those keywords when they are adjacent to the "unevaluatedItems" keyword. Those three annotations, as well as "unevaluatedItems", can also result from any and all adjacent <a href="#in-place" class="xref">in-place applicator</a> keywords.  This includes but is not limited to the in-place applicators defined in this document.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.2.p.3">If no relevant annotations are present, the "unevaluatedItems" subschema MUST be applied to all locations in the array.  If a boolean true value is present from any of the relevant annotations, "unevaluatedItems" MUST be ignored.  Otherwise, the subschema MUST be applied to any index greater than the largest annotation value for "prefixItems", which does not appear in any annotation value for "contains".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.2.p.4">This means that "prefixItems", "items", "contains", and all in-place applicators MUST be evaluated before this keyword can be evaluated.  Authors of extension keywords MUST NOT define an in-place applicator that would need to be evaluated after this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.2.p.5">If the "unevaluatedItems" subschema is applied to any positions within the instance array, it produces an annotation result of boolean true, analogous to the behavior of "items".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.2.p.6">Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as an empty schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.11.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.11.3">11.3.</a> <a href="#unevaluatedProperties" id="unevaluatedProperties">unevaluatedProperties</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.3.p.1">The value of "unevaluatedProperties" MUST be a valid JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.3.p.2">The behavior of this keyword depends on the annotation results of adjacent keywords that apply to the instance location being validated.  Specifically, the annotations from "properties", "patternProperties", and "additionalProperties", which can come from those keywords when they are adjacent to the "unevaluatedProperties" keyword.  Those three annotations, as well as "unevaluatedProperties", can also result from any and all adjacent <a href="#in-place" class="xref">in-place applicator</a> keywords.  This includes but is not limited to the in-place applicators defined in this document.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.3.p.3">Validation with "unevaluatedProperties" applies only to the child values of instance names that do not appear in the "properties", "patternProperties", "additionalProperties", or "unevaluatedProperties" annotation results that apply to the instance location being validated.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.3.p.4">For all such properties, validation succeeds if the child instance validates against the "unevaluatedProperties" schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.3.p.5">This means that "properties", "patternProperties", "additionalProperties", and all in-place applicators MUST be evaluated before this keyword can be evaluated.  Authors of extension keywords MUST NOT define an in-place applicator that would need to be evaluated after this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.3.p.6">The annotation result of this keyword is the set of instance property names validated by this keyword's subschema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.11.3.p.7">Omitting this keyword has the same assertion behavior as an empty schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12">12.</a> <a href="#output" id="output">Output Formatting</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.p.1">JSON Schema is defined to be platform-independent.  As such, to increase compatibility across platforms, implementations SHOULD conform to a standard validation output format.  This section describes the minimum requirements that consumers will need to properly interpret validation results.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12.1">12.1.</a> Format</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.1.p.1">JSON Schema output is defined using the JSON Schema data instance model as described in section 4.2.1.  Implementations MAY deviate from this as supported by their specific languages and platforms, however it is RECOMMENDED that the output be convertible to the JSON format defined herein via serialization or other means.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12.2">12.2.</a> Output Formats</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.2.p.1">This specification defines four output formats.  See the "Output Structure" section for the requirements of each format.  </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>Flag - A boolean which simply indicates the overall validation result with no further details.  </li>
+<li>Basic - Provides validation information in a flat list structure.  </li>
+<li>Detailed - Provides validation information in a condensed hierarchical structure based on the structure of the schema.  </li>
+<li>Verbose - Provides validation information in an uncondensed hierarchical structure that matches the exact structure of the schema.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> An implementation SHOULD provide at least one of the "flag", "basic", or "detailed" format and MAY provide the "verbose" format.  If it provides one or more of the "detailed" or "verbose" formats, it MUST also provide the "flag" format.  Implementations SHOULD specify in their documentation which formats they support.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12.3">12.3.</a> Minimum Information</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.p.1">Beyond the simplistic "flag" output, additional information is useful to aid in debugging a schema or instance.  Each sub-result SHOULD contain the information contained within this section at a minimum.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.p.2">A single object that contains all of these components is considered an output unit.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.p.3">Implementations MAY elect to provide additional information.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.3.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12.3.1">12.3.1.</a> Keyword Relative Location</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.1.p.1">The relative location of the validating keyword that follows the validation path.  The value MUST be expressed as a JSON Pointer, and it MUST include any by-reference applicators such as "$ref" or "$dynamicRef".  </p>
+<pre>
+
+#/properties/width/$ref/minimum
+
+                        </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.1.p.2">Note that this pointer may not be resolvable by the normal JSON Pointer process due to the inclusion of these by-reference applicator keywords.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.1.p.3">The JSON key for this information is "keywordLocation".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.3.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12.3.2">12.3.2.</a> Keyword Absolute Location</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.2.p.1">The absolute, dereferenced location of the validating keyword.  The value MUST be expressed as a full URI using the canonical URI of the relevant schema object, and it MUST NOT include by-reference applicators such as "$ref" or "$dynamicRef" as non-terminal path components.  It MAY end in such keywords if the error or annotation is for that keyword, such as an unresolvable reference.  <a id="CREF12" class="info">[CREF12]<span class="info">Note that "absolute" here is in the sense of "absolute filesystem path" (meaning the complete location) rather than the "absolute-URI" terminology from RFC 3986 (meaning with scheme but without fragment).  Keyword absolute locations will have a fragment in order to identify the keyword.  </span></a> </p>
+<pre>
+
+https://example.com/schemas/common#/$defs/count/minimum
+
+                        </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.2.p.2">This information MAY be omitted only if either the dynamic scope did not pass over a reference or if the schema does not declare an absolute URI as its "$id".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.2.p.3">The JSON key for this information is "absoluteKeywordLocation".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.3.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12.3.3">12.3.3.</a> Instance Location</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.3.p.1">The location of the JSON value within the instance being validated.  The value MUST be expressed as a JSON Pointer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.3.p.2">The JSON key for this information is "instanceLocation".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.3.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12.3.4">12.3.4.</a> Error or Annotation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.4.p.1">The error or annotation that is produced by the validation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.4.p.2">For errors, the specific wording for the message is not defined by this specification.  Implementations will need to provide this.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.4.p.3">For annotations, each keyword that produces an annotation specifies its format.  By default, it is the keyword's value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.4.p.4">The JSON key for failed validations is "error"; for successful validations it is "annotation".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.3.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12.3.5">12.3.5.</a> Nested Results</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.5.p.1">For the two hierarchical structures, this property will hold nested errors and annotations.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.3.5.p.2">The JSON key for nested results in failed validations is "errors"; for successful validations it is "annotations".  Note the plural forms, as a keyword with nested results can also have a local error or annotation.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12.4">12.4.</a> Output Structure</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.4.p.1">The output MUST be an object containing a boolean property named "valid".  When additional information about the result is required, the output MUST also contain "errors" or "annotations" as described below.  </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>"valid" - a boolean value indicating the overall validation success or failure </li>
+<li>"errors" - the collection of errors or annotations produced by a failed validation </li>
+<li>"annotations" - the collection of errors or annotations produced by a successful validation </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> For these examples, the following schema and instance will be used.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/polygon",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "$defs": {
+    "point": {
+      "type": "object",
+      "properties": {
+        "x": { "type": "number" },
+        "y": { "type": "number" }
+      },
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "required": [ "x", "y" ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "array",
+  "items": { "$ref": "#/$defs/point" },
+  "minItems": 3
+}
+
+[
+  {
+    "x": 2.5,
+    "y": 1.3
+  },
+  {
+    "x": 1,
+    "z": 6.7
+  }
+]
+
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.4.p.2">This instance will fail validation and produce errors, but it's trivial to deduce examples for passing schemas that produce annotations.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.4.p.3">Specifically, the errors it will produce are: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>The second object is missing a "y" property.  </li>
+<li>The second object has a disallowed "z" property.  </li>
+<li>There are only two objects, but three are required.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> Note that the error message wording as depicted in these examples is not a requirement of this specification.  Implementations SHOULD craft error messages tailored for their audience or provide a templating mechanism that allows their users to craft their own messages.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.4.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12.4.1">12.4.1.</a> Flag</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.4.1.p.1">In the simplest case, merely the boolean result for the "valid" valid property needs to be fulfilled.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "valid": false
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.4.1.p.2">Because no errors or annotations are returned with this format, it is RECOMMENDED that implementations use short-circuiting logic to return failure or success as soon as the outcome can be determined.  For example, if an "anyOf" keyword contains five sub-schemas, and the second one passes, there is no need to check the other three.  The logic can simply return with success.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.4.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12.4.2">12.4.2.</a> Basic</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.4.2.p.1">The "Basic" structure is a flat list of output units.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "valid": false,
+  "errors": [
+    {
+      "keywordLocation": "",
+      "instanceLocation": "",
+      "error": "A subschema had errors."
+    },
+    {
+      "keywordLocation": "/items/$ref",
+      "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+        "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point",
+      "instanceLocation": "/1",
+      "error": "A subschema had errors."
+    },
+    {
+      "keywordLocation": "/items/$ref/required",
+      "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+        "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point/required",
+      "instanceLocation": "/1",
+      "error": "Required property 'y' not found."
+    },
+    {
+      "keywordLocation": "/items/$ref/additionalProperties",
+      "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+        "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point/additionalProperties",
+      "instanceLocation": "/1/z",
+      "error": "Additional property 'z' found but was invalid."
+    },
+    {
+      "keywordLocation": "/minItems",
+      "instanceLocation": "",
+      "error": "Expected at least 3 items but found 2"
+    }
+  ]
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.4.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12.4.3">12.4.3.</a> Detailed</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.4.3.p.1">The "Detailed" structure is based on the schema and can be more readable for both humans and machines.  Having the structure organized this way makes associations between the errors more apparent.  For example, the fact that the missing "y" property and the extra "z" property both stem from the same location in the instance is not immediately obvious in the "Basic" structure.  In a hierarchy, the correlation is more easily identified.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.4.3.p.2">The following rules govern the construction of the results object: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>All applicator keywords ("*Of", "$ref", "if"/"then"/"else", etc.) require a node.  </li>
+<li>Nodes that have no children are removed.  </li>
+<li>Nodes that have a single child are replaced by the child.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> Branch nodes do not require an error message or an annotation.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "valid": false,
+  "keywordLocation": "",
+  "instanceLocation": "",
+  "errors": [
+    {
+      "valid": false,
+      "keywordLocation": "/items/$ref",
+      "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+        "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point",
+      "instanceLocation": "/1",
+      "errors": [
+        {
+          "valid": false,
+          "keywordLocation": "/items/$ref/required",
+          "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+            "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point/required",
+          "instanceLocation": "/1",
+          "error": "Required property 'y' not found."
+        },
+        {
+          "valid": false,
+          "keywordLocation": "/items/$ref/additionalProperties",
+          "absoluteKeywordLocation":
+            "https://example.com/polygon#/$defs/point/additionalProperties",
+          "instanceLocation": "/1/z",
+          "error": "Additional property 'z' found but was invalid."
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "valid": false,
+      "keywordLocation": "/minItems",
+      "instanceLocation": "",
+      "error": "Expected at least 3 items but found 2"
+    }
+  ]
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.4.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12.4.4">12.4.4.</a> Verbose</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.4.4.p.1">The "Verbose" structure is a fully realized hierarchy that exactly matches that of the schema.  This structure has applications in form generation and validation where the error's location is important.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.4.4.p.2">The primary difference between this and the "Detailed" structure is that all results are returned.  This includes sub-schema validation results that would otherwise be removed (e.g. annotations for failed validations, successful validations inside a `not` keyword, etc.).  Because of this, it is RECOMMENDED that each node also carry a `valid` property to indicate the validation result for that node.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.4.4.p.3">Because this output structure can be quite large, a smaller example is given here for brevity.  The URI of the full output structure of the example above is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/output/verbose-example">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/output/verbose-example</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+// schema
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/polygon",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "validProp": true,
+  },
+  "additionalProperties": false
+}
+
+// instance
+{
+  "validProp": 5,
+  "disallowedProp": "value"
+}
+
+// result
+{
+  "valid": false,
+  "keywordLocation": "",
+  "instanceLocation": "",
+  "errors": [
+    {
+      "valid": true,
+      "keywordLocation": "/type",
+      "instanceLocation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "valid": true,
+      "keywordLocation": "/properties",
+      "instanceLocation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "valid": false,
+      "keywordLocation": "/additionalProperties",
+      "instanceLocation": "",
+      "errors": [
+        {
+          "valid": false,
+          "keywordLocation": "/additionalProperties",
+          "instanceLocation": "/disallowedProp",
+          "error": "Additional property 'disallowedProp' found but was invalid."
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+}
+
+                        </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.12.4.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.12.4.5">12.4.5.</a> Output validation schemas</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.12.4.5.p.1">For convenience, JSON Schema has been provided to validate output generated by implementations.  Its URI is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/output/schema">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/output/schema</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.13">
+<a href="#rfc.section.13">13.</a> <a href="#security" id="security">Security Considerations</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.13.p.1">Both schemas and instances are JSON values. As such, all security considerations defined in <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC 8259</a> apply.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.13.p.2">Instances and schemas are both frequently written by untrusted third parties, to be deployed on public Internet servers.  Validators should take care that the parsing and validating against schemas does not consume excessive system resources.  Validators MUST NOT fall into an infinite loop.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.13.p.3">A malicious party could cause an implementation to repeatedly collect a copy of a very large value as an annotation.  Implementations SHOULD guard against excessive consumption of system resources in such a scenario.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.13.p.4">Servers MUST ensure that malicious parties cannot change the functionality of existing schemas by uploading a schema with a pre-existing or very similar "$id".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.13.p.5">Individual JSON Schema vocabularies are liable to also have their own security considerations. Consult the respective specifications for more information.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.13.p.6">Schema authors should take care with "$comment" contents, as a malicious implementation can display them to end-users in violation of a spec, or fail to strip them if such behavior is expected.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.13.p.7">A malicious schema author could place executable code or other dangerous material within a "$comment".  Implementations MUST NOT parse or otherwise take action based on "$comment" contents.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.14">
+<a href="#rfc.section.14">14.</a> IANA Considerations</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.14.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.14.1">14.1.</a> application/schema+json</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.14.1.p.1">The proposed MIME media type for JSON Schema is defined as follows: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>Type name: application</li>
+<li>Subtype name: schema+json</li>
+<li>Required parameters: N/A</li>
+<li>Optional parameters: <dl>
+<dt>schema:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A non-empty list of space-separated URIs, each identifying a JSON Schema resource.  The instance SHOULD successfully validate against at least one of these meta-schemas.  Non-validating meta-schemas MAY be included for purposes such as allowing clients to make use of older versions of a meta-schema as long as the runtime instance validates against that older version.  </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</li>
+<li>Encoding considerations: Encoding considerations are identical to those specified for the "application/json" media type.  See <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">JSON</a>.  </li>
+<li>Security considerations: See Section <a href="#security" class="xref">13</a> above.  </li>
+<li>Interoperability considerations: See Sections <a href="#language" class="xref">6.2</a>, <a href="#integers" class="xref">6.3</a>, and <a href="#regex" class="xref">6.4</a> above.  </li>
+<li>Fragment identifier considerations: See Section <a href="#fragments" class="xref">5</a> </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.14.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.14.2">14.2.</a> application/schema-instance+json</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.14.2.p.1">The proposed MIME media type for JSON Schema Instances that require a JSON Schema-specific media type is defined as follows: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>Type name: application</li>
+<li>Subtype name: schema-instance+json</li>
+<li>Required parameters: <dl>
+<dt>schema:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A non-empty list of space-separated URIs, each identifying a JSON Schema resource.  The instance SHOULD successfully validate against at least one of these schemas.  Non-validating schemas MAY be included for purposes such as allowing clients to make use of older versions of a schema as long as the runtime instance validates against that older version.  </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</li>
+<li>Encoding considerations: Encoding considerations are identical to those specified for the "application/json" media type.  See <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">JSON</a>.  </li>
+<li>Security considerations: See Section <a href="#security" class="xref">13</a> above.  </li>
+<li>Interoperability considerations: See Sections <a href="#language" class="xref">6.2</a>, <a href="#integers" class="xref">6.3</a>, and <a href="#regex" class="xref">6.4</a> above.  </li>
+<li>Fragment identifier considerations: See Section <a href="#fragments" class="xref">5</a> </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.references">
+<a href="#rfc.references">15.</a> References</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.1">
+<a href="#rfc.references.1">15.1.</a> Normative References</h1>
+<table><tbody>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="ecma262">[ecma262]</b></td>
+<td class="top">"<a href="https://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/11.0/index.html">ECMA-262, 11th edition specification</a>", June 2020.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bradner, S.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</a>", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC3986">[RFC3986]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Berners-Lee, T.</a>, <a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>L. Masinter</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986">Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax</a>", STD 66, RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6839">[RFC6839]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Hansen, T.</a> and <a>A. Melnikov</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6839">Additional Media Type Structured Syntax Suffixes</a>", RFC 6839, DOI 10.17487/RFC6839, January 2013.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6901">[RFC6901]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bryan, P.</a>, <a>Zyp, K.</a> and <a>M. Nottingham</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6901">JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Pointer</a>", RFC 6901, DOI 10.17487/RFC6901, April 2013.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC8259">[RFC8259]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bray, T.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8259">The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format</a>", STD 90, RFC 8259, DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="W3C.REC-ldp-20150226">[W3C.REC-ldp-20150226]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Speicher, S.</a>, <a>Arwe, J.</a> and <a>A. Malhotra</a>, "<a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2015/REC-ldp-20150226">Linked Data Platform 1.0</a>", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation REC-ldp-20150226, February 2015.</td>
+</tr>
+</tbody></table>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.2">
+<a href="#rfc.references.2">15.2.</a> Informative References</h1>
+<table><tbody>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="json-hyper-schema">[json-hyper-schema]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Andrews, H.</a> and <a>A. Wright</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-02">JSON Hyper-Schema: A Vocabulary for Hypermedia Annotation of JSON</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-02, November 2017.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="json-schema-validation">[json-schema-validation]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Wright, A.</a>, <a>Andrews, H.</a> and <a>B. Hutton</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-00">JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON</a>", Internet-Draft draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-00, December 2020.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6596">[RFC6596]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Ohye, M.</a> and <a>J. Kupke</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6596">The Canonical Link Relation</a>", RFC 6596, DOI 10.17487/RFC6596, April 2012.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC7049">[RFC7049]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bormann, C.</a> and <a>P. Hoffman</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7049">Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)</a>", RFC 7049, DOI 10.17487/RFC7049, October 2013.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC7231">[RFC7231]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>J. Reschke</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231">Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content</a>", RFC 7231, DOI 10.17487/RFC7231, June 2014.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC8288">[RFC8288]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Nottingham, M.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8288">Web Linking</a>", RFC 8288, DOI 10.17487/RFC8288, October 2017.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="W3C.WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025">[W3C.WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Tennison, J.</a>, "<a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025">Best Practices for Fragment Identifiers and Media Type Definitions</a>", World Wide Web Consortium WD WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025, October 2012.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="xml-names">[xml-names]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a href="mailto:tbray@textuality.com" title="Textuality">Bray, T.</a>, <a href="mailto:dmh@contivo.com" title="Contivo, Inc.">Hollander, D.</a>, <a href="mailto:andrewl@microsoft.com" title="Microsoft">Layman, A.</a> and <a href="mailto:richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk" title="University of Edinburgh and Markup Technology Ltd">R. Tobin</a>, "<a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names11-20060816">Namespaces in XML 1.1 (Second Edition)</a>", August 2006.</td>
+</tr>
+</tbody></table>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Appendix A.</a> <a href="#idExamples" id="idExamples">Schema identification examples</a>
+</h1>
+<p>Consider the following schema, which shows "$id" being used to identify both the root schema and various subschemas, and "$anchor" being used to define plain name fragment identifiers.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "$id": "https://example.com/root.json",
+    "$defs": {
+        "A": { "$anchor": "foo" },
+        "B": {
+            "$id": "other.json",
+            "$defs": {
+                "X": { "$anchor": "bar" },
+                "Y": {
+                    "$id": "t/inner.json",
+                    "$anchor": "bar"
+                }
+            }
+        },
+        "C": {
+            "$id": "urn:uuid:ee564b8a-7a87-4125-8c96-e9f123d6766f"
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+                </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.1">The schemas at the following URI-encoded <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">JSON Pointers</a> (relative to the root schema) have the following base URIs, and are identifiable by any listed URI in accordance with sections <a href="#fragments" class="xref">5</a> and <a href="#embedded" class="xref">9.2.1</a> above.  </p>
+<p></p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt># (document root)</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<dl>
+<dt>canonical absolute-URI (and also base URI)</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json </dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with pointer fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json# </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>#/$defs/A</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<dl>
+<dt>base URI</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json</dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with plain fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json#foo </dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with pointer fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json#/$defs/A </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>#/$defs/B</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<dl>
+<dt>base URI</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/other.json</dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with pointer fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/other.json# </dd>
+<dt>non-canonical URI with fragment relative to root.json</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json#/$defs/B </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>#/$defs/B/$defs/X</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<dl>
+<dt>base URI</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/other.json</dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with plain fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/other.json#bar </dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with pointer fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/other.json#/$defs/X </dd>
+<dt>non-canonical URI with fragment relative to root.json</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json#/$defs/B/$defs/X </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>#/$defs/B/$defs/Y</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<dl>
+<dt>base URI</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/t/inner.json</dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with plain fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/t/inner.json#bar </dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with pointer fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/t/inner.json# </dd>
+<dt>non-canonical URI with fragment relative to other.json</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/other.json#/$defs/Y </dd>
+<dt>non-canonical URI with fragment relative to root.json</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json#/$defs/B/$defs/Y </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>#/$defs/C</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<dl>
+<dt>base URI</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">urn:uuid:ee564b8a-7a87-4125-8c96-e9f123d6766f </dd>
+<dt>canonical URI with pointer fragment</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">urn:uuid:ee564b8a-7a87-4125-8c96-e9f123d6766f# </dd>
+<dt>non-canonical URI with fragment relative to root.json</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">https://example.com/root.json#/$defs/C </dd>
+</dl>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.B">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.B">Appendix B.</a> Manipulating schema documents and references</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.p.1">Various tools have been created to rearrange schema documents based on how and where references ("$ref") appear.  This appendix discusses which use cases and actions are compliant with this specification.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.B.1">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.B.1">B.1.</a> Bundling schema resources into a single document</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.1.p.1">A set of schema resources intended for use together can be organized with each in its own schema document, all in the same schema document, or any granularity of document grouping in between.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.1.p.2">Numerous tools exist to perform various sorts of reference removal.  A common case of this is producing a single file where all references can be resolved within that file.  This is typically done to simplify distribution, or to simplify coding so that various invocations of JSON Schema libraries do not have to keep track of and load a large number of resources.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.1.p.3">This transformation can be safely and reversibly done as long as all static references (e.g. "$ref") use URI-references that resolve to canonical URIs, and all schema resources have an absolute-URI as the "$id" in their root schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.1.p.4">With these conditions met, each external resource can be copied under "$defs", without breaking any references among the resources' schema objects, and without changing any aspect of validation or annotation results.  The names of the schemas under "$defs" do not affect behavior, assuming they are each unique, as they do not appear in canonical URIs for the embedded resources.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.B.2">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.B.2">B.2.</a> Reference removal is not always safe</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.2.p.1">Attempting to remove all references and produce a single schema document does not, in all cases, produce a schema with identical behavior to the original form.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.2.p.2">Since "$ref" is now treated like any other keyword, with other keywords allowed in the same schema objects, fully supporting non-recursive "$ref" removal in all cases can require relatively complex schema manipulations.  It is beyond the scope of this specification to determine or provide a set of safe "$ref" removal transformations, as they depend not only on the schema structure but also on the intended usage.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.C">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.C">Appendix C.</a> <a href="#recursive-example" id="recursive-example">Example of recursive schema extension</a>
+</h1>
+<p>Consider the following two schemas describing a simple recursive tree structure, where each node in the tree can have a "data" field of any type.  The first schema allows and ignores other instance properties.  The second is more strict and only allows the "data" and "children" properties.  An example instance with "data" misspelled as "daat" is also shown.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+// tree schema, extensible
+{
+    "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+    "$id": "https://example.com/tree",
+    "$dynamicAnchor": "node",
+
+    "type": "object",
+    "properties": {
+        "data": true,
+        "children": {
+            "type": "array",
+            "items": {
+                "$dynamicRef": "#node"
+            }
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+// strict-tree schema, guards against misspelled properties
+{
+    "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+    "$id": "https://example.com/strict-tree",
+    "$dynamicAnchor": "node",
+
+    "$ref": "tree",
+    "unevaluatedProperties": false
+}
+
+// instance with misspelled field
+{
+    "children": [ { "daat": 1 } ]
+}
+
+                </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.C.p.1">When we load these two schemas, we will notice the "$dynamicAnchor" named "node" (note the lack of "#" as this is just the name) present in each, resulting in the following full schema URIs: </p>
+
+<ul>
+<li>"https://example.com/tree#node"</li>
+<li>"https://example.com/strict-tree#node"</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> In addition, JSON Schema implementations keep track of the fact that these fragments were created with "$dynamicAnchor".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.C.p.2">If we apply the "strict-tree" schema to the instance, we will follow the "$ref" to the "tree" schema, examine its "children" subschema, and find the "$dynamicRef": to "#node" (note the "#" for URI fragment syntax) in its "items" subschema.  That reference resolves to "https://example.com/tree#node", which is a URI with a fragment created by "$dynamicAnchor".  Therefore we must examine the dynamic scope before following the reference.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.C.p.3">At this point, the dynamic path is "#/$ref/properties/children/items/$dynamicRef", with a dynamic scope containing (from the outermost scope to the innermost): </p>
+
+<ol>
+<li>"https://example.com/strict-tree#"</li>
+<li>"https://example.com/tree#"</li>
+<li>"https://example.com/tree#/properties/children"</li>
+<li>"https://example.com/tree#/properties/children/items"</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.C.p.4">Since we are looking for a plain name fragment, which can be defined anywhere within a schema resource, the JSON Pointer fragments are irrelevant to this check.  That means that we can remove those fragments and eliminate consecutive duplicates, producing: </p>
+
+<ol>
+<li>"https://example.com/strict-tree"</li>
+<li>"https://example.com/tree"</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.C.p.5">In this case, the outermost resource also has a "node" fragment defined by "$dynamicAnchor".  Therefore instead of resolving the "$dynamicRef" to "https://example.com/tree#node", we resolve it to "https://example.com/strict-tree#node".  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.C.p.6">This way, the recursion in the "tree" schema recurses to the root of "strict-tree", instead of only applying "strict-tree" to the instance root, but applying "tree" to instance children.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.C.p.7">This example shows both "$dynamicAnchor"s in the same place in each schema, specifically the resource root schema.  Since plain-name fragments are independent of the JSON structure, this would work just as well if one or both of the node schema objects were moved under "$defs".  It is the matching "$dynamicAnchor" values which tell us how to resolve the dynamic reference, not any sort of correlation in JSON structure.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.D">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.D">Appendix D.</a> Working with vocabularies</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.D.1">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.D.1">D.1.</a> Best practices for vocabulary and meta-schema authors</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.1">Vocabulary authors should take care to avoid keyword name collisions if the vocabulary is intended for broad use, and potentially combined with other vocabularies.  JSON Schema does not provide any formal namespacing system, but also does not constrain keyword names, allowing for any number of namespacing approaches.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.2">Vocabularies may build on each other, such as by defining the behavior of their keywords with respect to the behavior of keywords from another vocabulary, or by using a keyword from another vocabulary with a restricted or expanded set of acceptable values.  Not all such vocabulary re-use will result in a new vocabulary that is compatible with the vocabulary on which it is built.  Vocabulary authors should clearly document what level of compatibility, if any, is expected.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.3">Meta-schema authors should not use "$vocabulary" to combine multiple vocabularies that define conflicting syntax or semantics for the same keyword.  As semantic conflicts are not generally detectable through schema validation, implementations are not expected to detect such conflicts.  If conflicting vocabularies are declared, the resulting behavior is undefined.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.4">Vocabulary authors SHOULD provide a meta-schema that validates the expected usage of the vocabulary's keywords on their own.  Such meta-schemas SHOULD not forbid additional keywords, and MUST not forbid any keywords from the Core vocabulary.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.5">It is recommended that meta-schema authors reference each vocabulary's meta-schema using the <a href="#allOf" class="xref">"allOf"</a> keyword, although other mechanisms for constructing the meta-schema may be appropriate for certain use cases.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.6">The recursive nature of meta-schemas makes the "$dynamicAnchor" and "$dynamicRef" keywords particularly useful for extending existing meta-schemas, as can be seen in the JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema which extends the Validation meta-schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.7">Meta-schemas may impose additional constraints, including describing keywords not present in any vocabulary, beyond what the meta-schemas associated with the declared vocabularies describe.  This allows for restricting usage to a subset of a vocabulary, and for validating locally defined keywords not intended for re-use.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.8">However, meta-schemas should not contradict any vocabularies that they declare, such as by requiring a different JSON type than the vocabulary expects.  The resulting behavior is undefined.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.1.p.9">Meta-schemas intended for local use, with no need to test for vocabulary support in arbitrary implementations, can safely omit "$vocabulary" entirely.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.D.2">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.D.2">D.2.</a> <a href="#example-meta-schema" id="example-meta-schema">Example meta-schema with vocabulary declarations</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.2.p.1">This meta-schema explicitly declares both the Core and Applicator vocabularies, together with an extension vocabulary, and combines their meta-schemas with an "allOf".  The extension vocabulary's meta-schema, which describes only the keywords in that vocabulary, is shown after the main example meta-schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.2.p.2">The main example meta-schema also restricts the usage of the Unevaluated vocabulary by forbidding the keywords prefixed with "unevaluated", which are particularly complex to implement.  This does not change the semantics or set of keywords defined by the other vocabularies. It just ensures that schemas using this meta-schema that attempt to use the keywords prefixed with "unevaluated" will fail validation against this meta-schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.2.p.3">Finally, this meta-schema describes the syntax of a keyword, "localKeyword", that is not part of any vocabulary.  Presumably, the implementors and users of this meta-schema will understand the semantics of "localKeyword".  JSON Schema does not define any mechanism for expressing keyword semantics outside of vocabularies, making them unsuitable for use except in a specific environment in which they are understood.  </p>
+<p>This meta-schema combines several vocabularies for general use.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/meta/general-use-example",
+  "$dynamicAnchor": "meta",
+  "$vocabulary": {
+    "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/core": true,
+    "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/applicator": true,
+    "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/validation": true,
+    "https://example.com/vocab/example-vocab": true
+  },
+  "allOf": [
+    {"$ref": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/core"},
+    {"$ref": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/applicator"},
+    {"$ref": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/validation"},
+    {"$ref": "https://example.com/meta/example-vocab",
+  ],
+  "patternProperties": {
+    "^unevaluated": false
+  },
+  "properties": {
+    "localKeyword": {
+      "$comment": "Not in vocabulary, but validated if used",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  }
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>This meta-schema describes only a single extension vocabulary.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/meta/example-vocab",
+  "$dynamicAnchor": "meta",
+  "$vocabulary": {
+    "https://example.com/vocab/example-vocab": true,
+  },
+  "type": ["object", "boolean"],
+  "properties": {
+    "minDate": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "pattern": "\d\d\d\d-\d\d-\d\d",
+      "format": "date",
+    }
+  }
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.2.p.4">As shown above, even though each of the single-vocabulary meta-schemas referenced in the general-use meta-schema's "allOf" declares its corresponding vocabulary, this new meta-schema must re-declare them.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.2.p.5">The standard meta-schemas that combine all vocabularies defined by the Core and Validation specification, and that combine all vocabularies defined by those specifications as well as the Hyper-Schema specification, demonstrate additional complex combinations.  These URIs for these meta-schemas may be found in the Validation and Hyper-Schema specifications, respectively.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.D.2.p.6">While the general-use meta-schema can validate the syntax of "minDate", it is the vocabulary that defines the logic behind the semantic meaning of "minDate".  Without an understanding of the semantics (in this example, that the instance value must be a date equal to or after the date provided as the keyword's value in the schema), an implementation can only validate the syntactic usage.  In this case, that means validating that it is a date-formatted string (using "pattern" to ensure that it is validated even when "format" functions purely as an annotation, as explained in the <a href="#json-schema-validation" class="xref">Validation specification</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.E">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.E">Appendix E.</a> References and generative use cases</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.E.p.1">While the presence of references is expected to be transparent to validation results, generative use cases such as code generators and UI renderers often consider references to be semantically significant.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.E.p.2">To make such use case-specific semantics explicit, the best practice is to create an annotation keyword for use in the same schema object alongside of a reference keyword such as "$ref".  </p>
+<p>For example, here is a hypothetical keyword for determining whether a code generator should consider the reference target to be a distinct class, and how those classes are related.  Note that this example is solely for illustrative purposes, and is not intended to propose a functional code generation keyword.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "allOf": [
+        {
+            "classRelation": "is-a",
+            "$ref": "classes/base.json"
+        },
+        {
+            "$ref": "fields/common.json"
+        }
+    ],
+    "properties": {
+        "foo": {
+            "classRelation": "has-a",
+            "$ref": "classes/foo.json"
+        },
+        "date": {
+            "$ref": "types/dateStruct.json",
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+                </pre>
+<p id="rfc.section.E.p.3">Here, this schema represents some sort of object-oriented class.  The first reference in the "allOf" is noted as the base class.  The second is not assigned a class relationship, meaning that the code generator should combine the target's definition with this one as if no reference were involved.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.E.p.4">Looking at the properties, "foo" is flagged as object composition, while the "date" property is not.  It is simply a field with sub-fields, rather than an instance of a distinct class.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.E.p.5">This style of usage requires the annotation to be in the same object as the reference, which must be recognizable as a reference.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.F">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.F">Appendix F.</a> Acknowledgments</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.F.p.1">Thanks to Gary Court, Francis Galiegue, Kris Zyp, and Geraint Luff for their work on the initial drafts of JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.F.p.2">Thanks to Jason Desrosiers, Daniel Perrett, Erik Wilde, Evgeny Poberezkin, Brad Bowman, Gowry Sankar, Donald Pipowitch, Dave Finlay, Denis Laxalde, Phil Sturgeon, Shawn Silverman, and Karen Etheridge for their submissions and patches to the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.G">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.G">Appendix G.</a> ChangeLog</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF13" class="info">[CREF13]<span class="info">This section to be removed before leaving Internet-Draft status.</span></a> </p>
+<p></p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>draft-bhutton-json-schema-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>"$schema" MAY change for embedded resources</li>
+<li>Array-value "items" functionality is now "prefixItems"</li>
+<li>"items" subsumes the old function of "additionalItems"</li>
+<li>"contains" and "unevaluatedItems" interactions now specified</li>
+<li>Rename $recursive* to $dynamic*</li>
+<li>$dynamicAnchor defines a fragment like $anchor</li>
+<li>$dynamic* (previously $recursive) no longer use runtime base URI determination</li>
+<li>Define Compound Schema Documents (bundle) and processing</li>
+<li>Reference ECMA-262, 11th edition for regular expression support</li>
+<li>Regular expression should support unicode</li>
+<li>Remove media type parameters</li>
+<li>Specify Unknown keywords are collected as annotations</li>
+<li>Moved "unevaluatedItems" and "unevaluatedProperties" from core into their own vocabulary</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-02</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Update to RFC 8259 for JSON specification</li>
+<li>Moved "definitions" from the Validation specification here as "$defs"</li>
+<li>Moved applicator keywords from the Validation specification as their own vocabulary</li>
+<li>Moved the schema form of "dependencies" from the Validation specification as "dependentSchemas"</li>
+<li>Formalized annotation collection</li>
+<li>Specified recommended output formats</li>
+<li>Defined keyword interactions in terms of annotation and assertion results</li>
+<li>Added "unevaluatedProperties" and "unevaluatedItems"</li>
+<li>Define "$ref" behavior in terms of the assertion, applicator, and annotation model</li>
+<li>Allow keywords adjacent to "$ref"</li>
+<li>Note undefined behavior for "$ref" targets involving unknown keywords</li>
+<li>Add recursive referencing, primarily for meta-schema extension</li>
+<li>Add the concept of formal vocabularies, and how they can be recognized through meta-schemas</li>
+<li>Additional guidance on initial base URIs beyond network retrieval</li>
+<li>Allow "schema" media type parameter for "application/schema+json"</li>
+<li>Better explanation of media type parameters and the HTTP Accept header</li>
+<li>Use "$id" to establish canonical and base absolute-URIs only, no fragments</li>
+<li>Replace plain-name-fragment-only form of "$id" with "$anchor"</li>
+<li>Clarified that the behavior of JSON Pointers across "$id" boundary is unreliable</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-01</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>This draft is purely a clarification with no functional changes</li>
+<li>Emphasized annotations as a primary usage of JSON Schema</li>
+<li>Clarified $id by use cases</li>
+<li>Exhaustive schema identification examples</li>
+<li>Replaced "external referencing" with how and when an implementation might know of a schema from another document</li>
+<li>Replaced "internal referencing" with how an implementation should recognized schema identifiers during parsing</li>
+<li>Dereferencing the former "internal" or "external" references is always the same process</li>
+<li>Minor formatting improvements</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Make the concept of a schema keyword vocabulary more clear</li>
+<li>Note that the concept of "integer" is from a vocabulary, not the data model</li>
+<li>Classify keywords as assertions or annotations and describe their general behavior</li>
+<li>Explain the boolean schemas in terms of generalized assertions</li>
+<li>Reserve "$comment" for non-user-visible notes about the schema</li>
+<li>Wording improvements around "$id" and fragments</li>
+<li>Note the challenges of extending meta-schemas with recursive references</li>
+<li>Add "application/schema-instance+json" media type</li>
+<li>Recommend a "schema" link relation / parameter instead of "profile"</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-wright-json-schema-01</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Updated intro</li>
+<li>Allowed for any schema to be a boolean</li>
+<li>"$schema" SHOULD NOT appear in subschemas, although that may change</li>
+<li>Changed "id" to "$id"; all core keywords prefixed with "$"</li>
+<li>Clarify and formalize fragments for application/schema+json</li>
+<li>Note applicability to formats such as CBOR that can be represented in the JSON data model</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-wright-json-schema-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Updated references to JSON</li>
+<li>Updated references to HTTP</li>
+<li>Updated references to JSON Pointer</li>
+<li>Behavior for "id" is now specified in terms of RFC3986</li>
+<li>Aligned vocabulary usage for URIs with RFC3986</li>
+<li>Removed reference to draft-pbryan-zyp-json-ref-03</li>
+<li>Limited use of "$ref" to wherever a schema is expected</li>
+<li>Added definition of the "JSON Schema data model"</li>
+<li>Added additional security considerations</li>
+<li>Defined use of subschema identifiers for "id"</li>
+<li>Rewrote section on usage with HTTP</li>
+<li>Rewrote section on usage with rel="describedBy" and rel="profile"</li>
+<li>Fixed numerous invalid examples</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-zyp-json-schema-04</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Salvaged from draft v3.</li>
+<li>Split validation keywords into separate document.</li>
+<li>Split hypermedia keywords into separate document.</li>
+<li>Initial post-split draft.</li>
+<li>Mandate the use of JSON Reference, JSON Pointer.</li>
+<li>Define the role of "id". Define URI resolution scope.</li>
+<li>Add interoperability considerations.</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-zyp-json-schema-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul><li>Initial draft.</li></ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.authors"><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a></h1>
+<div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Austin Wright</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Wright</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:aaa@bzfx.net">aaa@bzfx.net</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Henry Andrews</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Andrews</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:andrews_henry@yahoo.com">andrews_henry@yahoo.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Ben Hutton</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Hutton</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:ben@jsonschema.dev">ben@jsonschema.dev</a></span>
+
+<span class="vcardline">URI: <a href="https://jsonschema.dev">https://jsonschema.dev</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Greg Dennis</span> 
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Dennis</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:gregsdennis@yahoo.com">gregsdennis@yahoo.com</a></span>
+
+<span class="vcardline">URI: <a href="https://github.com/gregsdennis">https://github.com/gregsdennis</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/obsolete/json-schema-validation.html b/draft/2020-12/obsolete/json-schema-validation.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..e573655f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/obsolete/json-schema-validation.html
@@ -0,0 +1,1401 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
+  "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
+<head profile="http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/">
+  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" />
+
+  <title>JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON </title>
+
+  <style type="text/css" title="Xml2Rfc (sans serif)">
+  /*<![CDATA[*/
+	  a {
+	  text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+      /* info code from SantaKlauss at http://www.madaboutstyle.com/tooltip2.html */
+      a.info {
+          /* This is the key. */
+          position: relative;
+          z-index: 24;
+          text-decoration: none;
+      }
+      a.info:hover {
+          z-index: 25;
+          color: #FFF; background-color: #900;
+      }
+      a.info span { display: none; }
+      a.info:hover span.info {
+          /* The span will display just on :hover state. */
+          display: block;
+          position: absolute;
+          font-size: smaller;
+          top: 2em; left: -5em; width: 15em;
+          padding: 2px; border: 1px solid #333;
+          color: #900; background-color: #EEE;
+          text-align: left;
+      }
+	  a.smpl {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  a:hover {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  a:active {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  address {
+	  margin-top: 1em;
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  body {
+	  color: black;
+	  font-family: verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  max-width: 55em;
+	  
+	  }
+	  cite {
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  dd {
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  dl {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.empty {
+	  list-style-type: none;
+	  }
+	  ul.empty li {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  dl p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  dt {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  h1 {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h1.np {
+	  page-break-before: always;
+	  }
+	  h1 a {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  }
+	  h2 {
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 15pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h2 a, h3 a, h4 a, h5 a, h6 a {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  img {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  }
+	  li {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  p {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  pre {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  background-color: lightyellow;
+	  padding: .25em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text2 {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f0f0f0;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.inline {
+	  background-color: white;
+	  padding: 0em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.drawing {
+	  border-style: solid;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  padding: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table.tt {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt td {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full td {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt th {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full th {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers th {
+	  border-style: none none inset none;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.left {
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.right {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.center {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  caption {
+	  caption-side: bottom;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+	  border-spacing: 1px;
+	  width: 95%;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.top {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  td.topnowrap {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap; 
+	  }
+	  table.header td {
+	  background-color: gray;
+	  width: 50%;
+	  }
+	  table.header a {
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.reference {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap;
+	  padding-right: 1em;
+	  }
+	  thead {
+	  display:table-header-group;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc, ul.toc ul {
+	  list-style: none;
+	  margin-left: 1.5em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  padding-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li {
+	  line-height: 150%;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li li {
+	  line-height: normal;
+	  font-weight: normal;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  li.excluded {
+	  font-size: 0pt;
+	  }
+	  ul p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	
+	  .comment {
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	  .center {
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .error {
+	  color: red;
+	  font-style: italic;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .figure {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  }
+	  .filename {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .fn {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .hidden {
+	  display: none;
+	  }
+	  .left {
+	  text-align: left;
+	  }
+	  .right {
+	  text-align: right;
+	  }
+	  .title {
+	  color: #990000;
+	  font-size: 18pt;
+	  line-height: 18pt;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  margin-top: 36pt;
+	  }
+	  .vcardline {
+	  display: block;
+	  }
+	  .warning {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	
+	
+	  @media print {
+	  .noprint {
+		display: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  a {
+		color: black;
+		text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+		width: 90%;
+	  }
+	
+	  td.header {
+		width: 50%;
+		color: black;
+		background-color: white;
+		vertical-align: top;
+		font-size: 12pt;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.toc a::after {
+		content: leader('.') target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.ind li li a {
+		content: target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  .print2col {
+		column-count: 2;
+		-moz-column-count: 2;
+		column-fill: auto;
+	  }
+	  }
+	
+	  @page {
+	  @top-left {
+		   content: "Internet-Draft"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-right {
+		   content: "December 2010"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-center {
+		   content: "Abbreviated Title";
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-left {
+		   content: "Doe"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-center {
+		   content: "Expires June 2011"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-right {
+		   content: "[Page " counter(page) "]"; 
+	  } 
+	  }
+	
+	  @page:first { 
+		@top-left {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-right {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-center {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+	  }
+  /*]]>*/
+  </style>
+
+  <link href="#rfc.toc" rel="Contents">
+<link href="#rfc.section.1" rel="Chapter" title="1 Introduction">
+<link href="#rfc.section.2" rel="Chapter" title="2 Conventions and Terminology">
+<link href="#rfc.section.3" rel="Chapter" title="3 Overview">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4" rel="Chapter" title="4 Interoperability Considerations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.1" rel="Chapter" title="4.1 Validation of String Instances">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.2" rel="Chapter" title="4.2 Validation of Numeric Instances">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4.3" rel="Chapter" title="4.3 Regular Expressions">
+<link href="#rfc.section.5" rel="Chapter" title="5 Meta-Schema">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6" rel="Chapter" title="6 A Vocabulary for Structural Validation">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.1 Validation Keywords for Any Instance Type">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.1.1 type">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.1.2 enum">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.1.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.1.3 const">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.2 Validation Keywords for Numeric Instances (number and integer)">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.1 multipleOf">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.2 maximum">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.3 exclusiveMaximum">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.4 minimum">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.2.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.2.5 exclusiveMinimum">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.3 Validation Keywords for Strings">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.3.1 maxLength">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.3.2 minLength">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.3.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.3.3 pattern">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.4 Validation Keywords for Arrays">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.1 maxItems">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.2 minItems">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.3 uniqueItems">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.4 maxContains">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.4.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.4.5 minContains">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5" rel="Chapter" title="6.5 Validation Keywords for Objects">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.1 maxProperties">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.2" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.2 minProperties">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.3" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.3 required">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6.5.4" rel="Chapter" title="6.5.4 dependentRequired">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7" rel="Chapter" title='7 Vocabularies for Semantic Content With "format"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.1 Foreword">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.2 Implementation Requirements">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.2.1 Format-Annotation Vocabulary">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.2.2 Format-Assertion Vocabulary">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.2.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.2.3 Custom format attributes">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.3 Defined Formats">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.1" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.1 Dates, Times, and Duration">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.2" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.2 Email Addresses">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.3" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.3 Hostnames">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.4" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.4 IP Addresses">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.5" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.5 Resource Identifiers">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.6" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.6 uri-template">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.7" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.7 JSON Pointers">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7.3.8" rel="Chapter" title="7.3.8 regex">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8" rel="Chapter" title="8 A Vocabulary for the Contents of String-Encoded Data">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.1" rel="Chapter" title="8.1 Foreword">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.2" rel="Chapter" title="8.2 Implementation Requirements">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.3" rel="Chapter" title="8.3 contentEncoding">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.4" rel="Chapter" title="8.4 contentMediaType">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.5" rel="Chapter" title="8.5 contentSchema">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8.6" rel="Chapter" title="8.6 Example">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9" rel="Chapter" title="9 A Vocabulary for Basic Meta-Data Annotations">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.1" rel="Chapter" title='9.1 "title" and "description"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.2" rel="Chapter" title='9.2 "default"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.3" rel="Chapter" title='9.3 "deprecated"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.4" rel="Chapter" title='9.4 "readOnly" and "writeOnly"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.9.5" rel="Chapter" title='9.5 "examples"'>
+<link href="#rfc.section.10" rel="Chapter" title="10 Security Considerations">
+<link href="#rfc.references" rel="Chapter" title="11 References">
+<link href="#rfc.references.1" rel="Chapter" title="11.1 Normative References">
+<link href="#rfc.references.2" rel="Chapter" title="11.2 Informative References">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A" rel="Chapter" title="A Keywords Moved from Validation to Core">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.B" rel="Chapter" title="B Acknowledgments">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.C" rel="Chapter" title="C ChangeLog">
+<link href="#rfc.authors" rel="Chapter">
+
+
+  <meta name="generator" content="xml2rfc version 2.30.0 - https://tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc" />
+  <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" />
+
+  <meta name="dct.creator" content="Wright, A., Ed., Andrews, H., Ed., and B. Hutton, Ed." />
+  <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-00" />
+  <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2020-28" />
+  <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Schema (application/schema+json) has several purposes, one of which is JSON instance validation.  This document specifies a vocabulary for JSON Schema to describe the meaning of JSON documents, provide hints for user interfaces working with JSON data, and to make assertions about what a valid document must look like.  " />
+  <meta name="description" content="JSON Schema (application/schema+json) has several purposes, one of which is JSON instance validation.  This document specifies a vocabulary for JSON Schema to describe the meaning of JSON documents, provide hints for user interfaces working with JSON data, and to make assertions about what a valid document must look like.  " />
+
+</head>
+
+<body>
+
+  <table class="header">
+    <tbody>
+    
+    	<tr>
+<td class="left">Internet Engineering Task Force</td>
+<td class="right">A. Wright, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
+<td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Intended status: Informational</td>
+<td class="right">H. Andrews, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Expires: August 1, 2021</td>
+<td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left"></td>
+<td class="right">B. Hutton, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left"></td>
+<td class="right">January 28, 2020</td>
+</tr>
+
+    	
+    </tbody>
+  </table>
+
+  <p class="title">JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON <br />
+  <span class="filename">draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-00</span></p>
+  
+  <h1 id="rfc.abstract"><a href="#rfc.abstract">Abstract</a></h1>
+<p>JSON Schema (application/schema+json) has several purposes, one of which is JSON instance validation.  This document specifies a vocabulary for JSON Schema to describe the meaning of JSON documents, provide hints for user interfaces working with JSON data, and to make assertions about what a valid document must look like.  </p>
+<h1><a>Note to Readers</a></h1>
+<p>The issues list for this draft can be found at <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues">https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>For additional information, see <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/">https://json-schema.org/</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<p>To provide feedback, use this issue tracker, the communication methods listed on the homepage, or email the document editors.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.status"><a href="#rfc.status">Status of This Memo</a></h1>
+<p>This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.</p>
+<p>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/.</p>
+<p>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."</p>
+<p>This Internet-Draft will expire on August 1, 2021.</p>
+<h1 id="rfc.copyrightnotice"><a href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a></h1>
+<p>Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors.  All rights reserved.</p>
+<p>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.</p>
+
+  
+  <hr class="noprint" />
+  <h1 class="np" id="rfc.toc"><a href="#rfc.toc">Table of Contents</a></h1>
+  <ul class="toc">
+
+  	<li>1.   <a href="#rfc.section.1">Introduction</a>
+</li>
+<li>2.   <a href="#rfc.section.2">Conventions and Terminology</a>
+</li>
+<li>3.   <a href="#rfc.section.3">Overview</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.   <a href="#rfc.section.4">Interoperability Considerations</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>4.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.1">Validation of String Instances</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.2">Validation of Numeric Instances</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.4.3">Regular Expressions</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>5.   <a href="#rfc.section.5">Meta-Schema</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6">A Vocabulary for Structural Validation</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1">Validation Keywords for Any Instance Type</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.1.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1.1">type</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.1.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1.2">enum</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.1.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.1.3">const</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2">Validation Keywords for Numeric Instances (number and integer)</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.1">multipleOf</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.2">maximum</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.3">exclusiveMaximum</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.2.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.4">minimum</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.2.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.2.5">exclusiveMinimum</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3">Validation Keywords for Strings</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3.1">maxLength</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3.2">minLength</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.3.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.3.3">pattern</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4">Validation Keywords for Arrays</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.4.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.1">maxItems</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.4.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.2">minItems</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.4.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.3">uniqueItems</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.4.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.4">maxContains</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.4.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.4.5">minContains</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5">Validation Keywords for Objects</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>6.5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.1">maxProperties</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.5.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.2">minProperties</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.5.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.3">required</a>
+</li>
+<li>6.5.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.6.5.4">dependentRequired</a>
+</li>
+</ul></ul><li>7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7">Vocabularies for Semantic Content With "format"</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.1">Foreword</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2">Implementation Requirements</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.2.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2.1">Format-Annotation Vocabulary</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.2.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2.2">Format-Assertion Vocabulary</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.2.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.2.3">Custom format attributes</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>7.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3">Defined Formats</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>7.3.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.1">Dates, Times, and Duration</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.2">Email Addresses</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.3">Hostnames</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.4">IP Addresses</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.5">Resource Identifiers</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.6">uri-template</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.7">JSON Pointers</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.3.8.   <a href="#rfc.section.7.3.8">regex</a>
+</li>
+</ul></ul><li>8.   <a href="#rfc.section.8">A Vocabulary for the Contents of String-Encoded Data</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>8.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.1">Foreword</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.2">Implementation Requirements</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.3">contentEncoding</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.4">contentMediaType</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.5">contentSchema</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.6.   <a href="#rfc.section.8.6">Example</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>9.   <a href="#rfc.section.9">A Vocabulary for Basic Meta-Data Annotations</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>9.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.1">"title" and "description"</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.2.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.2">"default"</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.3.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.3">"deprecated"</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.4.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.4">"readOnly" and "writeOnly"</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.5.   <a href="#rfc.section.9.5">"examples"</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>10.   <a href="#rfc.section.10">Security Considerations</a>
+</li>
+<li>11.   <a href="#rfc.references">References</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>11.1.   <a href="#rfc.references.1">Normative References</a>
+</li>
+<li>11.2.   <a href="#rfc.references.2">Informative References</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>Appendix A.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Keywords Moved from Validation to Core</a>
+</li>
+<li>Appendix B.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.B">Acknowledgments</a>
+</li>
+<li>Appendix C.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.C">ChangeLog</a>
+</li>
+<li><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a>
+</li>
+
+
+  </ul>
+
+  <h1 id="rfc.section.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.1">1.</a> Introduction</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.1">JSON Schema can be used to require that a given JSON document (an instance) satisfies a certain number of criteria. These criteria are asserted by using keywords described in this specification. In addition, a set of keywords is also defined to assist in interactive user interface instance generation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.2">This specification will use the concepts, syntax, and terminology defined by the <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">JSON Schema core</a> specification.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.2">2.</a> Conventions and Terminology</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.1">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 <a href="#RFC2119" class="xref">RFC 2119</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.2">This specification uses the term "container instance" to refer to both array and object instances. It uses the term "children instances" to refer to array elements or object member values.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.3">Elements in an array value are said to be unique if no two elements of this array are <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">equal</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.3">3.</a> Overview</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.1">JSON Schema validation asserts constraints on the structure of instance data.  An instance location that satisfies all asserted constraints is then annotated with any keywords that contain non-assertion information, such as descriptive metadata and usage hints.  If all locations within the instance satisfy all asserted constraints, then the instance is said to be valid against the schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.2">Each schema object is independently evaluated against each instance location to which it applies.  This greatly simplifies the implementation requirements for validators by ensuring that they do not need to maintain state across the document-wide validation process.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.3">This specification defines a set of assertion keywords, as well as a small vocabulary of metadata keywords that can be used to annotate the JSON instance with useful information.  The <a href="#format" class="xref">Section 7</a> keyword is intended primarily as an annotation, but can optionally be used as an assertion.  The <a href="#content" class="xref">Section 8</a> keywords are annotations for working with documents embedded as JSON strings.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4">4.</a> Interoperability Considerations</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.1">4.1.</a> Validation of String Instances</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.1.p.1">It should be noted that the nul character (\u0000) is valid in a JSON string. An instance to validate may contain a string value with this character, regardless of the ability of the underlying programming language to deal with such data.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.2">4.2.</a> Validation of Numeric Instances</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.2.p.1">The JSON specification allows numbers with arbitrary precision, and JSON Schema does not add any such bounds.  This means that numeric instances processed by JSON Schema can be arbitrarily large and/or have an arbitrarily long decimal part, regardless of the ability of the underlying programming language to deal with such data.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4.3">4.3.</a> <a href="#regexInterop" id="regexInterop">Regular Expressions</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.3.p.1">Keywords that use regular expressions, or constrain the instance value to be a regular expression, are subject to the interoperability considerations for regular expressions in the <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">JSON Schema Core</a> specification.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.5">5.</a> <a href="#meta-schema" id="meta-schema">Meta-Schema</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.1">The current URI for the default JSON Schema dialect meta-schema is <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema</a><span>&gt;</span>.  For schema author convenience, this meta-schema describes a dialect consisting of all vocabularies defined in this specification and the JSON Schema Core specification, as well as two former keywords which are reserved for a transitional period.  Individual vocabulary and vocabulary meta-schema URIs are given for each section below.  Certain vocabularies are optional to support, which is explained in detail in the relevant sections.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.2">Updated vocabulary and meta-schema URIs MAY be published between specification drafts in order to correct errors.  Implementations SHOULD consider URIs dated after this specification draft and before the next to indicate the same syntax and semantics as those listed here.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6">6.</a> A Vocabulary for Structural Validation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.1">Validation keywords in a schema impose requirements for successful validation of an instance.  These keywords are all assertions without any annotation behavior.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.2">Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" SHOULD be considered to require this vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.3">The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Validation vocabulary, is: &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/validation&gt;.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.4">The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/validation">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/validation</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.1">6.1.</a> <a href="#general" id="general">Validation Keywords for Any Instance Type</a>
+</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.1.1">6.1.1.</a> type</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.1.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be either a string or an array. If it is an array, elements of the array MUST be strings and MUST be unique.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.1.p.2">String values MUST be one of the six primitive types ("null", "boolean", "object", "array", "number", or "string"), or "integer" which matches any number with a zero fractional part.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.1.p.3">An instance validates if and only if the instance is in any of the sets listed for this keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.1.2">6.1.2.</a> <a href="#enum" id="enum">enum</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be an array. This array SHOULD have at least one element. Elements in the array SHOULD be unique.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.2">An instance validates successfully against this keyword if its value is equal to one of the elements in this keyword's array value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.2.p.3">Elements in the array might be of any type, including null.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.1.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.1.3">6.1.3.</a> const</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.3.p.1">The value of this keyword MAY be of any type, including null.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.3.p.2">Use of this keyword is functionally equivalent to an <a href="#enum" class="xref">"enum"</a> with a single value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.1.3.p.3">An instance validates successfully against this keyword if its value is equal to the value of the keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2">6.2.</a> <a href="#numeric" id="numeric">Validation Keywords for Numeric Instances (number and integer)</a>
+</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2.1">6.2.1.</a> multipleOf</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.1.p.1">The value of "multipleOf" MUST be a number, strictly greater than 0.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.1.p.2">A numeric instance is valid only if division by this keyword's value results in an integer.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2.2">6.2.2.</a> maximum</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.2.p.1">The value of "maximum" MUST be a number, representing an inclusive upper limit for a numeric instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.2.p.2">If the instance is a number, then this keyword validates only if the instance is less than or exactly equal to "maximum".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2.3">6.2.3.</a> exclusiveMaximum</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.3.p.1">The value of "exclusiveMaximum" MUST be a number, representing an exclusive upper limit for a numeric instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.3.p.2">If the instance is a number, then the instance is valid only if it has a value strictly less than (not equal to) "exclusiveMaximum".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2.4">6.2.4.</a> minimum</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.4.p.1">The value of "minimum" MUST be a number, representing an inclusive lower limit for a numeric instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.4.p.2">If the instance is a number, then this keyword validates only if the instance is greater than or exactly equal to "minimum".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.2.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.2.5">6.2.5.</a> exclusiveMinimum</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.5.p.1">The value of "exclusiveMinimum" MUST be a number, representing an exclusive lower limit for a numeric instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.2.5.p.2">If the instance is a number, then the instance is valid only if it has a value strictly greater than (not equal to) "exclusiveMinimum".  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.3">6.3.</a> <a href="#string" id="string">Validation Keywords for Strings</a>
+</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.3.1">6.3.1.</a> maxLength</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.1.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.</p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.1.p.2">A string instance is valid against this keyword if its length is less than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.1.p.3">The length of a string instance is defined as the number of its characters as defined by <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC 8259</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.3.2">6.3.2.</a> minLength</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.2.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.2.p.2">A string instance is valid against this keyword if its length is greater than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.2.p.3">The length of a string instance is defined as the number of its characters as defined by <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC 8259</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.2.p.4">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of 0.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.3.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.3.3">6.3.3.</a> <a href="#pattern" id="pattern">pattern</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.3.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a string. This string SHOULD be a valid regular expression, according to the ECMA-262 regular expression dialect.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.3.3.p.2">A string instance is considered valid if the regular expression matches the instance successfully. Recall: regular expressions are not implicitly anchored.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4">6.4.</a> Validation Keywords for Arrays</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4.1">6.4.1.</a> maxItems</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.1.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.1.p.2">An array instance is valid against "maxItems" if its size is less than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4.2">6.4.2.</a> minItems</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.2.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.2.p.2">An array instance is valid against "minItems" if its size is greater than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.2.p.3">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of 0.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4.3">6.4.3.</a> uniqueItems</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.3.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a boolean.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.3.p.2">If this keyword has boolean value false, the instance validates successfully. If it has boolean value true, the instance validates successfully if all of its elements are unique.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.3.p.3">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of false.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4.4">6.4.4.</a> maxContains</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.4.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.4.p.2">If "contains" is not present within the same schema object, then this keyword has no effect.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.4.p.3">An instance array is valid against "maxContains" in two ways, depending on the form of the annotation result of an adjacent <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">"contains"</a> keyword. The first way is if the annotation result is an array and the length of that array is less than or equal to the "maxContains" value. The second way is if the annotation result is a boolean "true" and the instance array length is less than or equal to the "maxContains" value.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.4.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.4.5">6.4.5.</a> minContains</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.5.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.5.p.2">If "contains" is not present within the same schema object, then this keyword has no effect.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.5.p.3">An instance array is valid against "minContains" in two ways, depending on the form of the annotation result of an adjacent <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">"contains"</a> keyword. The first way is if the annotation result is an array and the length of that array is greater than or equal to the "minContains" value. The second way is if the annotation result is a boolean "true" and the instance array length is greater than or equal to the "minContains" value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.5.p.4">A value of 0 is allowed, but is only useful for setting a range of occurrences from 0 to the value of "maxContains".  A value of 0 with no "maxContains" causes "contains" to always pass validation.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.4.5.p.5">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of 1.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5">6.5.</a> Validation Keywords for Objects</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5.1">6.5.1.</a> maxProperties</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.1.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.1.p.2">An object instance is valid against "maxProperties" if its number of properties is less than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5.2">6.5.2.</a> minProperties</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.2.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a non-negative integer.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.2.p.2">An object instance is valid against "minProperties" if its number of properties is greater than, or equal to, the value of this keyword.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.2.p.3">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of 0.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5.3">6.5.3.</a> required</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be an array.  Elements of this array, if any, MUST be strings, and MUST be unique.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.2">An object instance is valid against this keyword if every item in the array is the name of a property in the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.3.p.3">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty array.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6.5.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6.5.4">6.5.4.</a> dependentRequired</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.4.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be an object.  Properties in this object, if any, MUST be arrays.  Elements in each array, if any, MUST be strings, and MUST be unique.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.4.p.2">This keyword specifies properties that are required if a specific other property is present.  Their requirement is dependent on the presence of the other property.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.4.p.3">Validation succeeds if, for each name that appears in both the instance and as a name within this keyword's value, every item in the corresponding array is also the name of a property in the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.5.4.p.4">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as an empty object.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7">7.</a> <a href="#format" id="format">Vocabularies for Semantic Content With "format"</a>
+</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.1">7.1.</a> Foreword</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.1">Structural validation alone may be insufficient to allow an application to correctly utilize certain values. The "format" annotation keyword is defined to allow schema authors to convey semantic information for a fixed subset of values which are accurately described by authoritative resources, be they RFCs or other external specifications.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.2">The value of this keyword is called a format attribute. It MUST be a string. A format attribute can generally only validate a given set of instance types. If the type of the instance to validate is not in this set, validation for this format attribute and instance SHOULD succeed.  All format attributes defined in this section apply to strings, but a format attribute can be specified to apply to any instance types defined in the data model defined in the <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">core JSON Schema.</a> <a id="CREF1" class="info">[CREF1]<span class="info">Note that the "type" keyword in this specification defines an "integer" type which is not part of the data model. Therefore a format attribute can be limited to numbers, but not specifically to integers. However, a numeric format can be used alongside the "type" keyword with a value of "integer", or could be explicitly defined to always pass if the number is not an integer, which produces essentially the same behavior as only applying to integers.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.3">The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Format-Annotation vocabulary, is: &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/format-annotation&gt;. The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/format-annotation">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/format-annotation</a><span>&gt;</span>.  Implementing support for this vocabulary is REQUIRED.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.4">In addition to the Format-Annotation vocabulary, a secondary vocabulary is available for custom meta-schemas that defines "format" as an assertion. The URI for the Format-Assertion vocabulary, is: &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/format-assertion&gt;. The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/format-assertion">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/format-assertion</a><span>&gt;</span>.  Implementing support for the Format-Assertion vocabulary is OPTIONAL.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.1.p.5">Specifying both the Format-Annotation and the Format-Assertion vocabularies is functionally equivalent to specifying only the Format-Assertion vocabulary since its requirements are a superset of the Format-Annotation vocabulary.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.2">7.2.</a> Implementation Requirements</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.p.1">The "format" keyword functions as defined by the vocabulary which is referenced.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.2.1">7.2.1.</a> Format-Annotation Vocabulary</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.1.p.1">The value of format MUST be collected as an annotation, if the implementation supports annotation collection. This enables application-level validation when schema validation is unavailable or inadequate.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.1.p.2">Implementations MAY still treat "format" as an assertion in addition to an annotation and attempt to validate the value's conformance to the specified semantics. The implementation MUST provide options to enable and disable such evaluation and MUST be disabled by default. Implementations SHOULD document their level of support for such validation.  <a id="CREF2" class="info">[CREF2]<span class="info">Specifying the Format-Annotation vocabulary and enabling validation in an implementation should not be viewed as being equivalent to specifying the Format-Assertion vocabulary since implementations are not required to provide full validation support when the Format-Assertion vocabulary is not specified.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.1.p.3">When the implementation is configured for assertion behavior, it: <a id="CREF3" class="info">[CREF3]<span class="info">This matches the current reality of implementations, which provide widely varying levels of validation, including no validation at all, for some or all format attributes.  It is also designed to encourage relying only on the annotation behavior and performing semantic validation in the application, which is the recommended best practice.  </span></a> </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>SHOULD provide an implementation-specific best effort validation for each format attribute defined below; </li>
+<li>MAY choose to implement validation of any or all format attributes as a no-op by always producing a validation result of true; </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.2.2">7.2.2.</a> Format-Assertion Vocabulary</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.2.p.1">When the Format-Assertion vocabulary is declared with a value of true, implementations MUST provide full validation support for all of the formats defined by this specificaion. Implementations that cannot provide full validation support MUST refuse to process the schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.2.p.2">An implementation that supports the Format-Assertion vocabulary: <a id="CREF4" class="info">[CREF4]<span class="info">The expectation is that for simple formats such as date-time, syntactic validation will be thorough.  For a complex format such as email addresses, which are the amalgamation of various standards and numerous adjustments over time, with obscure and/or obsolete rules that may or may not be restricted by other applications making use of the value, a minimal validation is sufficient.  For example, an instance string that does not contain an "@" is clearly not a valid email address, and an "email" or "hostname" containing characters outside of 7-bit ASCII is likewise clearly invalid.  </span></a> </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>MUST still collect "format" as an annotation if the implementation supports annotation collection; </li>
+<li>MUST evaluate "format" as an assertion; </li>
+<li>MUST implement syntactic validation for all format attributes defined in this specification, and for any additional format attributes that it recognizes, such that there exist possible instance values of the correct type that will fail validation.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> The requirement for minimal validation of format attributes is intentionally vague and permissive, due to the complexity involved in many of the attributes.  Note in particular that the requirement is limited to syntactic checking; it is not to be expected that an implementation would send an email, attempt to connect to a URL, or otherwise check the existence of an entity identified by a format instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.2.p.3">It is RECOMMENDED that implementations use a common parsing library for each format, or a well-known regular expression.  Implementations SHOULD clearly document how and to what degree each format attribute is validated.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.2.p.4">The <a href="#meta-schema" class="xref">standard core and validation meta-schema</a> includes this vocabulary in its "$vocabulary" keyword with a value of false, since by default implementations are not required to support this keyword as an assertion.  Supporting the format vocabulary with a value of true is understood to greatly increase code size and in some cases execution time, and will not be appropriate for all implementations.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.2.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.2.3">7.2.3.</a> Custom format attributes</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.3.p.1">Implementations MAY support custom format attributes. Save for agreement between parties, schema authors SHALL NOT expect a peer implementation to support such custom format attributes. An implementation MUST NOT fail to collect unknown formats as annotations.  When the Format-Assertion vocabulary is specified, implementations MUST fail upon encountering unknown formats.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.2.3.p.2">Vocabularies do not support specifically declaring different value sets for keywords.  Due to this limitation, and the historically uneven implementation of this keyword, it is RECOMMENDED to define additional keywords in a custom vocabulary rather than additional format attributes if interoperability is desired.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3">7.3.</a> Defined Formats</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.1">7.3.1.</a> Dates, Times, and Duration</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.1.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.1.p.2">Date and time format names are derived from <a href="#RFC3339" class="xref">RFC 3339, section 5.6</a>.  The duration format is from the ISO 8601 ABNF as given in Appendix A of RFC 3339.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.1.p.3">Implementations supporting formats SHOULD implement support for the following attributes: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>date-time:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid representation according to the "date-time" production.  </dd>
+<dt>date:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid representation according to the "full-date" production.  </dd>
+<dt>time:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid representation according to the "full-time" production.  </dd>
+<dt>duration:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid representation according to the "duration" production.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.1.p.4">Implementations MAY support additional attributes using the other production names defined anywhere in that RFC.  If "full-date" or "full-time" are implemented, the corresponding short form ("date" or "time" respectively) MUST be implemented, and MUST behave identically.  Implementations SHOULD NOT define extension attributes with any name matching an RFC 3339 production unless it validates according to the rules of that production.  <a id="CREF5" class="info">[CREF5]<span class="info">There is not currently consensus on the need for supporting all RFC 3339 formats, so this approach of reserving the namespace will encourage experimentation without committing to the entire set.  Either the format implementation requirements will become more flexible in general, or these will likely either be promoted to fully specified attributes or dropped.  </span></a> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.2">7.3.2.</a> Email Addresses</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.2.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.2.p.2">A string instance is valid against these attributes if it is a valid Internet email address as follows: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>email:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">As defined by the "Mailbox" ABNF rule in <a href="#RFC5321" class="xref">RFC 5321, section 4.1.2</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>idn-email:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">As defined by the extended "Mailbox" ABNF rule in <a href="#RFC6531" class="xref">RFC 6531, section 3.3</a>.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> Note that all strings valid against the "email" attribute are also valid against the "idn-email" attribute.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.3">7.3.3.</a> Hostnames</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.3.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.3.p.2">A string instance is valid against these attributes if it is a valid representation for an Internet hostname as follows: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>hostname:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">As defined by <a href="#RFC1123" class="xref">RFC 1123, section 2.1</a>, including host names produced using the Punycode algorithm specified in <a href="#RFC5891" class="xref">RFC 5891, section 4.4</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>idn-hostname:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">As defined by either RFC 1123 as for hostname, or an internationalized hostname as defined by <a href="#RFC5890" class="xref">RFC 5890, section 2.3.2.3</a>.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> Note that all strings valid against the "hostname" attribute are also valid against the "idn-hostname" attribute.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.4">7.3.4.</a> IP Addresses</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.4.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.4.p.2">A string instance is valid against these attributes if it is a valid representation of an IP address as follows: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>ipv4:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">An IPv4 address according to the "dotted-quad" ABNF syntax as defined in <a href="#RFC2673" class="xref">RFC 2673, section 3.2</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>ipv6:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">An IPv6 address as defined in <a href="#RFC4291" class="xref">RFC 4291, section 2.2</a>.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.5">7.3.5.</a> Resource Identifiers</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.5.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p></p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>uri:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid URI, according to <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">[RFC3986]</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>uri-reference:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid URI Reference (either a URI or a relative-reference), according to <a href="#RFC3986" class="xref">[RFC3986]</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>iri:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid IRI, according to <a href="#RFC3987" class="xref">[RFC3987]</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>iri-reference:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid IRI Reference (either an IRI or a relative-reference), according to <a href="#RFC3987" class="xref">[RFC3987]</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>uuid:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid string representation of a UUID, according to <a href="#RFC4122" class="xref">[RFC4122]</a>.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.5.p.3">Note that all valid URIs are valid IRIs, and all valid URI References are also valid IRI References.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.5.p.4">Note also that the "uuid" format is for plain UUIDs, not UUIDs in URNs.  An example is "f81d4fae-7dec-11d0-a765-00a0c91e6bf6".  For UUIDs as URNs, use the "uri" format, with a "pattern" regular expression of "^urn:uuid:" to indicate the URI scheme and URN namespace.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.6">7.3.6.</a> uri-template</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.6.p.1">This attribute applies to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.6.p.2">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid URI Template (of any level), according to <a href="#RFC6570" class="xref">[RFC6570]</a>.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.6.p.3">Note that URI Templates may be used for IRIs; there is no separate IRI Template specification.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.7">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.7">7.3.7.</a> JSON Pointers</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.7.p.1">These attributes apply to string instances.  </p>
+<p></p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>json-pointer:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid JSON string representation of a JSON Pointer, according to <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901, section 5</a>.  </dd>
+<dt>relative-json-pointer:</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">A string instance is valid against this attribute if it is a valid <a href="#relative-json-pointer" class="xref">Relative JSON Pointer</a>.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> To allow for both absolute and relative JSON Pointers, use "anyOf" or "oneOf" to indicate support for either format.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7.3.8">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7.3.8">7.3.8.</a> regex</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.8.p.1">This attribute applies to string instances.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.8.p.2">A regular expression, which SHOULD be valid according to the <a href="#ecma262" class="xref">ECMA-262</a> regular expression dialect.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.3.8.p.3">Implementations that validate formats MUST accept at least the subset of ECMA-262 defined in the <a href="#regexInterop" class="xref">Regular Expressions</a> section of this specification, and SHOULD accept all valid ECMA-262 expressions.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8">8.</a> <a href="#content" id="content">A Vocabulary for the Contents of String-Encoded Data</a>
+</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.1">8.1.</a> Foreword</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.1">Annotations defined in this section indicate that an instance contains non-JSON data encoded in a JSON string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.2">These properties provide additional information required to interpret JSON data as rich multimedia documents.  They describe the type of content, how it is encoded, and/or how it may be validated.  They do not function as validation assertions; a malformed string-encoded document MUST NOT cause the containing instance to be considered invalid.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.3">Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" SHOULD be considered to require this vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.4">The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Content vocabulary, is: &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/content&gt;.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.1.p.5">The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/content">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/content</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.2">8.2.</a> Implementation Requirements</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.1">Due to security and performance concerns, as well as the open-ended nature of possible content types, implementations MUST NOT automatically decode, parse, and/or validate the string contents by default.  This additionally supports the use case of embedded documents intended for processing by a different consumer than that which processed the containing document.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.2">All keywords in this section apply only to strings, and have no effect on other data types.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.3">Implementations MAY offer the ability to decode, parse, and/or validate the string contents automatically.  However, it MUST NOT perform these operations by default, and MUST provide the validation result of each string-encoded document separately from the enclosing document.  This process SHOULD be equivalent to fully evaluating the instance against the original schema, followed by using the annotations to decode, parse, and/or validate each string-encoded document.  <a id="CREF6" class="info">[CREF6]<span class="info">For now, the exact mechanism of performing and returning parsed data and/or validation results from such an automatic decoding, parsing, and validating feature is left unspecified.  Should such a feature prove popular, it may be specified more thoroughly in a future draft.  </span></a> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.2.p.4">See also the <a href="#security" class="xref">Security Considerations</a> sections for possible vulnerabilities introduced by automatically processing the instance string according to these keywords.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.3">8.3.</a> contentEncoding</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.1">If the instance value is a string, this property defines that the string SHOULD be interpreted as binary data and decoded using the encoding named by this property.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.2">Possible values indicating base 16, 32, and 64 encodings with several variations are listed in <a href="#RFC4648" class="xref">RFC 4648</a>.  Additionally, sections 6.7 and 6.8 of <a href="#RFC2045" class="xref">RFC 2045</a> provide encodings used in MIME.  As "base64" is defined in both RFCs, the definition from RFC 4648 SHOULD be assumed unless the string is specifically intended for use in a MIME context.  Note that all of these encodings result in strings consisting only of 7-bit ASCII characters.  Therefore, this keyword has no meaning for strings containing characters outside of that range.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.3">If this keyword is absent, but "contentMediaType" is present, this indicates that the encoding is the identity encoding, meaning that no transformation was needed in order to represent the content in a UTF-8 string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.3.p.4">The value of this property MUST be a string.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.4">8.4.</a> contentMediaType</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.1">If the instance is a string, this property indicates the media type of the contents of the string.  If "contentEncoding" is present, this property describes the decoded string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.4.p.2">The value of this property MUST be a string, which MUST be a media type, as defined by <a href="#RFC2046" class="xref">RFC 2046</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.5">8.5.</a> contentSchema</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.5.p.1">If the instance is a string, and if "contentMediaType" is present, this property contains a schema which describes the structure of the string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.5.p.2">This keyword MAY be used with any media type that can be mapped into JSON Schema's data model.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.5.p.3">The value of this property MUST be a valid JSON schema. It SHOULD be ignored if "contentMediaType" is not present.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8.6">8.6.</a> Example</h1>
+<p>Here is an example schema, illustrating the use of "contentEncoding" and "contentMediaType": </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": "string",
+    "contentEncoding": "base64",
+    "contentMediaType": "image/png"
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Instances described by this schema are expected to be strings, and their values should be interpretable as base64-encoded PNG images.  </p>
+<p>Another example: </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": "string",
+    "contentMediaType": "text/html"
+}
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Instances described by this schema are expected to be strings containing HTML, using whatever character set the JSON string was decoded into.  Per section 8.1 of <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">RFC 8259</a>, outside of an entirely closed system, this MUST be UTF-8.  </p>
+<p>This example describes a JWT that is MACed using the HMAC SHA-256 algorithm, and requires the "iss" and "exp" fields in its claim set.  </p>
+<pre>
+
+{
+    "type": "string",
+    "contentMediaType": "application/jwt",
+    "contentSchema": {
+        "type": "array",
+        "minItems": 2,
+        "prefixItems": [
+            {
+                "const": {
+                    "typ": "JWT",
+                    "alg": "HS256"
+                }
+            },
+            {
+                "type": "object",
+                "required": ["iss", "exp"],
+                "properties": {
+                    "iss": {"type": "string"},
+                    "exp": {"type": "integer"}
+                }
+            }
+        ]
+    }
+}
+                    </pre>
+<p>Note that "contentEncoding" does not appear.  While the "application/jwt" media type makes use of base64url encoding, that is defined by the media type, which determines how the JWT string is decoded into a list of two JSON data structures: first the header, and then the payload.  Since the JWT media type ensures that the JWT can be represented in a JSON string, there is no need for further encoding or decoding.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9">9.</a> A Vocabulary for Basic Meta-Data Annotations</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.1">These general-purpose annotation keywords provide commonly used information for documentation and user interface display purposes.  They are not intended to form a comprehensive set of features.  Rather, additional vocabularies can be defined for more complex annotation-based applications.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.2">Meta-schemas that do not use "$vocabulary" SHOULD be considered to require this vocabulary as if its URI were present with a value of true.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.3">The current URI for this vocabulary, known as the Meta-Data vocabulary, is: &lt;https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/vocab/meta-data&gt;.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.4">The current URI for the corresponding meta-schema is: <span>&lt;</span><a href="https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/meta-data">https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/meta/meta-data</a><span>&gt;</span>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.1">9.1.</a> "title" and "description"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.1">The value of both of these keywords MUST be a string.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.1.p.2">Both of these keywords can be used to decorate a user interface with information about the data produced by this user interface. A title will preferably be short, whereas a description will provide explanation about the purpose of the instance described by this schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.2">9.2.</a> "default"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.1">There are no restrictions placed on the value of this keyword.  When multiple occurrences of this keyword are applicable to a single sub-instance, implementations SHOULD remove duplicates.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.2.p.2">This keyword can be used to supply a default JSON value associated with a particular schema. It is RECOMMENDED that a default value be valid against the associated schema.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.3">9.3.</a> "deprecated"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be a boolean.  When multiple occurrences of this keyword are applicable to a single sub-instance, applications SHOULD consider the instance location to be deprecated if any occurrence specifies a true value.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.2">If "deprecated" has a value of boolean true, it indicates that applications SHOULD refrain from usage of the declared property. It MAY mean the property is going to be removed in the future.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.3">A root schema containing "deprecated" with a value of true indicates that the entire resource being described MAY be removed in the future.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.4">The "deprecated" keyword applies to each instance location to which the schema object containing the keyword successfully applies.  This can result in scenarios where every array item or object property is deprecated even though the containing array or object is not.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.3.p.5">Omitting this keyword has the same behavior as a value of false.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.4">9.4.</a> "readOnly" and "writeOnly"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.1">The value of these keywords MUST be a boolean.  When multiple occurrences of these keywords are applicable to a single sub-instance, the resulting behavior SHOULD be as for a true value if any occurrence specifies a true value, and SHOULD be as for a false value otherwise.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.2">If "readOnly" has a value of boolean true, it indicates that the value of the instance is managed exclusively by the owning authority, and attempts by an application to modify the value of this property are expected to be ignored or rejected by that owning authority.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.3">An instance document that is marked as "readOnly" for the entire document MAY be ignored if sent to the owning authority, or MAY result in an error, at the authority's discretion.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.4">If "writeOnly" has a value of boolean true, it indicates that the value is never present when the instance is retrieved from the owning authority.  It can be present when sent to the owning authority to update or create the document (or the resource it represents), but it will not be included in any updated or newly created version of the instance.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.5">An instance document that is marked as "writeOnly" for the entire document MAY be returned as a blank document of some sort, or MAY produce an error upon retrieval, or have the retrieval request ignored, at the authority's discretion.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.6">For example, "readOnly" would be used to mark a database-generated serial number as read-only, while "writeOnly" would be used to mark a password input field.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.7">These keywords can be used to assist in user interface instance generation.  In particular, an application MAY choose to use a widget that hides input values as they are typed for write-only fields.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.4.p.8">Omitting these keywords has the same behavior as values of false.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9.5">9.5.</a> "examples"</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.1">The value of this keyword MUST be an array.  There are no restrictions placed on the values within the array.  When multiple occurrences of this keyword are applicable to a single sub-instance, implementations MUST provide a flat array of all values rather than an array of arrays.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.2">This keyword can be used to provide sample JSON values associated with a particular schema, for the purpose of illustrating usage.  It is RECOMMENDED that these values be valid against the associated schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.5.p.3">Implementations MAY use the value(s) of "default", if present, as an additional example.  If "examples" is absent, "default" MAY still be used in this manner.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10">10.</a> <a href="#security" id="security">Security Considerations</a>
+</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.1">JSON Schema validation defines a vocabulary for JSON Schema core and concerns all the security considerations listed there.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.2">JSON Schema validation allows the use of Regular Expressions, which have numerous different (often incompatible) implementations.  Some implementations allow the embedding of arbitrary code, which is outside the scope of JSON Schema and MUST NOT be permitted.  Regular expressions can often also be crafted to be extremely expensive to compute (with so-called "catastrophic backtracking"), resulting in a denial-of-service attack.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.3">Implementations that support validating or otherwise evaluating instance string data based on "contentEncoding" and/or "contentMediaType" are at risk of evaluating data in an unsafe way based on misleading information.  Applications can mitigate this risk by only performing such processing when a relationship between the schema and instance is established (e.g., they share the same authority).  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.4">Processing a media type or encoding is subject to the security considerations of that media type or encoding.  For example, the security considerations of <a href="#RFC4329" class="xref">RFC 4329 Scripting Media Types</a> apply when processing JavaScript or ECMAScript encoded within a JSON string.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.references">
+<a href="#rfc.references">11.</a> References</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.1">
+<a href="#rfc.references.1">11.1.</a> Normative References</h1>
+<table><tbody>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="ecma262">[ecma262]</b></td>
+<td class="top">"<a href="https://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/11.0">ECMA-262, 11th edition specification</a>", June 2020.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="json-schema">[json-schema]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Wright, A.</a>, <a>Andrews, H.</a>, <a>Hutton, B.</a> and <a>G. Dennis</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-00">JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents</a>", Internet-Draft draft-bhutton-json-schema-00, December 2020.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="relative-json-pointer">[relative-json-pointer]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Luff, G.</a>, <a title="Cloudflare, Inc.">Andrews, H.</a> and <a>B. Hutton</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01">Relative JSON Pointers</a>", Internet-Draft draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01, December 2020.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC1123">[RFC1123]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Braden, R.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1123">Requirements for Internet Hosts - Application and Support</a>", STD 3, RFC 1123, DOI 10.17487/RFC1123, October 1989.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC2045">[RFC2045]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Freed, N.</a> and <a>N. Borenstein</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2045">Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies</a>", RFC 2045, DOI 10.17487/RFC2045, November 1996.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC2046">[RFC2046]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Freed, N.</a> and <a>N. Borenstein</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2046">Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types</a>", RFC 2046, DOI 10.17487/RFC2046, November 1996.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bradner, S.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</a>", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC2673">[RFC2673]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Crawford, M.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2673">Binary Labels in the Domain Name System</a>", RFC 2673, DOI 10.17487/RFC2673, August 1999.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC3339">[RFC3339]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Klyne, G.</a> and <a>C. Newman</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3339">Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps</a>", RFC 3339, DOI 10.17487/RFC3339, July 2002.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC3986">[RFC3986]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Berners-Lee, T.</a>, <a>Fielding, R.</a> and <a>L. Masinter</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986">Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax</a>", STD 66, RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC3987">[RFC3987]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Duerst, M.</a> and <a>M. Suignard</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3987">Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs)</a>", RFC 3987, DOI 10.17487/RFC3987, January 2005.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC4122">[RFC4122]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Leach, P.</a>, <a>Mealling, M.</a> and <a>R. Salz</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4122">A Universally Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace</a>", RFC 4122, DOI 10.17487/RFC4122, July 2005.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC4291">[RFC4291]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Hinden, R.</a> and <a>S. Deering</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4291">IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture</a>", RFC 4291, DOI 10.17487/RFC4291, February 2006.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC4648">[RFC4648]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Josefsson, S.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4648">The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data Encodings</a>", RFC 4648, DOI 10.17487/RFC4648, October 2006.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC5321">[RFC5321]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Klensin, J.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5321">Simple Mail Transfer Protocol</a>", RFC 5321, DOI 10.17487/RFC5321, October 2008.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC5890">[RFC5890]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Klensin, J.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5890">Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework</a>", RFC 5890, DOI 10.17487/RFC5890, August 2010.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC5891">[RFC5891]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Klensin, J.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5891">Internationalized Domain Names in Applications (IDNA): Protocol</a>", RFC 5891, DOI 10.17487/RFC5891, August 2010.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6531">[RFC6531]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Yao, J.</a> and <a>W. Mao</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6531">SMTP Extension for Internationalized Email</a>", RFC 6531, DOI 10.17487/RFC6531, February 2012.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6570">[RFC6570]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Gregorio, J.</a>, <a>Fielding, R.</a>, <a>Hadley, M.</a>, <a>Nottingham, M.</a> and <a>D. Orchard</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6570">URI Template</a>", RFC 6570, DOI 10.17487/RFC6570, March 2012.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6901">[RFC6901]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bryan, P.</a>, <a>Zyp, K.</a> and <a>M. Nottingham</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6901">JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Pointer</a>", RFC 6901, DOI 10.17487/RFC6901, April 2013.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC8259">[RFC8259]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bray, T.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8259">The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format</a>", STD 90, RFC 8259, DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017.</td>
+</tr>
+</tbody></table>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.2">
+<a href="#rfc.references.2">11.2.</a> Informative References</h1>
+<table><tbody><tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC4329">[RFC4329]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Hoehrmann, B.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4329">Scripting Media Types</a>", RFC 4329, DOI 10.17487/RFC4329, April 2006.</td>
+</tr></tbody></table>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Appendix A.</a> Keywords Moved from Validation to Core</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.A.p.1">Several keywords have been moved from this document into the <a href="#json-schema" class="xref">Core Specification</a> as of this draft, in some cases with re-naming or other changes.  This affects the following former validation keywords: </p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>"definitions"</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">Renamed to "$defs" to match "$ref" and be shorter to type.  Schema vocabulary authors SHOULD NOT define a "definitions" keyword with different behavior in order to avoid invalidating schemas that still use the older name.  While "definitions" is absent in the single-vocabulary meta-schemas referenced by this document, it remains present in the default meta-schema, and implementations SHOULD assume that "$defs" and "definitions" have the same behavior when that meta-schema is used.  </dd>
+<dt>"allOf", "anyOf", "oneOf", "not", "if", "then", "else",                                  "items", "additionalItems", "contains", "propertyNames",                                  "properties", "patternProperties", "additionalProperties"</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">All of these keywords apply subschemas to the instance and combine their results, without asserting any conditions of their own.  Without assertion keywords, these applicators can only cause assertion failures by using the false boolean schema, or by inverting the result of the true boolean schema (or equivalent schema objects).  For this reason, they are better defined as a generic mechanism on which validation, hyper-schema, and extension vocabularies can all be based.  </dd>
+<dt>"dependencies"</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">This keyword had two different modes of behavior, which made it relatively challenging to implement and reason about.  The schema form has been moved to Core and renamed to "dependentSchemas", as part of the applicator vocabulary.  It is analogous to "properties", except that instead of applying its subschema to the property value, it applies it to the object containing the property.  The property name array form is retained here and renamed to "dependentRequired", as it is an assertion which is a shortcut for the conditional use of the "required" assertion keyword.  </dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.B">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.B">Appendix B.</a> Acknowledgments</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.p.1">Thanks to Gary Court, Francis Galiegue, Kris Zyp, and Geraint Luff for their work on the initial drafts of JSON Schema.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.B.p.2">Thanks to Jason Desrosiers, Daniel Perrett, Erik Wilde, Evgeny Poberezkin, Brad Bowman, Gowry Sankar, Donald Pipowitch, Dave Finlay, Denis Laxalde, Phil Sturgeon, Shawn Silverman, and Karen Etheridge for their submissions and patches to the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.C">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.C">Appendix C.</a> ChangeLog</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF7" class="info">[CREF7]<span class="info">This section to be removed before leaving Internet-Draft status.</span></a> </p>
+<p></p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Correct email format RFC reference to 5321 instead of 5322</li>
+<li>Clarified the set and meaning of "contentEncoding" values</li>
+<li>Reference ECMA-262, 11th edition for regular expression support</li>
+<li>Split "format" into an annotation only vocabulary and an assertion vocabulary</li>
+<li>Clarify "deprecated" when applicable to arrays</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-02</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Grouped keywords into formal vocabularies</li>
+<li>Update "format" implementation requirements in terms of vocabularies</li>
+<li>By default, "format" MUST NOT be validated, although validation can be enabled</li>
+<li>A vocabulary declaration can be used to require "format" validation</li>
+<li>Moved "definitions" to the core spec as "$defs"</li>
+<li>Moved applicator keywords to the core spec</li>
+<li>Renamed the array form of "dependencies" to "dependentRequired", moved the schema form to the core spec</li>
+<li>Specified all "content*" keywords as annotations, not assertions</li>
+<li>Added "contentSchema" to allow applying a schema to a string-encoded document</li>
+<li>Also allow RFC 4648 encodings in "contentEncoding"</li>
+<li>Added "minContains" and "maxContains"</li>
+<li>Update RFC reference for "hostname" and "idn-hostname"</li>
+<li>Add "uuid" and "duration" formats</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>This draft is purely a clarification with no functional changes</li>
+<li>Provided the general principle behind ignoring annotations under "not" and similar cases</li>
+<li>Clarified "if"/"then"/"else" validation interactions</li>
+<li>Clarified "if"/"then"/"else" behavior for annotation</li>
+<li>Minor formatting and cross-referencing improvements</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Added "if"/"then"/"else"</li>
+<li>Classify keywords as assertions or annotations per the core spec</li>
+<li>Warn of possibly removing "dependencies" in the future</li>
+<li>Grouped validation keywords into sub-sections for readability</li>
+<li>Moved "readOnly" from hyper-schema to validation meta-data</li>
+<li>Added "writeOnly"</li>
+<li>Added string-encoded media section, with former hyper-schema "media" keywords</li>
+<li>Restored "regex" format (removal was unintentional)</li>
+<li>Added "date" and "time" formats, and reserved additional RFC 3339 format names</li>
+<li>I18N formats: "iri", "iri-reference", "idn-hostname", "idn-email"</li>
+<li>Clarify that "json-pointer" format means string encoding, not URI fragment</li>
+<li>Fixed typo that inverted the meaning of "minimum" and "exclusiveMinimum"</li>
+<li>Move format syntax references into Normative References</li>
+<li>JSON is a normative requirement</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-wright-json-schema-validation-01</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Standardized on hyphenated format names with full words ("uriref" becomes "uri-reference")</li>
+<li>Add the formats "uri-template" and "json-pointer"</li>
+<li>Changed "exclusiveMaximum"/"exclusiveMinimum" from boolean modifiers of "maximum"/"minimum" to independent numeric fields.</li>
+<li>Split the additionalItems/items into two sections</li>
+<li>Reworked properties/patternProperties/additionalProperties definition</li>
+<li>Added "examples" keyword</li>
+<li>Added "contains" keyword</li>
+<li>Allow empty "required" and "dependencies" arrays</li>
+<li>Fixed "type" reference to primitive types</li>
+<li>Added "const" keyword</li>
+<li>Added "propertyNames" keyword</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-wright-json-schema-validation-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Added additional security considerations</li>
+<li>Removed reference to "latest version" meta-schema, use numbered version instead</li>
+<li>Rephrased many keyword definitions for brevity</li>
+<li>Added "uriref" format that also allows relative URI references</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-fge-json-schema-validation-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Initial draft.</li>
+<li>Salvaged from draft v3.</li>
+<li>Redefine the "required" keyword.</li>
+<li>Remove "extends", "disallow"</li>
+<li>Add "anyOf", "allOf", "oneOf", "not", "definitions", "minProperties", "maxProperties".</li>
+<li>"dependencies" member values can no longer be single strings; at least one element is required in a property dependency array.</li>
+<li>Rename "divisibleBy" to "multipleOf".</li>
+<li>"type" arrays can no longer have schemas; remove "any" as a possible value.</li>
+<li>Rework the "format" section; make support optional.</li>
+<li>"format": remove attributes "phone", "style", "color"; rename "ip-address" to "ipv4"; add references for all attributes.</li>
+<li>Provide algorithms to calculate schema(s) for array/object instances.</li>
+<li>Add interoperability considerations.</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.authors"><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a></h1>
+<div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Austin Wright</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Wright</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:aaa@bzfx.net">aaa@bzfx.net</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Henry Andrews</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Andrews</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:andrews_henry@yahoo.com">andrews_henry@yahoo.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Ben Hutton</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Hutton</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:ben@jsonschema.dev">ben@jsonschema.dev</a></span>
+
+<span class="vcardline">URI: <a href="https://jsonschema.dev">https://jsonschema.dev</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/output/schema b/draft/2020-12/output/schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..efe176a0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/output/schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2020-12/output/schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/output/verbose-example b/draft/2020-12/output/verbose-example
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..38f31932
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/output/verbose-example
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../../_includes/draft/2020-12/output/verbose-example.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/relative-json-pointer.html b/draft/2020-12/relative-json-pointer.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..fe44bd8a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/relative-json-pointer.html
@@ -0,0 +1,735 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" 
+  "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
+<head profile="http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/">
+  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" />
+
+  <title>Relative JSON Pointers</title>
+
+  <style type="text/css" title="Xml2Rfc (sans serif)">
+  /*<![CDATA[*/
+	  a {
+	  text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+      /* info code from SantaKlauss at http://www.madaboutstyle.com/tooltip2.html */
+      a.info {
+          /* This is the key. */
+          position: relative;
+          z-index: 24;
+          text-decoration: none;
+      }
+      a.info:hover {
+          z-index: 25;
+          color: #FFF; background-color: #900;
+      }
+      a.info span { display: none; }
+      a.info:hover span.info {
+          /* The span will display just on :hover state. */
+          display: block;
+          position: absolute;
+          font-size: smaller;
+          top: 2em; left: -5em; width: 15em;
+          padding: 2px; border: 1px solid #333;
+          color: #900; background-color: #EEE;
+          text-align: left;
+      }
+	  a.smpl {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  a:hover {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  a:active {
+	  text-decoration: underline;
+	  }
+	  address {
+	  margin-top: 1em;
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  body {
+	  color: black;
+	  font-family: verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  max-width: 55em;
+	  
+	  }
+	  cite {
+	  font-style: normal;
+	  }
+	  dd {
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  dl {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.empty {
+	  list-style-type: none;
+	  }
+	  ul.empty li {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  dl p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  dt {
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	  h1 {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h1.np {
+	  page-break-before: always;
+	  }
+	  h1 a {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  }
+	  h2 {
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 15pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h3, h4, h5, h6 {
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  page-break-after: avoid;
+	  }
+	  h2 a, h3 a, h4 a, h5 a, h6 a {
+	  color: black;
+	  }
+	  img {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  }
+	  li {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  ol p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  p {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  margin-right: 2em;
+	  }
+	  pre {
+	  margin-left: 3em;
+	  background-color: lightyellow;
+	  padding: .25em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text2 {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f0f0f0;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.inline {
+	  background-color: white;
+	  padding: 0em;
+	  }
+	  pre.text {
+	  border-style: dotted;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  width: 69em;
+	  }
+	  pre.drawing {
+	  border-style: solid;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  background-color: #f8f8f8;
+	  padding: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table {
+	  margin-left: 2em;
+	  }
+	  table.tt {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers {
+	  border-style: outset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt td {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full td {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.tt th {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  table.full th {
+	  border-style: inset;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.headers th {
+	  border-style: none none inset none;
+	  border-width: 1px;
+	  }
+	  table.left {
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.right {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  }
+	  table.center {
+	  margin-left: auto;
+	  margin-right: auto;
+	  }
+	  caption {
+	  caption-side: bottom;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-top: .5em;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+	  border-spacing: 1px;
+	  width: 95%;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.top {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  }
+	  td.topnowrap {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap; 
+	  }
+	  table.header td {
+	  background-color: gray;
+	  width: 50%;
+	  }
+	  table.header a {
+	  color: white;
+	  }
+	  td.reference {
+	  vertical-align: top;
+	  white-space: nowrap;
+	  padding-right: 1em;
+	  }
+	  thead {
+	  display:table-header-group;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc, ul.toc ul {
+	  list-style: none;
+	  margin-left: 1.5em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  padding-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li {
+	  line-height: 150%;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 10pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  ul.toc li li {
+	  line-height: normal;
+	  font-weight: normal;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  margin-right: 0em;
+	  }
+	  li.excluded {
+	  font-size: 0pt;
+	  }
+	  ul p {
+	  margin-left: 0em;
+	  }
+	
+	  .comment {
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	  .center {
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .error {
+	  color: red;
+	  font-style: italic;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .figure {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  font-size: 9pt;
+	  }
+	  .filename {
+	  color: #333333;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  font-size: 12pt;
+	  line-height: 21pt;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  }
+	  .fn {
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  }
+	  .hidden {
+	  display: none;
+	  }
+	  .left {
+	  text-align: left;
+	  }
+	  .right {
+	  text-align: right;
+	  }
+	  .title {
+	  color: #990000;
+	  font-size: 18pt;
+	  line-height: 18pt;
+	  font-weight: bold;
+	  text-align: center;
+	  margin-top: 36pt;
+	  }
+	  .vcardline {
+	  display: block;
+	  }
+	  .warning {
+	  font-size: 14pt;
+	  background-color: yellow;
+	  }
+	
+	
+	  @media print {
+	  .noprint {
+		display: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  a {
+		color: black;
+		text-decoration: none;
+	  }
+	
+	  table.header {
+		width: 90%;
+	  }
+	
+	  td.header {
+		width: 50%;
+		color: black;
+		background-color: white;
+		vertical-align: top;
+		font-size: 12pt;
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.toc a::after {
+		content: leader('.') target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  ul.ind li li a {
+		content: target-counter(attr(href), page);
+	  }
+	
+	  .print2col {
+		column-count: 2;
+		-moz-column-count: 2;
+		column-fill: auto;
+	  }
+	  }
+	
+	  @page {
+	  @top-left {
+		   content: "Internet-Draft"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-right {
+		   content: "December 2010"; 
+	  } 
+	  @top-center {
+		   content: "Abbreviated Title";
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-left {
+		   content: "Doe"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-center {
+		   content: "Expires June 2011"; 
+	  } 
+	  @bottom-right {
+		   content: "[Page " counter(page) "]"; 
+	  } 
+	  }
+	
+	  @page:first { 
+		@top-left {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-right {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+		@top-center {
+		  content: normal;
+		}
+	  }
+  /*]]>*/
+  </style>
+
+  <link href="#rfc.toc" rel="Contents">
+<link href="#rfc.section.1" rel="Chapter" title="1 Introduction">
+<link href="#rfc.section.2" rel="Chapter" title="2 Conventions and Terminology">
+<link href="#rfc.section.3" rel="Chapter" title="3 Syntax">
+<link href="#rfc.section.4" rel="Chapter" title="4 Evaluation">
+<link href="#rfc.section.5" rel="Chapter" title="5 JSON String Representation">
+<link href="#rfc.section.5.1" rel="Chapter" title="5.1 Examples">
+<link href="#rfc.section.6" rel="Chapter" title="6 Non-use in URI Fragment Identifiers">
+<link href="#rfc.section.7" rel="Chapter" title="7 Error Handling">
+<link href="#rfc.section.8" rel="Chapter" title="8 Relationship to JSON Pointer">
+<link href="#rfc.section.9" rel="Chapter" title="9 Acknowledgements">
+<link href="#rfc.section.10" rel="Chapter" title="10 Security Considerations">
+<link href="#rfc.references" rel="Chapter" title="11 References">
+<link href="#rfc.references.1" rel="Chapter" title="11.1 Normative References">
+<link href="#rfc.references.2" rel="Chapter" title="11.2 Informative References">
+<link href="#rfc.appendix.A" rel="Chapter" title="A ChangeLog">
+<link href="#rfc.authors" rel="Chapter">
+
+
+  <meta name="generator" content="xml2rfc version 2.30.0 - https://tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc" />
+  <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" />
+
+  <meta name="dct.creator" content="Luff, G., Andrews, H., Ed., and B. Hutton, Ed." />
+  <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-bhutton-relative-json-pointer-00" />
+  <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2020-28" />
+  <meta name="dct.abstract" content="JSON Pointer is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines an extension to the JSON Pointer syntax, allowing relative locations from within the document.  " />
+  <meta name="description" content="JSON Pointer is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines an extension to the JSON Pointer syntax, allowing relative locations from within the document.  " />
+
+</head>
+
+<body>
+
+  <table class="header">
+    <tbody>
+    
+    	<tr>
+<td class="left">Internet Engineering Task Force</td>
+<td class="right">G. Luff</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
+<td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Intended status: Informational</td>
+<td class="right">H. Andrews, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left">Expires: August 1, 2021</td>
+<td class="right"></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left"></td>
+<td class="right">B. Hutton, Ed.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="left"></td>
+<td class="right">January 28, 2020</td>
+</tr>
+
+    	
+    </tbody>
+  </table>
+
+  <p class="title">Relative JSON Pointers<br />
+  <span class="filename">draft-bhutton-relative-json-pointer-00</span></p>
+  
+  <h1 id="rfc.abstract"><a href="#rfc.abstract">Abstract</a></h1>
+<p>JSON Pointer is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines an extension to the JSON Pointer syntax, allowing relative locations from within the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.status"><a href="#rfc.status">Status of This Memo</a></h1>
+<p>This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.</p>
+<p>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/.</p>
+<p>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."</p>
+<p>This Internet-Draft will expire on August 1, 2021.</p>
+<h1 id="rfc.copyrightnotice"><a href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a></h1>
+<p>Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors.  All rights reserved.</p>
+<p>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.</p>
+
+  
+  <hr class="noprint" />
+  <h1 class="np" id="rfc.toc"><a href="#rfc.toc">Table of Contents</a></h1>
+  <ul class="toc">
+
+  	<li>1.   <a href="#rfc.section.1">Introduction</a>
+</li>
+<li>2.   <a href="#rfc.section.2">Conventions and Terminology</a>
+</li>
+<li>3.   <a href="#rfc.section.3">Syntax</a>
+</li>
+<li>4.   <a href="#rfc.section.4">Evaluation</a>
+</li>
+<li>5.   <a href="#rfc.section.5">JSON String Representation</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>5.1.   <a href="#rfc.section.5.1">Examples</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>6.   <a href="#rfc.section.6">Non-use in URI Fragment Identifiers</a>
+</li>
+<li>7.   <a href="#rfc.section.7">Error Handling</a>
+</li>
+<li>8.   <a href="#rfc.section.8">Relationship to JSON Pointer</a>
+</li>
+<li>9.   <a href="#rfc.section.9">Acknowledgements</a>
+</li>
+<li>10.   <a href="#rfc.section.10">Security Considerations</a>
+</li>
+<li>11.   <a href="#rfc.references">References</a>
+</li>
+<ul><li>11.1.   <a href="#rfc.references.1">Normative References</a>
+</li>
+<li>11.2.   <a href="#rfc.references.2">Informative References</a>
+</li>
+</ul><li>Appendix A.   <a href="#rfc.appendix.A">ChangeLog</a>
+</li>
+<li><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a>
+</li>
+
+
+  </ul>
+
+  <h1 id="rfc.section.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.1">1.</a> Introduction</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.1.p.1">JSON Pointer (<a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901</a>) is a syntax for specifying locations in a JSON document, starting from the document root.  This document defines a related syntax allowing identification of relative locations from within the document.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.2">
+<a href="#rfc.section.2">2.</a> Conventions and Terminology</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.2.p.1">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 <a href="#RFC2119" class="xref">RFC 2119</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.3">
+<a href="#rfc.section.3">3.</a> Syntax</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.1">A Relative JSON Pointer is a Unicode string in UTF-8 encoding (see RFC 8259, <a href="#RFC8259" class="xref">Section 8</a>), comprising a non-negative integer, followed by either a '#' (%x23) character or a JSON Pointer (<a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901</a>).  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.3.p.2">The separation between the integer prefix and the JSON Pointer will always be unambiguous, because a JSON Pointer must be either zero- length or start with a '/' (%x2F).  Similarly, a JSON Pointer will never be ambiguous with the '#'.  </p>
+<p>The ABNF syntax of a Relative JSON Pointer is: </p>
+<pre>
+
+   relative-json-pointer =  non-negative-integer [index-manipulation] &lt;json-pointer&gt;
+   relative-json-pointer =/ non-negative-integer "#"
+   index-manipulation    =  ("+" / "-") non-negative-integer
+   non-negative-integer      =  %x30 / %x31-39 *( %x30-39 )
+           ; "0", or digits without a leading "0"
+
+                </pre>
+<p>where &lt;json-pointer&gt; follows the production defined in <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901, Section&#160;3</a> ("Syntax").  </p>
+<p></p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.4">
+<a href="#rfc.section.4">4.</a> Evaluation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.1">Evaluation of a Relative JSON Pointer begins with a reference to a value within a JSON document, and completes with either a value within that document, a string corresponding to an object member, or integer value representing an array index.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.2">Evaluation begins by processing the non-negative-integer prefix.  This can be found by taking the longest continuous sequence of decimal digits available, starting from the beginning of the string, taking the decimal numerical value.  If this value is more than zero, then the following steps are repeated that number of times: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>If the current referenced value is the root of the document, then evaluation fails (see below).  </li>
+<li>If the referenced value is an item within an array, then the new referenced value is that array.  </li>
+<li>If the referenced value is an object member within an object, then the new referenced value is that object.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.3">If the next character is a plus ("+") or minus ("-"), followed by another continuous sequence of decimal digits, the following steps are taken using the decimal numeric value of that plus or minus sign and decimal sequence: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>If the current referenced value is not an item of an array, then evaluation fails (see below).  </li>
+<li>If the referenced value is an item of an array, then the new referenced value is the item of the array indexed by adding the decimal value (which may be negative), to the index of the current referenced value.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.4">If the remainder of the Relative JSON Pointer is a JSON Pointer, then evaluation proceeds as per <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901, Section 5</a> with the modification that the initial reference being used is the reference currently being held (which may not be root of the document).  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.4.p.5">Otherwise (when the remainder of the Relative JSON Pointer is the character '#'), the final result is determined as follows: </p>
+
+<ul class="empty">
+<li>If the current referenced value is the root of the document, then evaluation fails (see below).  </li>
+<li>If the referenced value is an item within an array, then the final evaluation result is the value's index position within the array.  </li>
+<li>If the referenced value is an object member within an object, then the new referenced value is the corresponding member name.  </li>
+</ul>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5">
+<a href="#rfc.section.5">5.</a> JSON String Representation</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.5.p.1">The concerns surrounding JSON String representation of a Relative JSON Pointer are identical to those laid out in <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">RFC 6901, Section 5</a>.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.5.1">
+<a href="#rfc.section.5.1">5.1.</a> Examples</h1>
+<p>For example, given the JSON document: </p>
+<pre>
+
+                      {
+                         "foo": ["bar", "baz"],
+                         "highly": {
+                            "nested": {
+                               "objects": true
+                            }
+                         }
+                      }
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Starting from the value "baz" (inside "foo"), the following JSON strings evaluate to the accompanying values: </p>
+<pre>
+
+                  "0"                         "baz"
+                  "1/0"                       "bar"
+                  "0-1"                       "bar"
+                  "2/highly/nested/objects"   true
+                  "0#"                        1
+                  "0-1#"                      0
+                  "1#"                        "foo"
+
+                    </pre>
+<p>Starting from the value {"objects":true} (corresponding to the member key "nested"), the following JSON strings evaluate to the accompanying values: </p>
+<pre>
+
+                "0/objects"                 true
+                "1/nested/objects"          true
+                "2/foo/0"                   "bar"
+                "0#"                        "nested"
+                "1#"                        "highly"
+
+                    </pre>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.6">
+<a href="#rfc.section.6">6.</a> Non-use in URI Fragment Identifiers</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.6.p.1">Unlike a JSON Pointer, a Relative JSON Pointer can not be used in a URI fragment identifier.  Such fragments specify exact positions within a document, and therefore Relative JSON Pointers are not suitable.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.7">
+<a href="#rfc.section.7">7.</a> Error Handling</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.1">In the event of an error condition, evaluation of the JSON Pointer fails to complete.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.7.p.2">Evaluation may fail due to invalid syntax, or referencing a non- existent value.  This specification does not define how errors are handled.  An application of JSON Relative Pointer SHOULD specify the impact and handling of each type of error.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.8">
+<a href="#rfc.section.8">8.</a> Relationship to JSON Pointer</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.8.p.1">Relative JSON Pointers are intended as a companion to JSON Pointers.  Applications MUST specify the use of each syntax separately.  Defining either JSON Pointer or Relative JSON Pointer as an acceptable syntax does not imply that the other syntax is also acceptable.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.9">
+<a href="#rfc.section.9">9.</a> Acknowledgements</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.1">The language and structure of this specification are based heavily on <a href="#RFC6901" class="xref">[RFC6901]</a>, sometimes quoting it outright.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.9.p.2">This draft remains primarily as written and published by Geraint Luff, with only minor subsequent alterations under new editorship.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.section.10">
+<a href="#rfc.section.10">10.</a> Security Considerations</h1>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.1">Evaluation of a given Relative JSON Pointer is not guaranteed to reference an actual JSON value.  Applications using Relative JSON Pointer should anticipate this situation by defining how a pointer that does not resolve ought to be handled.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.2">As part of processing, a composite data structure may be assembled from multiple JSON documents (in part or in full).  In such cases, applications SHOULD ensure that a Relative JSON Pointer does not evaluate to a value outside the document for which is was written.  </p>
+<p id="rfc.section.10.p.3">Note that JSON pointers can contain the NUL (Unicode U+0000) character.  Care is needed not to misinterpret this character in programming languages that use NUL to mark the end of a string.  </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.references">
+<a href="#rfc.references">11.</a> References</h1>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.1">
+<a href="#rfc.references.1">11.1.</a> Normative References</h1>
+<table><tbody>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bradner, S.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</a>", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC6901">[RFC6901]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bryan, P.</a>, <a>Zyp, K.</a> and <a>M. Nottingham</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6901">JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Pointer</a>", RFC 6901, DOI 10.17487/RFC6901, April 2013.</td>
+</tr>
+</tbody></table>
+<h1 id="rfc.references.2">
+<a href="#rfc.references.2">11.2.</a> Informative References</h1>
+<table><tbody><tr>
+<td class="reference"><b id="RFC8259">[RFC8259]</b></td>
+<td class="top">
+<a>Bray, T.</a>, "<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8259">The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format</a>", STD 90, RFC 8259, DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017.</td>
+</tr></tbody></table>
+<h1 id="rfc.appendix.A">
+<a href="#rfc.appendix.A">Appendix A.</a> ChangeLog</h1>
+<p><a id="CREF1" class="info">[CREF1]<span class="info">This section to be removed before leaving Internet-Draft status.</span></a> </p>
+<p></p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>draft-bhutton-relative-json-pointer-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul><li>Add array forward and backward index manipulation</li></ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-02</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul><li>Update to the latest JSON RFC</li></ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul><li>The initial number is "non-negative", not "positive"</li></ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul>
+<li>Revived draft with identical wording and structure.</li>
+<li>Clarified how to use alongside JSON Pointer.</li>
+</ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+<dt>draft-luff-relative-json-pointer-00</dt>
+<dd style="margin-left: 8">
+<ul><li>Initial draft.</li></ul>
+<p> </p>
+</dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p> </p>
+<h1 id="rfc.authors"><a href="#rfc.authors">Authors' Addresses</a></h1>
+<div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Geraint Luff</span> 
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Luff</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality">Cambridge</span>,  
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline">UK</span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:luffgd@gmail.com">luffgd@gmail.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Henry Andrews</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Andrews</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:andrews_henry@yahoo.com">andrews_henry@yahoo.com</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div><div class="avoidbreak">
+  <address class="vcard">
+	<span class="vcardline">
+	  <span class="fn">Ben Hutton</span> (editor)
+	  <span class="n hidden">
+		<span class="family-name">Hutton</span>
+	  </span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="org vcardline"></span>
+	<span class="adr">
+	  
+	  <span class="vcardline">
+		<span class="locality"></span> 
+		<span class="region"></span>
+		<span class="code"></span>
+	  </span>
+	  <span class="country-name vcardline"></span>
+	</span>
+	<span class="vcardline">EMail: <a href="mailto:ben@jsonschema.dev">ben@jsonschema.dev</a></span>
+
+<span class="vcardline">URI: <a href="https://jsonschema.dev">https://jsonschema.dev</a></span>
+
+  </address>
+</div>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/release-notes.md b/draft/2020-12/release-notes.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..7fad89da
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/release-notes.md
@@ -0,0 +1,480 @@
+---
+title: JSON Schema 2020-12 Release Notes
+layout: page
+---
+The previous draft (2019-09) introduced a lot of new concepts including
+`$recursiveRef`/`$recursiveAnchor`, `unevaluatedProperties`/`unevaluatedItems`,
+vocabularies, and more. Since then, these new features have seen multiple
+implementations and usage in real schemas. This draft is mostly dedicated to
+changes related to applying the lessons we've learned about implementing and
+using these new features in the wild.
+
+This document attempts to put information most useful to schema authors toward
+the top and information for implementation authors toward the bottom.
+
+## Changes to items and additionalItems
+The keywords used for defining arrays and tuples have been redesigned to help
+lower the learning curve for JSON Schema. Since the `items` keyword was used for
+both types, we would often see people mistakenly defining a tuple when they
+meant to define an array and not understand why only the first item in the array
+was validating.
+
+The `items` and `additionalItems` keywords have been replaced with `prefixItems`
+and `items` where `prefixItems` has the same functionality as the
+array-of-schemas for of the old `items` and the new `items` keyword has the same
+functionality as the old `additionalItems` keyword.
+
+Although the meaning of `items` has changed, the syntax for defining arrays
+remains the same. Only the syntax for defining tuples has changed. The idea is
+that an array has items (`items`) and optionally has some positionally defined
+items that come before the normal items (`prefixItems`).
+
+Here are some examples to illustrate the changes.
+
+### Open tuple
+<table>
+  <tr>
+    <th>Draft 2019-09</th>
+    <th>Draft 2020-12</th>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <pre>{
+  "items": [
+    { "$ref": "#/$defs/foo" },
+    { "$ref": "#/$defs/bar" }
+  ]
+}</pre>
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      <pre>{
+  "prefixItems": [
+    { "$ref": "#/$defs/foo" },
+    { "$ref": "#/$defs/bar" }
+  ]
+}</pre>
+    </td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+
+### Closed tuple
+<table>
+  <tr>
+    <th>Draft 2019-09</th>
+    <th>Draft 2020-12</th>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <pre>{
+  "items": [
+    { "$ref": "#/$defs/foo" },
+    { "$ref": "#/$defs/bar" }
+  ],
+  "additionalItems": false
+}</pre>
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      <pre>{
+  "prefixItems": [
+    { "$ref": "#/$defs/foo" },
+    { "$ref": "#/$defs/bar" }
+  ],
+  "items": false
+}</pre>
+    </td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+
+### Tuple with constrained additional items
+<table>
+  <tr>
+    <th>Draft 2019-09</th>
+    <th>Draft 2020-12</th>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <pre>{
+  "items": [
+    { "$ref": "#/$defs/foo" },
+    { "$ref": "#/$defs/bar" }
+  ],
+  "additionalItems": { "$ref": "#/$defs/baz" }
+}</pre>
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      <pre>{
+  "prefixItems": [
+    { "$ref": "#/$defs/foo" },
+    { "$ref": "#/$defs/bar" }
+  ],
+  "items": { "$ref": "#/$defs/baz" }
+}</pre>
+    </td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+
+## $dynamicRef and $dynamicAnchor
+The `$recursiveRef` and `$recursiveAnchor` keywords were replaced by the more
+powerful `$dynamicRef` and `$dynamicAnchor` keywords. `$recursiveRef` and
+`$recursiveAnchor` were introduced in the previous draft to solve the problem of
+extending recursive schemas. As the "recursive" keywords got some use and we
+understood them better, we discovered how we could generalize them to solve even
+more types of problems. The name change reflects that these keywords are useful
+for more than just extending recursive schemas.
+
+A `$dynamicAnchor` can be thought of like a normal `$anchor` except that it can
+be referenced across schemas rather than just in the schema where it was
+defined. You can think of the old `$recursiveAnchor` as working the same way
+except that it only allowed you to create one anchor per schema, it had to be at
+the root of the schema, and the anchor name is always empty.
+
+`$dynamicRef` works the same as the old `$recursiveRef` except that fragments
+are no longer empty (`"$dynamicRef": "#my-anchor"` instead of `"$recursiveRef":
+"#"`) and non-fragment-only URIs are allowed. When a `$dynamicRef` contains a
+non-fragment-only URI-Reference, the schema the URI-Reference resolves to is
+used as the starting point for dynamic resolution.
+
+Here's how you would covert a schema using `$recursiveRef` to use `$dynamicRef`.
+
+<table>
+  <tr>
+    <th>Draft 2019-09</th>
+    <th>Draft 2020-12</th>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td><pre>// tree schema, extensible
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/tree",
+  "$recursiveAnchor": true,
+
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "data": true,
+    "children": {
+      "type": "array",
+      "items": { "$recursiveRef": "#" }
+    }
+  }
+}
+
+// strict-tree schema, guards against misspelled properties
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/strict-tree",
+  "$recursiveAnchor": true,
+
+  "$ref": "tree",
+  "unevaluatedProperties": false
+}</pre></td>
+    <td><pre>// tree schema, extensible
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/tree",
+  "$dynamicAnchor": "node",
+
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "data": true,
+    "children": {
+      "type": "array",
+      "items": { "$dynamicRef": "#node" }
+    }
+  }
+}
+
+// strict-tree schema, guards against misspelled properties
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/strict-tree",
+  "$dynamicAnchor": "node",
+
+  "$ref": "tree",
+  "unevaluatedProperties": false
+}</pre></td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+
+## contains and unevaluatedItems
+In the previous draft, it wasn't specified how or if the `contains` keyword
+affects the `unevaluatedItems` keyword. This draft specifies that any item in an
+array that passes validation of the `contains` schema is considered "evaluated".
+
+This allows you to use `contains` to express some constraints more cleanly than
+you could in previous drafts. This example show how you can express an array
+that has some item matching one schema and everything else matching another
+schema.
+
+<table>
+  <tr>
+    <th>Draft 2019-09</th>
+    <th>Draft 2020-12</th>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td><pre>{
+  "type": "array",
+  "contains": { "type": "string" },
+  "items": {
+    "anyOf": [
+      { "type": "string" },
+      { "type": "number" }
+    ]
+  }
+}</pre></td>
+    <td><pre>{
+  "type": "array",
+  "contains": { "type": "string" },
+  "unevaluatedItems": { "type": "number" }
+}
+
+
+
+
+
+</pre></td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+
+Unfortunately, this change means you may not be able to use `contains` in some
+situations you did before. Consider this draft 2019-09 schema describing a tuple
+of two strings where one of the two must be three or more characters long and
+any additional items are not allowed.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/schema",
+  "type": "array",
+  "items": [{ "type": "string" }, { "type": "string" }],
+  "contains": { "type": "string", "minLength": 3 },
+  "unevaluatedItems": false
+}
+```
+
+Given this schema, the instance `["a", "b", "ccc"]` will fail because `"ccc"` is
+considered unevaluated and fails the `unevaluatedItems` keyword. Now let's
+naively convert that example to a draft 2020-12 schema.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "type": "array",
+  "prefixItems": [{ "type": "string" }, { "type": "string" }],
+  "contains": { "type": "string", "minLength": 3 },
+  "unevaluatedItems": false
+}
+```
+
+Given this schema, the instance `["a", "b", "ccc"]` will pass because `"ccc"` is
+considered evaluated and doesn't not apply to the `unevaluatedItems` keyword. To
+fix this problem we can use the same boolean algebra transformation we used to
+use before we had the `contains` keyword.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "type": "array",
+  "prefixItems": [{ "type": "string" }, { "type": "string" }],
+  "not": {
+    "items": {
+      "not": { "type": "string", "minLength": 3 }
+    }
+  },
+  "unevaluatedItems": false
+}
+```
+
+Given this schema, the instance `["a", "b", "ccc"]` will fail because `"ccc"` is
+considered unevaluated and fails the `unevaluatedItems` keyword like it did in
+previous drafts.
+
+## Regular Expressions
+Regular expressions are now expected (but not strictly required) to support
+unicode characters. Previously, this was unspecified and implementations may or
+may not support this unicode in regular expressions.
+
+## Media Type Changes
+JSON Schema defines two media types, `application/schema+json` and
+`application/schema-instance+json`. This draft drops support for the `schema`
+media type parameter. It's caused a lot of confusion and disagreement. Since we
+haven't seen any evidence of anyone actually using it, it was decided to remove
+it for now.
+
+## Embedded Schemas and Bundling
+In Draft 2019-09, the meaning of `$id` in a sub-schema changed from indicating a
+base URI change within the current schema to indicating an embedded schema
+independent of the parent schema. A schema that contains one or more embedded
+schemas is called a "Compound Schema Document". This draft introduces guidance
+on how bundlers should embedded schemas to create Compound Schema Documents.
+
+If you reference an external schema, that schema can declare its own `$schema`
+and that may be different than the `$schema` of the referencing schema.
+Implementations need to be prepared to switch processing modes or throw an
+error if they don't support the `$schema` of the referenced schema. Embedded
+schemas work exactly the same way. They may declare a `$schema` that is not the
+same as the parent schema and implementations need to be prepared to handle the
+`$schema` change appropriately.
+
+A notable consequence of embedded schemas having a different `$schema` than its
+parent is that implementations can't validate Compound Schema Documents directly
+against the meta-schema. The Compound Schema Document needs to be decomposed and
+each Schema Resource needs to be validated individually against the appropriate
+meta-schema for that schema.
+
+This draft introduces official guidance on how to use embedded schemas to
+bundle schemas into a Compound Schema Document. The approach is designed to not
+have to modify schemas (other than adding to `$defs`) so that output results
+remain as similar as possible whether you are validating the bundled schema or
+following external references. Here's an example of a customer schema with
+external references that we want to bundle.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/schema/customer",
+
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "name": { "type": "string" },
+    "phone": { "$ref": "/schema/common#/$defs/phone" },
+    "address": { "$ref": "/schema/address" }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+```json
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/schema/address",
+
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "address": { "type": "string" },
+    "city": { "type": "string" },
+    "postalCode": { "$ref": "/schema/common#/$defs/usaPostalCode" },
+    "state": { "$ref": "/$defs/states" }
+  },
+
+  "$defs": {
+    "states": {
+      "enum": [...]
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+```json
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/schema/common",
+
+  "$defs": {
+    "phone": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "pattern": "^[\+]?[(]?[0-9]{3}[)]?[-\s\.]?[0-9]{3}[-\s\.]?[0-9]{4,6}$"
+    },
+    "usaPostalCode": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "pattern": "^[0-9]{5}(?:-[0-9]{4})?$"
+    },
+    "unsignedInt": {
+      "type": "integer",
+      "minimum": 0
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+To bundle these schemas, we simply add each of the referenced schemas as
+embedded schemas using `$defs`. Here's what the bundled schema would look like.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/schema/customer",
+
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "name": { "type": "string" },
+    "phone": { "$ref": "/schema/common#/$defs/phone" },
+    "address": { "$ref": "/schema/address" }
+  }
+
+  "$defs": {
+    "https://example.com/schema/address": {
+      "$id": "https://example.com/schema/address",
+
+      "type": "object",
+      "properties": {
+        "address": { "type": "string" },
+        "city": { "type": "string" },
+        "postalCode": { "$ref": "/schema/common#/$defs/usaPostalCode" },
+        "state": { "$ref": "#/$defs/states" }
+      },
+
+      "$defs": {
+        "states": {
+          "enum": [...]
+        }
+      }
+    },
+    "https://example.com/schema/common": {
+      "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09",
+      "$id": "https://example.com/schema/common",
+
+      "$defs": {
+        "phone": {
+          "type": "string",
+          "pattern": "^[\+]?[(]?[0-9]{3}[)]?[-\s\.]?[0-9]{3}[-\s\.]?[0-9]{4,6}$"
+        },
+        "usaPostalCode": {
+          "type": "string",
+          "pattern": "^[0-9]{5}(?:-[0-9]{4})?$"
+        },
+        "unsignedInt": {
+          "type": "integer",
+          "minimum": 0
+        }
+      }
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+Here are a few things you might notice from this example.
+
+1. No `$ref`s were modified. Even local references are unchanged.
+2. `https://example.com/schema/common#/$defs/unsignedInt` got pulled in with the
+common schema even though it isn't used. It's allowed to trim out the extra
+definitions, but not necessary.
+3. `https://example.com/schema/address` doesn't declare a `$schema`. Because it
+uses the same `$schema` as `https://example.com/schema/customer`, it can skip
+that declaration and use the `$schema` from the schema it's embedded in.
+4. `https://example.com/schema/common` uses a different `$schema` than the
+document it's embedded in. That's allowed.
+5. Definitions from `https://example.com/schema/common` are used in both of the
+other schemas and only needs to be included once. It isn't necessary for
+bundlers to embed a schema inside another embedded schema.
+
+## Annotations
+Implementations that collect annotations should now include annotations for
+unknown keywords in the "verbose" output format. The annotation value for an
+unknown keyword is the keyword's value.
+
+## Vocabulary Changes
+The `unevaluatedProperties` and `unevaluatedItems` keywords have been moved from
+the applicator vocabulary to their own designated vocabulary which is required
+in the default meta-schema. In Draft 2019-09, these keywords were expected to
+throw an error if not implemented. This was a special-case behavior of the
+applicator vocabulary. Moving the "unevaluated" keywords into their own
+vocabulary allows us to remove that special-case and also allowing for dialects
+to be constructed that don't require these keywords.
+
+The format vocabulary was broken into two separate vocabularies. The
+"format-annotation" vocabulary treats the `format` keyword as an annotation and
+the "format-assertion" vocabulary treats the `format` keyword as an assertion.
+The "format-annotation" vocabulary is used in the default meta-schema and is
+required. In Draft 2019-09, `format` should be evaluated as an annotation by
+default and implementations could provide configuration to change the behavior
+to evaluate `format` as an assertion. The separate vocabularies allow for
+removing the special configuration requirements and just use the vocabulary
+system to express which behavior should be used.
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/schema b/draft/2020-12/schema
new file mode 120000
index 00000000..70e58e37
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/schema
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../_includes/draft/2020-12/schema.json
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/vocab/applicator.md b/draft/2020-12/vocab/applicator.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..93c75bcb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/vocab/applicator.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.10
+title: A Vocabulary for Applying Subschemas
+---
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/vocab/content.md b/draft/2020-12/vocab/content.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..b60a25c4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/vocab/content.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.8
+title: A Vocabulary for the Contents of String-Encoded Data
+---
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/vocab/core.md b/draft/2020-12/vocab/core.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..dca0cbed
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/vocab/core.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.8
+title: The JSON Schema Core Vocabulary
+---
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/vocab/format-annotation.md b/draft/2020-12/vocab/format-annotation.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..ff0e1aa8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/vocab/format-annotation.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7
+title: A Vocabulary for Semantic Content with "format" as annotations
+---
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/vocab/format-assertion.md b/draft/2020-12/vocab/format-assertion.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..fe9640eb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/vocab/format-assertion.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7
+title: A Vocabulary for Semantic Content with "format" as assertions
+---
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/vocab/meta-data.md b/draft/2020-12/vocab/meta-data.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..0fb58ffa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/vocab/meta-data.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.9
+title: A Vocabulary for Basic Meta-Data Annotations
+---
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/vocab/unevaluated.md b/draft/2020-12/vocab/unevaluated.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..0ff02bc1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/vocab/unevaluated.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.11
+title: A Vocabulary for Unevaluated Locations
+---
diff --git a/draft/2020-12/vocab/validation.md b/draft/2020-12/vocab/validation.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..e03833e4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/draft/2020-12/vocab/validation.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.6
+title: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation
+---
diff --git a/example1.md b/example1.md
deleted file mode 100644
index 429b991e..00000000
--- a/example1.md
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,270 +0,0 @@
----
-layout: page
----
-
-Example data
-------------
-
-Let's pretend we're interacting with a JSON based product catalog. This catalog has a product which has an *id*, a *name*, a *price*, and an optional set of *tags*.
-
-### Example JSON data for a product API
-
-An example product in this API is:
-
-```json
-{
-    "id": 1,
-    "name": "A green door",
-    "price": 12.50,
-    "tags": ["home", "green"]
-}
-```
-
-While generally straightforward, that example leaves some open questions. For example, one may ask:
-
--   What is id?
--   Is name required?
--   Can price be 0?
--   Are all tags strings?
-
-When you're talking about a data format, you want to have metadata about what fields mean, and what valid inputs for those fields are. JSON schema is a specification for standardizing how to answer those questions for JSON data.
-
-Starting the schema
--------------------
-
-To start a schema definition, let's begin with a basic JSON schema:
-
-```json
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "title": "Product",
-    "description": "A product from Acme's catalog",
-    "type": "object"
-}
-```
-
-The above schema has four properties called *keywords*. The *title* and *description* keywords are descriptive only, in that they do not add constraints to the data being validated. The intent of the schema is stated with these two keywords (that is, this schema describes a product).
-
-The *type* keyword defines the first constraint on our JSON data: it has to be a JSON Object.
-
-Finally, the *$schema* keyword states that this schema is written according to the draft v4 specification.
-
-Defining the properties
------------------------
-
-Next let's answer our previous questions about this API, starting with id.
-
-### What is id?
-
-*id* is a numeric value that uniquely identifies a product. Since this is the canonical identifier for a product, it doesn't make sense to have a product without one, so it is required.
-
-In JSON Schema terms, we can update our schema to:
-
-```json
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "title": "Product",
-    "description": "A product from Acme's catalog",
-    "type": "object",
-    "properties": {
-        "id": {
-            "description": "The unique identifier for a product",
-            "type": "integer"
-        }
-    },
-    "required": ["id"]
-}
-```
-
-### Is name required?
-
-*name* is a string value that describes a product. Since there isn't much to a product without a name, it also is required. Adding this gives us the schema:
-
-```json
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "title": "Product",
-    "description": "A product from Acme's catalog",
-    "type": "object",
-    "properties": {
-        "id": {
-            "description": "The unique identifier for a product",
-            "type": "integer"
-        },
-        "name": {
-            "description": "Name of the product",
-            "type": "string"
-        }
-    },
-    "required": ["id", "name"]
-}
-```
-
-### Can price be 0?
-
-According to Acme's docs, there are no free products. In JSON schema a number can have a minimum. By default this minimum is inclusive, so we need to specify *exclusiveMinimum*. Therefore we can update our schema with *price*:
-
-```json
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "title": "Product",
-    "description": "A product from Acme's catalog",
-    "type": "object",
-    "properties": {
-        "id": {
-            "description": "The unique identifier for a product",
-            "type": "integer"
-        },
-        "name": {
-            "description": "Name of the product",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "price": {
-            "type": "number",
-            "minimum": 0,
-            "exclusiveMinimum": true
-        }
-    },
-    "required": ["id", "name", "price"]
-}
-```
-
-### Are all tags strings?
-
-Finally, we come to the *tags* property. Unlike the previous properties, tags have many values, and is represented as a JSON array. According to Acme's docs, all tags must be strings, but you aren't required to specify tags. We simply leave *tags* out of the list of required properties.
-
-However, Acme's docs add two constraints:
-
--   there must be at least one tag,
--   all tags must be unique.
-
-The first constraint can be added with *minItems*, and the second one by specifying *uniqueItems* as being true:
-
-```json
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "title": "Product",
-    "description": "A product from Acme's catalog",
-    "type": "object",
-    "properties": {
-        "id": {
-            "description": "The unique identifier for a product",
-            "type": "integer"
-        },
-        "name": {
-            "description": "Name of the product",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "price": {
-            "type": "number",
-            "minimum": 0,
-            "exclusiveMinimum": true
-        },
-        "tags": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "items": {
-                "type": "string"
-            },
-            "minItems": 1,
-            "uniqueItems": true
-        }
-    },
-    "required": ["id", "name", "price"]
-}
-```
-
-Summary
--------
-
-The above example is by no means definitive of all the types of data JSON schema can define. For more definitive information see the [full standard draft](#definitions).
-
-As a final example, here's a spec for an array of products, with the products having 2 new properties. The first is a *dimensions* property for the size of the product, and the second is a *warehouseLocation* field for where the warehouse that stores them is geographically located.
-
-And also, since JSON Schema defines a reference schema for a geographic location, instead of coming up with our own, we'll reference the [canonical one](http://json-schema.org/geo).
-
-### Set of products:
-
-```json
-[
-    {
-        "id": 2,
-        "name": "An ice sculpture",
-        "price": 12.50,
-        "tags": ["cold", "ice"],
-        "dimensions": {
-            "length": 7.0,
-            "width": 12.0,
-            "height": 9.5
-        },
-        "warehouseLocation": {
-            "latitude": -78.75,
-            "longitude": 20.4
-        }
-    },
-    {
-        "id": 3,
-        "name": "A blue mouse",
-        "price": 25.50,
-        "dimensions": {
-            "length": 3.1,
-            "width": 1.0,
-            "height": 1.0
-        },
-        "warehouseLocation": {
-            "latitude": 54.4,
-            "longitude": -32.7
-        }
-    }
-]
-```
-
-### Set of products schema:
-
-```json
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "title": "Product set",
-    "type": "array",
-    "items": {
-        "title": "Product",
-        "type": "object",
-        "properties": {
-            "id": {
-                "description": "The unique identifier for a product",
-                "type": "number"
-            },
-            "name": {
-                "type": "string"
-            },
-            "price": {
-                "type": "number",
-                "minimum": 0,
-                "exclusiveMinimum": true
-            },
-            "tags": {
-                "type": "array",
-                "items": {
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "minItems": 1,
-                "uniqueItems": true
-            },
-            "dimensions": {
-                "type": "object",
-                "properties": {
-                    "length": {"type": "number"},
-                    "width": {"type": "number"},
-                    "height": {"type": "number"}
-                },
-                "required": ["length", "width", "height"]
-            },
-            "warehouseLocation": {
-                "description": "Coordinates of the warehouse with the product",
-                "$ref": "http://json-schema.org/geo"
-            }
-        },
-        "required": ["id", "name", "price"]
-    }
-}
-```
-
diff --git a/example2.md b/example2.md
deleted file mode 100644
index be42c5f8..00000000
--- a/example2.md
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,409 +0,0 @@
----
-layout: page
----
-
-Purpose
--------
-
-This example shows a possible JSON representation of a hypothetical machine's mount points as represented in an `/etc/fstab` file.
-
-An entry in the fstab file can have many different forms. Here is a possible representation of a full fstab:
-
-```json
-{
-    "/": {
-        "storage": {
-            "type": "disk",
-            "device": "/dev/sda1"
-        },
-        "fstype": "btrfs",
-        "readonly": true
-    },
-    "/var": {
-        "storage": {
-            "type": "disk",
-            "label": "8f3ba6f4-5c70-46ec-83af-0d5434953e5f"
-        },
-        "fstype": "ext4",
-        "options": [ "nosuid" ]
-    },
-    "/tmp": {
-        "storage": {
-            "type": "tmpfs",
-            "sizeInMB": 64
-        }
-    },
-    "/var/www": {
-        "storage": {
-            "type": "nfs",
-            "server": "my.nfs.server",
-            "remotePath": "/exports/mypath"
-        }
-    }
-}
-```
-
-Not all constraints to an fstab file can be modeled using JSON Schema alone; however, it can already represent a good number of them. We will add constraints one after the other until we get to a satisfactory result.
-
-Base schema
------------
-
-We will start with a base schema expressing the following constraints:
-
--   the list of entries is a JSON object;
--   the member names (or property names) of this object must all be valid, absolute paths;
--   there must be an entry for the root filesystem (ie, `/`).
-
-We also want the schema to be regarded as a draft v4 schema, we must therefore specify *$schema*:
-
-```json
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "type": "object",
-    "properties": {
-        "/": {}
-    },
-    "patternProperties": {
-        "^(/[^/]+)+$": {}
-    },
-    "additionalProperties": false,
-    "required": [ "/" ]
-}
-```
-
-Note how the valid paths constraint is enforced here:
-
--   we have a *properties* keyword with only a `/` entry;
--   we use *patternProperties* to match other property names via a regular expression (note that it does not match `/`);
--   as *additionalProperties* is false, it constrains object properties to be either `/` or to match the regular expression.
-
-You will notice that the regular expression is explicitly anchored (with `^` and `$`): in JSON Schema, regular expressions (in *patternProperties* and in *pattern*) are not anchored by default.
-
-For now, the schemas describing individual entries are empty: we will start describing the constraints in the following paragraphs, using another schema, which we will reference from the main schema when we are ready.
-
-The entry schema - starting out
--------------------------------
-
-Here again we will proceed step by step. We will start with the global structure of our schema, which will be as such:
-
-```json
-{
-    "id": "http://some.site.somewhere/entry-schema#",
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "description": "schema for an fstab entry",
-    "type": "object",
-    "required": [ "storage" ],
-    "properties": {
-        "storage": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "oneOf": [
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/diskDevice" },
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/diskUUID" },
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/nfs" },
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/tmpfs" }
-            ]
-        }
-    },
-    "definitions": {
-        "diskDevice": {},
-        "diskUUID": {},
-        "nfs": {},
-        "tmpfs": {}
-    }
-}
-```
-
-You should already be familiar with some of the constraints:
-
--   an fstab entry must be an object (`"type": "object"`);
--   it must have one property with name *storage* (`"required": [ "storage" ]`);
--   the *storage* property must also be an object.
-
-There are a couple of novelties:
-
--   you will notice the appearance of JSON References, via the *$ref* keyword; here, all references used are local to the schema, and the fragment part is a URI encoded JSON Pointer;
--   you will notice the appearance of an *id*: this is the URI of this resource; we assume here that this URI is the actual URI of this schema;
--   the *oneOf* keyword is new in draft v4; its value is an array of schemas, and an instance is valid if and only if it is valid against exactly one of these schemas;
--   finally, the *definitions* keyword is a standardized placeholder in which you can define inline subschemas to be used in a schema.
-
-### The *fstype*, *options* and *readonly* properties
-
-The entry schema - adding constraints
--------------------------------------
-
-Let's now extend this skeleton to add constraints to these three properties. Note that none of them are required:
-
--   we will pretend that we only support `ext3`, `ext4` and `btrfs` as filesystem types;
--   *options* must be an array, and the items in this array must be strings; moreover, there must be at least one item, and all items should be unique;
--   *readonly* must be a boolean.
-
-With these added constraints, the schema now looks like this:
-
-```json
-{
-    "id": "http://some.site.somewhere/entry-schema#",
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "description": "schema for an fstab entry",
-    "type": "object",
-    "required": [ "storage" ],
-    "properties": {
-        "storage": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "oneOf": [
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/diskDevice" },
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/diskUUID" },
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/nfs" },
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/tmpfs" }
-            ]
-        },
-        "fstype": {
-            "enum": [ "ext3", "ext4", "btrfs" ]
-        },
-        "options": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "minItems": 1,
-            "items": { "type": "string" },
-            "uniqueItems": true
-        },
-        "readonly": { "type": "boolean" }
-    },
-    "definitions": {
-        "diskDevice": {},
-        "diskUUID": {},
-        "nfs": {},
-        "tmpfs": {}
-    }
-}
-```
-
-For now, all definitions are empty (an empty JSON Schema validates all instances). We will write schemas for individual definitions below, and fill these schemas into the entry schema.
-
-The *diskDevice* storage type
------------------------------
-
-This storage type has two required properties, *type* and *device*. The type can only be *disk*, and the device must be an absolute path starting with */dev*. No other properties are allowed:
-
-```json
-{
-    "properties": {
-        "type": { "enum": [ "disk" ] },
-        "device": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "pattern": "^/dev/[^/]+(/[^/]+)*$"
-        }
-    },
-    "required": [ "type", "device" ],
-    "additionalProperties": false
-}
-```
-
-You will have noted that we need not specify that *type* must be a string: the constraint described by *enum* is enough.
-
-The *diskUUID* storage type
----------------------------
-
-This storage type has two required properties, *type* and *label*. The type can only be *disk*, and the label must be a valid UUID. No other properties are allowed:
-
-```json
-{
-    "properties": {
-        "type": { "enum": [ "disk" ] },
-        "label": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "pattern": "^[a-fA-F0-9]{8}-[a-fA-F0-9]{4}-[a-fA-F0-9]{4}-[a-fA-F0-9]{4}-[a-fA-F0-9]{12}$"
-        }
-    },
-    "required": [ "type", "label" ],
-    "additionalProperties": false
-}
-```
-
-The *nfs* storage type
-----------------------
-
-This storage type has three required properties: *type*, *server* and *remotePath*. What is more, the server may be either a host name, an IPv4 address or an IPv6 address.
-
-For the constraints on *server*, we use a new keyword: *format*. While it is not required that *format* be supported, we will suppose that it is here:
-
-```json
-{
-    "properties": {
-        "type": { "enum": [ "nfs" ] },
-        "remotePath": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "pattern": "^(/[^/]+)+$"
-        },
-        "server": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "oneOf": [
-                { "format": "host-name" },
-                { "format": "ipv4" },
-                { "format": "ipv6" }
-            ]
-        }
-    },
-    "required": [ "type", "server", "remotePath" ],
-    "additionalProperties": false
-}
-```
-
-The *tmpfs* storage type
-------------------------
-
-This storage type has two required properties: *type* and *sizeInMB*. The size can only be an integer. What is more, we will require that the size be between 16 and 512, inclusive:
-
-```json
-{
-    "properties": {
-        "type": { "enum": [ "tmpfs" ] },
-        "sizeInMB": {
-            "type": "integer",
-            "minimum": 16,
-            "maximum": 512
-        }
-    },
-    "required": [ "type", "sizeInMB" ],
-    "additionalProperties": false
-}
-```
-
-The full entry schema
----------------------
-
-The resulting schema is quite large:
-
-```json
-{
-    "id": "http://some.site.somewhere/entry-schema#",
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "description": "schema for an fstab entry",
-    "type": "object",
-    "required": [ "storage" ],
-    "properties": {
-        "storage": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "oneOf": [
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/diskDevice" },
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/diskUUID" },
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/nfs" },
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/tmpfs" }
-            ]
-        },
-        "fstype": {
-            "enum": [ "ext3", "ext4", "btrfs" ]
-        },
-        "options": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "minItems": 1,
-            "items": { "type": "string" },
-            "uniqueItems": true
-        },
-        "readonly": { "type": "boolean" }
-    },
-    "definitions": {
-        "diskDevice": {
-            "properties": {
-                "type": { "enum": [ "disk" ] },
-                "device": {
-                    "type": "string",
-                    "pattern": "^/dev/[^/]+(/[^/]+)*$"
-                }
-            },
-            "required": [ "type", "device" ],
-            "additionalProperties": false
-        },
-        "diskUUID": {
-            "properties": {
-                "type": { "enum": [ "disk" ] },
-                "label": {
-                    "type": "string",
-                    "pattern": "^[a-fA-F0-9]{8}-[a-fA-F0-9]{4}-[a-fA-F0-9]{4}-[a-fA-F0-9]{4}-[a-fA-F0-9]{12}$"
-                }
-            },
-            "required": [ "type", "label" ],
-            "additionalProperties": false
-        },
-        "nfs": {
-            "properties": {
-                "type": { "enum": [ "nfs" ] },
-                "remotePath": {
-                    "type": "string",
-                    "pattern": "^(/[^/]+)+$"
-                },
-                "server": {
-                    "type": "string",
-                    "oneOf": [
-                        { "format": "host-name" },
-                        { "format": "ipv4" },
-                        { "format": "ipv6" }
-                    ]
-                }
-            },
-            "required": [ "type", "server", "remotePath" ],
-            "additionalProperties": false
-        },
-        "tmpfs": {
-            "properties": {
-                "type": { "enum": [ "tmpfs" ] },
-                "sizeInMB": {
-                    "type": "integer",
-                    "minimum": 16,
-                    "maximum": 512
-                }
-            },
-            "required": [ "type", "sizeInMB" ],
-            "additionalProperties": false
-        }
-    }
-}
-```
-
-Plugging this into our main schema
-----------------------------------
-
-Now that all possible entries have been described, we can refer to the entry schema from our main schema. We will, again, use a JSON Reference here:
-
-```json
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "type": "object",
-    "properties": {
-        "/": { "$ref": "http://some.site.somewhere/entry-schema#" }
-    },
-    "patternProperties": {
-        "^(/[^/]+)+$": { "$ref": "http://some.site.somewhere/entry-schema#" }
-    },
-    "additionalProperties": false,
-    "required": [ "/" ]
-}
-```
-
-Wrapping up
------------
-
-This example is much more advanced than the previous example; you will have learned of schema referencing and identification, you will have been introduced to other keywords. There are also a few additional points to consider.
-
-### The schema can be improved
-
-This is only an example for learning purposes. Some additional constraints could be described. For instance:
-
--   it makes no sense for `/` to be mounted on a tmpfs filesystem;
--   it makes no sense to specify the filesystem type if the storage is either NFS or tmpfs.
-
-As an exercise, you can always try and add these constraints. It would probably require splitting the schema further.
-
-### Not all constraints can be expressed
-
-JSON Schema limits itself to describing the structure of JSON data, it cannot express functional constraints.
-
-If we take an NFS entry as an example, JSON Schema alone cannot check that the submitted NFS server's hostname, or IP address, is actually correct: this check is left to applications.
-
-### Tools have varying JSON Schema support
-
-While this is not a concern if you know that the schema you write will be used by you alone, you should keep this in mind if you write a schema which other people can potentially use. The schema we have written here has some features which can be problematic for portability:
-
--   *format* support is optional, and as such other tools may ignore this keyword: this can lead to a different validation outcome for the same data;
--   it uses regular expressions: care should be taken not to use any advanced features (such as lookarounds), since they may not be supported at the other end;
--   it uses *$schema* to express the need to use draft v4 syntax, but not all tools support draft v4 (in fact, most don't support it).
-
-
diff --git a/examples.md b/examples.md
deleted file mode 100644
index 86ce80fb..00000000
--- a/examples.md
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,39 +0,0 @@
----
-layout: page
----
-
-Basic example
--------------
-
-Here is a basic example of a JSON Schema:
-
-```json
-{
-    "title": "Person",
-    "type": "object",
-    "properties": {
-        "firstName": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "lastName": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "age": {
-            "description": "Age in years",
-            "type": "integer",
-            "minimum": 0
-        }
-    },
-    "required": ["firstName", "lastName"]
-}
-```
-
-Walkthroughs
-------------
-
-The two examples below are step-by-step guides into building a schema:
-
--   [a simple example](example1.md) which covers a classical product catalog description.
--   [a more advanced example](example2.md), using JSON Schema to describe filesystem entries in a Unix-like /etc/fstab file.
-
-The [Space Telescope Science Institute](http://www.stsci.edu/) has also published a [guide aimed at schema authors](http://spacetelescope.github.io/understanding-json-schema/).
diff --git a/favicon.ico b/favicon.ico
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..e2ab1c91
Binary files /dev/null and b/favicon.ico differ
diff --git a/geo b/geo
deleted file mode 100644
index 2f335265..00000000
--- a/geo
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,9 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "description": "A geographical coordinate",
-    "type": "object",
-    "properties": {
-        "latitude": { "type": "number" },
-        "longitude": { "type": "number" }
-    }
-}
diff --git a/hyper-schema b/hyper-schema
deleted file mode 100644
index 853bd35f..00000000
--- a/hyper-schema
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,168 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/hyper-schema#",
-    "id": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/hyper-schema#",
-    "title": "JSON Hyper-Schema",
-    "allOf": [
-        {
-            "$ref": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#"
-        }
-    ],
-    "properties": {
-        "additionalItems": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                {
-                    "type": "boolean"
-                },
-                {
-                    "$ref": "#"
-                }
-            ]
-        },
-        "additionalProperties": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                {
-                    "type": "boolean"
-                },
-                {
-                    "$ref": "#"
-                }
-            ]
-        },
-        "dependencies": {
-            "additionalProperties": {
-                "anyOf": [
-                    {
-                        "$ref": "#"
-                    },
-                    {
-                        "type": "array"
-                    }
-                ]
-            }
-        },
-        "items": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                {
-                    "$ref": "#"
-                },
-                {
-                    "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray"
-                }
-            ]
-        },
-        "definitions": {
-            "additionalProperties": {
-                "$ref": "#"
-            }
-        },
-        "patternProperties": {
-            "additionalProperties": {
-                "$ref": "#"
-            }
-        },
-        "properties": {
-            "additionalProperties": {
-                "$ref": "#"
-            }
-        },
-        "allOf": {
-            "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray"
-        },
-        "anyOf": {
-            "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray"
-        },
-        "oneOf": {
-            "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray"
-        },
-        "not": {
-            "$ref": "#"
-        },
-
-        "links": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "items": {
-                "$ref": "#/definitions/linkDescription"
-            }
-        },
-        "fragmentResolution": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "media": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "properties": {
-                "type": {
-                    "description": "A media type, as described in RFC 2046",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "binaryEncoding": {
-                    "description": "A content encoding scheme, as described in RFC 2045",
-                    "type": "string"
-                }
-            }
-        },
-        "pathStart": {
-            "description": "Instances' URIs must start with this value for this schema to apply to them",
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "uri"
-        }
-    },
-    "definitions": {
-        "schemaArray": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "items": {
-                "$ref": "#"
-            }
-        },
-        "linkDescription": {
-            "title": "Link Description Object",
-            "type": "object",
-            "required": [ "href", "rel" ],
-            "properties": {
-                "href": {
-                    "description": "a URI template, as defined by RFC 6570, with the addition of the $, ( and ) characters for pre-processing",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "rel": {
-                    "description": "relation to the target resource of the link",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "title": {
-                    "description": "a title for the link",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "targetSchema": {
-                    "description": "JSON Schema describing the link target",
-                    "$ref": "#"
-                },
-                "mediaType": {
-                    "description": "media type (as defined by RFC 2046) describing the link target",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "method": {
-                    "description": "method for requesting the target of the link (e.g. for HTTP this might be \"GET\" or \"DELETE\")",
-                    "type": "string"
-                },
-                "encType": {
-                    "description": "The media type in which to submit data along with the request",
-                    "type": "string",
-                    "default": "application/json"
-                },
-                "schema": {
-                    "description": "Schema describing the data to submit along with the request",
-                    "$ref": "#"
-                }
-            }
-        }
-    },
-    "links": [
-        {
-            "rel": "self",
-            "href": "{+id}"
-        },
-        {
-            "rel": "full",
-            "href": "{+($ref)}"
-        }
-    ]
-}
-
diff --git a/img/logo.png b/img/logo.png
deleted file mode 100644
index 48219ade..00000000
Binary files a/img/logo.png and /dev/null differ
diff --git a/implementations.md b/implementations.md
index d784fd80..c2df42b0 100644
--- a/implementations.md
+++ b/implementations.md
@@ -1,196 +1,404 @@
 ---
 layout: page
-title: Software
-permalink: /implementations
+title: Implementations
+permalink: /implementations.html
 ---
 
-Implementations below are written in different languages, and support part, or all, of the specification.
+_**NOTE:** This page lists implementations with (or actively working towards) support for draft-06 or later._
 
-Implementations below are classified based on their functionality. When known, the license of the project is also mentioned.
+_For implementations supporting only draft-04 or older, or that are no longer in development, see the [Obsolete Implementations](obsolete-implementations) page._
 
-If you have updates to this list, make a pull request on the [GitHub repo](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io)
+
+* TOC
+{:toc}
+
+Implementations below are written in different languages, and support part, or all, of at least one recent version of the specification.
+
+
+Implementations are classified based on their functionality. When known, the license of the project is also mentioned.
+
+If you have updates to this list, make a pull request on the [GitHub repo](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io).
+
+Listing does not signify a recommendation or endorsement of any kind.
 
 Validators
 ----------
 
-### Libraries
-
 <nav class="intra" markdown="1">
 
--   [.NET](#validator-dotnet)
--   [Action Script 3](#validator-action-script-3)
--   [C](#validator-c)
--   [C++](#validator-cpp)
--   [Clojure](#validator-clojure)
--   [Dart](#validator-dart)
--   [Erlang](#validator-erlang)
--   [Go](#validator-go)
--   [Haskell](#validator-haskell)
--   [Java](#validator-java)
--   [JavaScript](#validator-javascript)
--   [PHP](#validator-php)
--   [Perl](#validator-perl)
--   [Python](#validator-python)
--   [Ruby](#validator-ruby)
+{% assign validator-libraries = site.data.validator-libraries-modern | sort: 'name' %}
+
+{% for language in validator-libraries %}
+-   [{{ language.name }}](#validator-{% if language.anchor-name %}{{ language.anchor-name }}{% else %}{{ language.name | downcase }}{% endif %})
+{% endfor %}
 
 </nav>
 
-<!-- -->
-
-- .NET <a id="validator-dotnet"></a>
-    -   <a href="http://james.newtonking.com/projects/json-net.aspx" id="link-impl-json-net">Json.NET</a> (MIT)
-    -   <a href="http://NJsonSchema.org" id="link-impl-n-json-schema">NJsonSchema</a> - *supports version 4* (Ms-PL)
-- ActionScript 3 <a id="validator-action-script-3"></a>
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/raulbajales/Frigga" id="link-impl-frigga">Frigga</a> (MIT)
-- C <a id="validator-c"></a>
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/netmail-open/wjelement" id="link-impl-wjelement">WJElement</a> (LGPLv3)
-- C++ <a id="validator-cpp"></a>
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/petehug/wjelement-cpp" id="link-impl-wjelement">wjelement-cpp</a> - *supports version 4* (LGPLv3)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/tristanpenman/valijson" id="link-impl-valijson">Header-only C++ library for JSON Schema validation</a> - *supports only version 4* (BSD-2-Clause)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/pboettch/json-schema-validator" id="link-impl-modern-c++-validator">Modern C++ JSON schema validator</a> - *supports only version 4* based on JSON for Modern C++ (MIT)
-- Clojure <a id="validator-clojure"></a>
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/metosin/scjsv" id="link-impl-metosin-scjsv">scjsv</a> - *supports version 4* (wrapper for [fge/json-schema-validator](https://github.com/fge/json-schema-validator)) (Eclipse Public License v1.0)
--  Dart <a id="validator-dart"></a>
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/patefacio/json_schema" id="link-impl-dart-jsonschema">json_schema</a> *supports version 4* (BSL-1.0)
-- Erlang <a name="validator-erlang"></a>
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/for-GET/jesse" id="link-impl-jesse">JeSSE</a> (Apache 2.0)
-- Go <a name="validator-go"></a>
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/sigu-399/gojsonschema" id="link-impl-gojsonschema">gojsonschema</a> (Apache 2.0)
-- Haskell <a id="validator-haskell"></a>
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/timjb/aeson-schema" id="link-impl-aeson-schema">aeson-schema</a> (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/seagreen/hjsonschema" id="link-impl-hjsonschema">hjsonschema</a> - *supports version 4* (MIT)
-- Java <a id="validator-java"></a>
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/fge/json-schema-validator" id="link-impl-fge-json-schema-validator">json-schema-validator</a> - *supports version 4* (LGPLv3)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/everit-org/json-schema" id="link-impl-everit-json-schema">json-schema (implementation based on the org.json API)</a> - *supports version 4* (Apache License 2.0)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/networknt/json-schema-validator" id="link-impl-networknt-json-schema">json-schema-validator</a> - *supports version 4* (Apache License 2.0)
-- JavaScript <a id="validator-javascript"></a>
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/epoberezkin/ajv" id="link-impl-ajv">ajv</a> for Node.js and browsers - *supports version 4, version 6, [custom keywords](https://github.com/epoberezkin/ajv-keywords) and [$data reference](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues/51)* (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/korzio/djv" id="link-impl-djv">djv</a> for Node.js and browsers - *supports version 4* (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/tdegrunt/jsonschema" id="link-impl-tdegrunt-jsonschema">jsonschema</a> for Node.js - *supports version 4* (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/mafintosh/is-my-json-valid" id="link-impl-is-my-json-valid">is-my-json-valid</a> - *supports version 4* (MIT)
-    -   <a href="http://geraintluff.github.com/tv4/" id="link-impl-tv4">tv4</a> - *supports version 4* (Public Domain)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/natesilva/jayschema" id="link-impl-jayschema">JaySchema</a> for Node.js - *supports version 4* (BSD)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/zaggino/z-schema" id="link-impl-z-schema">z-schema</a> for Node.js - *supports version 4* (MIT)
-    -   <a href="http://github.com/IreneKnapp/direct-schema" id="link-impl-direct-schema">direct-schema</a> (BSD)
-    -   <a href="http://github.com/garycourt/JSV" id="link-impl-jsv">JSV</a> (BSD)
-    -   <a href="http://github.com/kriszyp/json-schema" id="link-impl-kriszyp-jsonschema">json-schema</a> (AFL or BSD) as part of <a href="http://www.persvr.org/" id="link-impl-persvr">Persevere</a>
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/akidee/schema.js" id="link-impl-schema-js">schema.js</a> (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/oferei/json-gate" id="link-impl-json-gate">json-gate</a> (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/bugventure/jsen" id="link-impl-jsen">JSEN</a> for Node.js - *supports version 4* (MIT)
-- PHP <a id="validator-php"></a>
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/geraintluff/jsv4-php" id="link-impl-jsv4-php">jsv4-php</a> - *supports version 4* (Public Domain / MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/hasbridge/php-json-schema" id="link-impl-php-json-schema">php-json-schema</a> (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/justinrainbow/json-schema" id="link-impl-json-schema">json-schema</a> (Berkeley)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/stefk/jval" id="link-impl-jval">JVal</a> - *supports version 4* (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/thephpleague/json-guard" id="link-impl-json-guard">JSON Guard</a> - *supports version 4* (MIT)
-- Perl <a id="validator-perl"></a>
-    -   <a href="https://metacpan.org/module/JSV::Validator" id="link-impl-perl-jsv-validator">JSV::Validator</a> (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://metacpan.org/module/JSON::Schema" id="link-impl-perl-json-schema">JSON::Schema</a> (MIT)
-- Python <a id="validator-python"></a>
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/Julian/jsonschema" id="link-impl-jsonschema">jsonschema</a> - *supports version 4* (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/zyga/json-schema-validator" id="link-impl-zyga-json-schema-validator">json-schema-validator</a> (LGPL)
-- Ruby <a id="validator-ruby"></a>
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/Constellation/ruby-jsonchema" id="link-impl-ruby-jsonchema">ruby-jsonschema</a> (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/hoxworth/json-schema" id="link-impl-ruby-hoxworth-json-schema">json-schema</a> - *supports version 4* (MIT)
-
-### Online
-
--   <a href="http://jsonschemalint.com/" id="link-impl-jsonschemalint">JSON Schema Lint</a> - validate against your own schemas
--   <a href="http://schemastore.org/validator/" id="link-impl-schemastore">SchemaStore.org</a> - validate against common JSON Schemas
-
-Validation benchmarks
----------------------
+<!-- To add a validator, add it in _data/validator-libraries-modern.yml -->
+
+<ul>
+  {% for language in validator-libraries %}
+  <li>
+    <strong>{{language.name}}</strong><a id="validator-{% if language.anchor-name %}{{ language.anchor-name }}{% else %}{{ language.name | downcase }}{% endif %}"></a>
+    {% if language.notes %}
+        <p>{{ language.notes }}</p>
+    {% endif %}
+    <ul>
+    {% for implementation in language.implementations %}
+      <li>
+        <a name="{{ implementation.anchor-name | default: implementation.name }}"></a>
+        <a href="{{ implementation.url}}">{{ implementation.name }}</a>
+        <ul>
+          <li><em>Supports:</em>
+            {% if implementation.date-draft and implementation.date-draft != empty %}
+                {{ implementation.date-draft | sort | reverse | join: ", " }}
+                {%- if implementation.draft and implementation.draft != empty %}, {% endif %}
+            {% endif %}
+            {% if implementation.draft and implementation.draft != empty %}
+                draft-0{{ implementation.draft | sort | reverse | join: ", -0" }}
+            {% endif %}
+          </li>
+
+        {% if implementation.compliance %}
+          <li><em>Compliance:</em>
+          {% if implementation.compliance.config.docs %}
+            This implementation <a href="{{ implementation.compliance.config.docs }}">documents</a> that you must
+          {% endif %}
+          {% if implementation.compliance.config.instructions %}
+            <strong>{{ implementation.compliance.config.instructions | markdownify | remove: '<p>' | remove: '</p>' }}</strong> to produce specification-compliant behavior.
+          </li>
+          {% endif %}
+        {% endif %}
+
+        {% if implementation.built-on %}
+          <li><em>Built on:</em>
+            <a href="#{{ implementation.built-on.anchor-name | default: implementation.built-on.name }}">{{ implementation.built-on.name }}</a>
+          </li>
+        {% endif %}
+
+        {% if implementation.license %}
+          <li><em>License:</em>
+            {{ implementation.license | join: ", " }}
+          </li>
+        {% endif %}
+
+        {% if implementation.notes %}
+          <li><em>Notes:</em>
+            {{ implementation.notes | markdownify | remove: '<p>' | remove: '</p>' }}
+          </li>
+        {% endif %}
+
+        {% if implementation.last-updated %}
+          <li><em>Information last updated:</em>
+            {{ implementation.last-updated }}
+          </li>
+        {% endif %}
+
+        </ul>
+      </li>
+    {% endfor %}
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <p />
+  {% endfor %}
+</ul>
+
+#### Benchmarks
+
+Benchmarks that compare at least two implementations supporting draft-06+ may be listed here.
+
+-   Go
+    -   [validator-benchmarks](https://github.com/TheWildBlue/validator-benchmarks) - benchmark of Go JSON Schema validators based on official test suite
 
--   Java
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/networknt/json-schema-validator-perftest" id="link-bench-networknt">json-schema-validator-benchmark</a> - compares performance of three JSON schema validator implementations in Java(Apache 2.0)
+-   JavaScript
+    -   [json-schema-benchmark](https://github.com/ebdrup/json-schema-benchmark) - an independent benchmark for Node.js JSON-schema validators based on JSON-Schema Test Suite (MIT)
 
-<!-- -->
+-   PHP
+    -   [php-json-schema-bench](https://github.com/swaggest/php-json-schema-bench) - comparative benchmark for JSON-schema PHP validators using JSON-Schema Test Suite and z-schema/JSCK (MIT)
+
+#### API documentation
+
+-   JavaScript
+    -   [@cloudflare/doca](https://github.com/cloudflare/json-schema-tools/tree/master/workspaces/doca) ([JSON Schema Tools](https://github.com/cloudflare/json-schema-tools)), _draft-04, -06, -07, and Doca extensions_ (UI forthcoming)
+    -   [@adobe/jsonschema2md](https://github.com/adobe/jsonschema2md) makes it easier by providing a number of scripts that can turn JSON Schema files into readable Markdown documentation that is ready for consumption on GitHub or processed using Jekyll or other static site generators. _JSON Schema 2019-09_ ([partial](https://github.com/adobe/jsonschema2md/blob/master/schemasupport.md))
+
+-   Python
+    -   [FastAPI](https://github.com/tiangolo/fastapi) (MIT) is an API framework based on Python 3.6+ types that generates **OpenAPI 3** schemas, including **JSON Schemas** for all the models declared.
+
+#### Link Description Object utilities
 
 -   JavaScript
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/ebdrup/json-schema-benchmark" id="link-bench-ebdrup">json-schema-benchmark</a> - an independent benchmark for Node.js JSON-schema validators based on JSON-Schema Test Suite (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/zaggino/z-schema#benchmarks" id="link-bench-z-schema">z-schema validator benchmark</a> - compares performance in the individual tests from JSON-Schema Test Suite (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/pandastrike/jsck#benchmarks" id="link-bench-jsck">JSCK validator benchmark</a> - shows performance for JSON-schemas of different complexity (MIT)
+    -   [@cloudflare/json-hyper-schema](https://github.com/cloudflare/json-schema-tools/tree/master/workspaces/json-hyper-schema) _draft-07, -06, -04_ (BSD-3-Clause)
+
 
-Schema generation
+Schema generators
 -----------------
 
+Schema generators need not support generating every schema keyword.
+For schema generators, compatibility with a draft means that either:
+
+* Schemas produced explicitly set the draft with `$schema`
+* Schemas produced lack `$schema` but are valid against the appropriate meta-schema
+
+For example, the only incompatibilities between draft-04 and draft-06 involve `exclusiveMinimum`, `exclusiveMaximum`, and `id` vs `$id`.  If a generator does not set `$schema` and does not ever emit those keywords, then it is compatible with draft-06 even if it was written with draft-04 in mind.
+
+#### From code
+
 -   .NET
-    -   <a href="http://james.newtonking.com/projects/json-net.aspx" id="link-impl-json-net">Json.NET</a> (MIT) - generates schemas from .NET types
-    -   <a href="http://NJsonSchema.org" id="link-impl-n-json-schema">NJsonSchema</a> - *supports version 4* (Ms-PL) - generates schemas from .NET types
+    -   [Json.NET](https://www.newtonsoft.com/jsonschema) (AGPL-3.0) - generates schemas from .NET types
+    -   [NJsonSchema](https://github.com/RSuter/NJsonSchema/) - (Ms-PL) - generates schemas from .NET types, see issue [574](https://github.com/RSuter/NJsonSchema/issues/574) for draft-06+ support progress
+    -   [JsonSchema.Net.Generation](https://github.com/gregsdennis/json-everything) (MIT) - generates schemas from .NET types
+-   Go
+    -   [jsonschema](https://github.com/invopop/jsonschema) - (MIT) - generate schemas from Go structs. Supports Draft 2020-12.
 -   PHP
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/Limenius/liform" id="link-impl-liform">Liform</a> (MIT) - generates schemas from Symfony forms
+    -   [Liform](https://github.com/Limenius/liform) (MIT) - generates schemas from Symfony forms
+-   TypeScript
+    -   [typescript-json-schema](https://github.com/YousefED/typescript-json-schema)
 -   Python
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/aromanovich/jsl" id="link-impl-jsl">JSL</a> (BSD) - a Python DSL for defining JSON Schemas
+    -   [Pydantic](https://pydantic-docs.helpmanual.io/) (MIT) - generates schemas from Python models based on Python 3.6+ type hints.
+    -   [msgspec](https://jcristharif.com/msgspec/) (BSD-3-Clause) - generates schemas from Python type annotations.
+    -   [mashumaro](https://github.com/Fatal1ty/mashumaro) (Apache 2.0) - generates schemas from Python type annotations
+    -   [drf-jsonschema-serializer](https://github.com/maykinmedia/drf-jsonschema-serializer) (BSD-3-Clause) - generates schemas from Django Rest Framework serializers
+-   Java
+    -   [jsonschema-generator](https://github.com/victools/jsonschema-generator) (Apache 2.0) - generates schemas from Java types *supports Draft 7 and Draft 2019-09*
 -   Scala
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/snowplow/schema-guru" id="link-impl-guru">Schema Guru</a> (Apache 2.0) - CLI util, Spark Job and Web UI for deriving JSON Schemas out of corpus of JSON instances
--   TypeScript
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/YousefED/typescript-json-schema" id="link-impl-typescript-json-schema">typescript-json-schema</a>
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/lbovet/typson" id="link-impl-typson">Typson</a> (Apache 2.0)
+    -   [scala-jsonschema](https://github.com/andyglow/scala-jsonschema) (Apache 2.0) - generates schemad out of Scala case classes
+-   Ruby
+    -   [Shale](https://github.com/kgiszczak/shale) (MIT) - generates schema from Ruby models *supports Draft 2020-12*
+-   Rust
+    -   [Schemars](https://github.com/GREsau/schemars) (MIT) - generates schema from Rust code *supports Draft 7* 
+
+#### From data
+
+-   Java
+    -   [saasquatch/json-schema-inferrer](https://github.com/saasquatch/json-schema-inferrer) _2020-12, 2019-09, draft-07, draft-06, draft-04_ (Apache 2.0) - Java library for inferring JSON Schemas from one or multiple JSON samples.
+-   Scala
+    -   [Schema Guru](https://github.com/snowplow/schema-guru) (Apache 2.0) - CLI util, Spark Job and Web UI for deriving JSON Schemas out of corpus of JSON instances; see issue [178](https://github.com/snowplow/schema-guru/issues/178) for progress towards draft-06+ support
+    -   [JSONoid](https://github.com/michaelmior/jsonoid-discovery/) (MIT) - command line tool and Spark application for inferring schemas from JSON documents, supports draft 2019-09
+-   Clojure
+    -   [luposlip/json-schema](https://github.com/luposlip/json-schema) (Apache 2.0) - infer JSON Schema from Clojure data
 -   Online (web tool)
-    -   [jsonschema.net](http://www.jsonschema.net/) - generates schemas from example data
-    -   <a href="http://schemaguru.snowplowanalytics.com/" id="link-impl-guru-ui">Schema Guru Web UI</a> - derives precise Schemas using several JSON instances. Based on [Schema Guru](link-impl-guru)
--   Visual Studio
-    -   <a href="http://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/b4515ef8-a518-41ca-b48c-bb1fd4e6faf7" id="link-impl-vs">JSON Schema Generator</a> - free extension
+    -   [jsonschema.net](https://www.jsonschema.net/) - generates schemas from example data
+    -   [Liquid Online Tools](https://www.liquid-technologies.com/online-json-to-schema-converter) - infer JSON Schema from sample JSON data
+    -   [quicktype.io](https://app.quicktype.io/#l=schema) - infer JSON Schema from samples, and generate TypeScript, C++, go, Java, C#, Swift, etc. types from JSON Schema
 
-Data parsing
-------------
+#### From model
 
--   Haskell
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/timjb/aeson-schema" id="link-impl-aeson-schema">aeson-schema</a> (MIT) - generates code for a parser
--   Ruby
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/google/autoparse" id="link-impl-autoparse">autoparse</a> (ASL 2.0)
+-   [Dataspecer](https://dataspecer.com) - Generates JSON Schema (and JSON-LD context) from conceptual model *supports Draft 2020-12*
+
+Generators from schemas
+-----------------------
+
+Tools that generate artifacts from schemas need not support every keyword,
+as not all keywords work well for generative use cases.
+
+Generators are considered compatible with a draft if they support (or benignly
+ignore) the appropriate `$schema` value, and interpret the keywords that they
+do support according to that draft.
+
+For example, if a generator that was originally written for draft-04 does not
+support `id`, `exclusiveMinimum`, or `exclusiveMaxium`, then as long as it does
+not require a draft-04 `$schema`, it is compatible with draft-06 since those
+are the only keywords that changed.
+
+#### Code generation
+
+-   Dotnet
+    -  [Corvus.JsonSchema](https://www.nuget.org/packages/Corvus.Json.JsonSchema.TypeGeneratorTool/) - generates an idiomatic dotnet type model from JSON Schema files, supporting all JSON Schema features, including property accessors, enumeration, common string `format`, and JSON document building/modification; over low-level `System.Text.Json` types. *supports Draft 6, Draft 7, Draft 2019-09 and Draft 2020-12*.
+-   Elm
+    -  [json-schema-to-elm](https://github.com/dragonwasrobot/json-schema-to-elm) - generates Elm types, JSON decoders+encoders, and fuzz tests from one or more JSON Schema files, using [dragonwasrobot/json_schema](https://github.com/dragonwasrobot/json_schema) *supports Draft 7*
+-   Go
+    -  [go-jsonschema](https://git.sr.ht/~emersion/go-jsonschema) - generates Go types and helpers from JSON schema files *supports Draft 2020-12* 
+    - [protoc-gen-jsonschema](https://github.com/chrusty/protoc-gen-jsonschema) - Generates JSON schemas from protobuf proto v2 and v3 files.
+-   Java
+    - [jsonCodeGen](https://github.com/schlothauer-wauer/jsoncodegen) (MIT) - Groovy based generation tasks from JSON schema. Already includes templates/generators for Java Beans, Swagger specification files and PlantUML diagrams.
+    - [jsonschema2pojo](https://github.com/joelittlejohn/jsonschema2pojo) (Apache 2.0) - generates Java types from JSON Schema (or example JSON) and can annotate those types for data-binding with Jackson 2.x or Gson. *draft-07*
+    - [jsonschematypes](https://github.com/jimblackler/jsonschematypes) (Apache 2.0) - Java library to generate Java or TypeScript classes from standard JSON Schemas. *JSON Schema 2019-09, draft-07, -06, -04, -03*
+    - [jsongenerator](https://github.com/jimblackler/jsonschematypes/tree/master/codegen) *JSON Schema 2019-09, draft-07, -06, -04, -03* (Apache-2.0)
+-   Kotlin
+    - [json-kotlin-schema-codegen](https://github.com/pwall567/json-kotlin-schema-codegen) (MIT) - Generates Kotlin data classes, Java classes or TypeScript interfaces from JSON Schema.
+-   Online (web tool)
+    -   [quicktype.io](https://app.quicktype.io/#l=schema) - infer JSON Schema from samples, and generate TypeScript, C++, go, Java, C#, Swift, etc. types from JSON Schema
+-   PHP
+    -  [php-code-builder](https://github.com/swaggest/php-code-builder)(MIT) - generates PHP mapping structures defined by JSON schema using [swaggest/json-schema](https://github.com/swaggest/php-json-schema) *supports Draft 7*
+-   Python
+    - [yacg](https://github.com/OkieOth/yacg) (MIT) - parse JSON Schema and OpenApi files to build a meta model from them. This meta model can be used in Mako templates to generate source code, other schemas or plantUml.
+    - [statham](https://github.com/jacksmith15/statham-schema) (MIT) - generate type-annotated models from JSON Schema documents.
+-   Rust
+    - [schemafy](https://github.com/Marwes/schemafy/) - generates Rust types and serialization code from a JSON schema. *supports Draft 4*
 -   Scala
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/VoxSupplyChain/json-schema-codegen" id="link-impl-json-schema-codegen">json-schema-codegen</a> - Tool and SBT plugin for generating Scala, TypeScript models and parsers from Json-Schema definitions, *supports version 4* (Apache 2.0)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/aishfenton/argus" id="link-impl-argus">Argus</a> (MIT) - Macros for building models from JSON Schemas
+    - [json-schema-to-case-class](https://github.com/cchandurkar/json-schema-to-case-class) (MIT) - NPM Package, [Web UI](https://cchandurkar.github.io/json-schema-to-case-class) and a CLI to generate Scala case classes from JSON Schema. *Supports JSON Schema 2019-09, draft-07, -06, -04, -03*
+-   TypeScript
+    - [jsongenerator](https://github.com/jimblackler/jsonschematypes/tree/master/codegen) *JSON Schema 2019-09, draft-07, -06, -04, -03* (Apache-2.0)
+-   Ruby
+    - [Shale](https://github.com/kgiszczak/shale) (MIT) - generates Ruby models from a JSON schema *supports Draft 2020-12*
 
-UI generation
--------------
+#### Web UI generation
 
--   JavaScript
-    -   <a href="http://jsonary.com/" id="link-impl-jsonary">Jsonary</a> - *supports version 4* (MIT)
-    -   <a href="http://metawidget.org/" id="link-impl-metawidget">Metawidget</a> (LGPL)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/Limenius/liform-react" id="link-impl-liform-react">Liform-react</a> (MIT)
-    -   <a href="http://jsonforms.io" id="link-impl-jsonforms">JSON Forms</a> (MIT)
-
-Editors
--------
-
--   <a href="https://www.liquid-technologies.com/json-schema-editor" id="link-impl-liquidxml">Liquid XML Studio 2016</a> - *Graphical JSON schema editor for v4, context sensitive intellisense for JSON documents.*
--   <a href="http://www.visualstudio.com/" id="link-impl-visualstudio">Visual Studio 2013</a> - *Auto-completion and tooltips based on JSON schema v3 and v4*
--   <a href="http://www.json-buddy.com/" id="link-impl-jsonbuddy">JSONBuddy</a> - *Grid-style JSON editor and context sensitive entry-helpers based on JSON schema*
--   <a href="https://www.jetbrains.com/resharper/" id="link-impl-resharer">ReSharper 2016.1</a> - *code completion, inspections and quick fixes for JSON schema in Visual Studio 2010 - 2015, including support for JSON Path and regular expressions for schema editing*
--   <a href="https://code.visualstudio.com/" id="link-impl-vscode">Visual Studio Code</a> - *Schema driven code completion, hovers and validation for editing JSON files (including schemas)*
--   <a href="http://jsoneditoronline.org" id="link-impl-jsoneditoronline">JSONEditor Online</a> - *View, edit, format, and validate JSON online*
--   <a href="https://json-schema-editor.tangramjs.com" id="link-impl-jsonschemaeditor">Json Schema Editor</a> - *An intuitive editor for json schema online*
-
-Compatibility
--------------
+_TODO: Sort by draft support._
+
+Various levels of support for UI generation primarily from the validation vocabulary or combined with UI specific definition.
 
 -   JavaScript
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/geraintluff/json-schema-compatability" id="link-json-schema-compatibility">JSON Schema Compatibility</a> - *converts v3 to v4* (Public Domain)
+    -   [Alpaca Forms](http://www.alpacajs.org/) (ASL 2.0)
+    -   [Angular Schema Form](https://github.com/json-schema-form/angular-schema-form) (MIT)
+    -   [Angular2 Schema Form](https://github.com/makinacorpus/angular2-schema-form) *unrelated to Angular Schema Form* (MIT)
+    -   [Angular6-json-schema-form](https://github.com/hamzahamidi/Angular6-json-schema-form) (MIT)
+    -   [Dashjoin JSON Schema Form](https://github.com/dashjoin/json-schema-form) (Apache 2) *draft-06 (minus oneOf, anyOf, allOf, not)*
+    -   [JSON Editor](https://github.com/json-editor/json-editor) (MIT)
+    -   [JSON Form (joshfire)](https://github.com/joshfire/jsonform) (joshfire) (MIT)
+    -   [Json Forms (brutusin)](https://github.com/brutusin/json-forms) (brutusin) (MIT)
+    -   [JSONForms (jsonforms.io)](https://jsonforms.io/) (EclipseSource) (MIT)
+    -   [Liform-react](https://github.com/Limenius/liform-react) (MIT)
+    -   [React JSON Schema Form (mozilla)](https://github.com/mozilla-services/react-jsonschema-form) (Apache 2)
+    -   [React Json Schema Form (Mui)](https://github.com/vip-git/react-jsonschema-form-material-ui) (MIT)
+    -   [React Schema Form (networknt)](https://github.com/networknt/react-schema-form) (MIT)
+    -   [Restspace Schema Form](https://github.com/restspace/schema-form) (MIT)
+    -   [uniforms (Vazco)](https://github.com/vazco/uniforms) (MIT)
+    -   [UI Schema for React](https://github.com/ui-schema/ui-schema) (MIT) *2019-09 / draft-08, -07, -06, -04 (incompatible `type=integer`)*
+
+#### Data from schemas
+
+-   .Net
+    -   [JsonSchema.Net.DataGeneration](https://github.com/gregsdennis/json-everything) (MIT) Data generation from JSON schemas, powered by the Bogus testing data generation library.
+-   Python
+    -   [hypothesis-jsonschema](https://github.com/Zac-HD/hypothesis-jsonschema) (MPL) *draft-07, -06, -04*;  takes any schema, even with complex and interacting constraints, and returns a [Hypothesis](https://hypothesis.works/) strategy which can generate valid documents for testing.
+-   Java
+    -   [jsongenerator](https://github.com/jimblackler/jsongenerator) *JSON Schema 2019-09, draft-07, -06, -04, -03* (Apache-2.0)
 
-Hyper-schema handling
----------------------
+Utilities
+---------
+
+Draft compatibility for utilities is generally specific to the purpose of
+the utility, and decided on a case-by-case basis.
+
+#### General processing
 
 -   JavaScript
-    -   <a href="http://jsonary.com/" id="link-impl-jsonary">Jsonary</a> - *supports version 4* (MIT)
--   Scala
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/VoxSupplyChain/json-schema-parser" id="link-impl-json-schema-parser">json-schema-parser</a> - Schema parser and validator, *supports version 4* (Apache 2.0)
+    -   [json-schema-ref-parser](https://github.com/BigstickCarpet/json-schema-ref-parser) (MIT) Tools for dereferencing non-cyclic schemas, bundling referenced schemas into a single file, and other `$ref` processing.
+    -   [json-schema-library](https://github.com/sagold/json-schema-library) (MIT) - Exposes tools to work with json-schema, including: data creation from json-schema, `$ref` processing, walk through schemas, etc.
+    -   [@cloudflare/json-schema-walker](https://github.com/cloudflare/json-schema-tools/tree/master/workspaces/json-schema-walker) ([JSON Schema Tools](https://github.com/cloudflare/json-schema-tools)), _draft-07, -06, -04, and Cloudflare's Doca extensions_ Walks schemas and runs pre- and post-walk callbacks.  Can modify schemas in place. (BSD-3-Clause)
+    -   [@hyperjump/json-schema-core](https://github.com/jdesrosiers/json-schema-core)
+        (MIT) Tools for working with schemas that handle identifiers and
+        references. Build vocabularies and other JSON Schema based tools.
 
-Documentation generation
-------------------------
+#### Schema to Schema
 
 -   JavaScript
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/mattyod/matic" id="link-impl-matic">Matic</a> (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/lbovet/docson" id="link-impl-docson">Docson</a> (Apache 2.0)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/cloudflare/doca/" id="link-impl-docs-generator">doca</a> (BSD)
+    -   [@cloudflare/json-schema-transform](https://github.com/cloudflare/json-schema-tools/tree/master/workspaces/json-schema-transform) ([JSON Schema Tools](https://github.com/cloudflare/json-schema-tools)), (BSD-3-Clause) Utilities using @cloudflare/json-schema-walker for transformations including `allOf` merging and example roll-up.
+    -   [mokkabanna/json-schema-merge-allof](https://github.com/mokkabonna/json-schema-merge-allof) (MIT)
+    -   [mokkabanna/json-schema-compare](https://github.com/mokkabonna/json-schema-compare) (MIT)
+    -   [loganvolkers/json-schema-resolve-allof](https://github.com/loganvolkers/json-schema-resolve-allof) (_license not stated_)
+    -   [JSON-Schema-Instantiator](https://github.com/tomarad/JSON-Schema-Instantiator) (MIT)
 
-Other
------
+#### Schema draft migration
 
 -   JavaScript
-    -   <a href="http://orderly-json.org" id="link-impl-orderly">Orderly</a> (BSD)
-    -   <a href="http://www.dojotoolkit.org/" id="link-impl-dojo">Dojo</a> (AFL or BSD) - supports some aspects of JSON Schema
-    -   <a href="http://schematic-ipsum.herokuapp.com/" id="link-impl-schematic-ipsum">Schematic Ipsum</a> (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/tomarad/JSON-Schema-Instantiator" id="link-impl-json-schema-instantiator">JSON-Schema-Instantiator</a> (MIT)
-    -   <a href="https://github.com/andreineculau/json-schema-random" id="link-impl-json-schema-random">JSON Schema Random</a> (Apache 2.0)
+    -    [AlterSchema](https://github.com/sourcemeta/alterschema) _JSON Schema 2020-12, 2019-09, draft-07, -06, -04_
+
+#### Format converters
+
+-   OpenAPI
+    -   [JSON Schema to OpenAPI Schema](https://github.com/wework/json-schema-to-openapi-schema) _draft-04_ Draft-06 and -07 planned per README (MIT)
+    -   [OpenAPI specification to JSON Schema](https://github.com/instrumenta/openapi2jsonschema) Draft-07 (MIT)
+-   Orderly
+    -   [Orderly](https://github.com/lloyd/orderly) (BSD-3-Clause)
+-   RAML
+    -   [ramldt2jsonschema](https://github.com/raml-org/ramldt2jsonschema) _draft-06, 04_ (Apache-2.0)
+-   Webpack
+    -   [@cloudflare/json-schema-ref-loader](https://github.com/cloudflare/json-schema-tools/tree/master/workspaces/json-schema-ref-loader) ([JSON Schema Tools](https://github.com/cloudflare/json-schema-tools)), (BSD-3-Clause) Webpack loader for dereference-able schemas in JSON, JSON5, YAML, or JavaScript
+    -   [@cloudflare/json-schema-apidoc-loader](https://github.com/cloudflare/json-schema-tools/tree/master/workspaces/json-schema-apidoc-loader) ([JSON Schema Tools](https://github.com/cloudflare/json-schema-tools)), Back-end for [@cloudflare/doca](https://github.com/cloudflare/json-schema-tools/tree/master/workspaces/doca), _draft-04, -06, -07, and Doca extensions_
+-   XSD
+    -   [Oxygen XSD to JSON Schema](https://www.oxygenxml.com/json_converter.html#xsd-to-json-schema) - Generate from an XSD file a similar JSON Schema structure.
+    -   [XSD to JSON Schema IntellJ plugin](https://plugins.jetbrains.com/plugin/19024-xsd-to-json-schema) - Plugin for converting an XML Schema (XSD) file to a JSON Schema file.
+
+#### Testing
+
+-   Python
+    -   [hypothesis-jsonschema](https://github.com/Zac-HD/hypothesis-jsonschema) (MPL) *draft-07, -06, -04*;  takes any schema, even with complex and interacting constraints, and returns a [Hypothesis](https://hypothesis.works/) strategy which can generate valid documents for testing.
+
+#### Editors
+
+-   [Altova XMLSpy 2019r3](https://www.altova.com/xmlspy-xml-editor#json_schema) - *Graphical JSON Schema editor for draft-06 and draft-7, as well as validation of JSON files based on JSON Schema*
+-   [Dashjoin JSON Schema editor](https://dashjoin.github.io/#/schema) - *Graphical online JSON Schema editor for draft-06 (minus oneOf, anyOf, allOf, not). The generated schema can be tested immediately via a form that is driven by it.*
+-   [Hackolade Studio](https://hackolade.com/help/JSONSchemaEditor.html) - *Visual JSON Schema editor for draft-04, draft-06, draft-07, 2019-09, 2020-12, as well as data modeling tool for NoSQL databases, storage formats, REST APIs, and JSON in RDBMS.  Also converts to and from: different draft specifications, DDL, XSD, Swagger, OpenAPI, YAML, Avro, Parquet, Protobuf, and most of the NoSQL script syntaxes.  Includes a GUI for Entity-Relationship Diagrams and a Command-Line Interface.*
+-   [JSONBuddy](https://www.json-buddy.com/) - *Text and grid-style JSON editor and validator. Complete JSON Schema development environment with JSON Schema analyzer, context sensitive entry-helpers, sample data generation based on JSON Schema and JSON Schema validation debugger: Step through the validation process and set breakpoints. JSON Schema testing tool including schema coverage. Support for draft-4, draft-6, draft-7, 2019-09 and 2020-12.*
+-   [JSONEditor Online](https://jsoneditoronline.org/) - *View, edit, format, and validate JSON online* Support draft-4, draft-6, and draft-7.
+-   [Liquid JSON Schema Editor](https://www.liquid-technologies.com/json-schema-editor) - *Graphical JSON Schema editor for draft-04, draft-06, draft-07 and 2019-09, with split source code and grphical editing. Includes validation of JSON files based on JSON Schema, JSON Sample Generator and JSON Schema Documentation Generator.*
+-   [Oxygen JSON Schema Editor](https://www.oxygenxml.com/xml_developer/json_schema_editor.html) - *JSON Schema editor with a variety of editing features and helper views (Design/Text/Author). Support for validation and editing JSON Schema draft-4, draft-6, and draft-7, 2019-09 (partial), 2020-12 (partial). Validation and editing of JSON files based on JSON Schema.*
+-   [Perseid Modeler](https://www.datensen.com/data-modeling/perseid-modeler-for-json-schema.html) - *a modeling tool for JSON Schema and OpenAPI. Key features include: visual JSON schema creation using tree and ERD-like diagrams, support for JSON schema structures including operators and conditions, import of existing schemas from files, creation of detailed HTML reports, export to PDF, script generation, and more. Supported versions: draft 4, 6, 7, 2019-09 and 2020-12*
+-   [Stoplight Studio](https://stoplight.io/) - *JSON Schema IDE (text-based and GUI) with support for JSON/YAML linting, which can also be based on JSON Schema rules via Spectral. Support for draft-4, draft-6 and draft-7.*
+-   [Visual Studio Code](https://code.visualstudio.com/) - *Schema driven code completion, hovers and validation for editing JSON files (including schemas)*
+-   [WebStorm](https://www.jetbrains.com/webstorm/), [IntelliJ IDEA](https://www.jetbrains.com/idea/), and other [JetBrains IDEs](https://www.jetbrains.com/products.html?fromMenu#type=ide) - *Code completion, documentation, and validation for JSON and YAML files using JSON Schema. Support for draft-4, draft-6, and draft-7.*
+-   [Eclipse IDE](https://www.eclipse.org/downloads/eclipse-packages) - *Rich JSON edition supporting schema for instantaneous validation and error reporting, completion, documentation.*
+
+#### Documentation generators
+
+
+- [docusaurus-json-schema-plugin](https://github.com/jy95/docusaurus-json-schema-plugin) - Schema viewer. Runs within a [Docusaurus](https://docusaurus.io/) web app. Supports draft-7, 2019-09, Draft 2020-12
+- [json-schema-static-docs](https://tomcollins.github.io/json-schema-static-docs/) - Generates human friendly markdown documentation from JSON Schema. Includes links between pages based on $ref values. Supports draft-7.
+- [jsonschematic](https://github.com/yanick/jsonschematic/) - Svelte-based schema viewer. Runs as a local web app. Supports draft-7.
+- [docson](https://github.com/lbovet/docson) - Javascript-based schema viewer.  Runs as a local web app. Supports draft-4.
+- [json-schema-for-humans](https://pypi.org/project/json-schema-for-humans/) - Generate HTML representation of a schema. Python-based. Supports draft-7.
+- [oXygen JSON Schema Documentation](https://www.oxygenxml.com/json_converter.html#generate-json-schema-documentation) - Generate JSON Schema documentation in HTML format including diagrams.
+- [wetzel](https://github.com/CesiumGS/wetzel) - Generates Markdown and AsciiDoc. With some limitations, supports draft-3, draft-4, draft-7, and 2020-12.
+
+Schema Repositories
+-------------------
+
+-   [SchemaStore.org](https://schemastore.org/json/) - validate against common JSON Schemas
+
+
+Schema Linter
+-------------
+
+-   [json-schema-linter](https://www.json-schema-linter.com/) - Lint/validate/parse json-schema itself, and find typos, missing properties, missing required keys, etc. Supports draft 4, 6, and 7.
+-   [Stoplight Spectral](https://stoplight.io/open-source/spectral) - A flexible JSON/YAML linter for creating automated style guides, with baked in support for OpenAPI v2/v3 and JSON Schema. Supports draft 4, 6, and 7.
+
+Hyper-Schema
+---------------------
+
+<nav class="intra" markdown="1">
+
+{% assign hyper-schema-libraries = site.data.hyper-libraries-modern | sort:"name" %}
+
+{% for language in hyper-schema-libraries %}
+-   [{{ language.name }}](#hyper-schema-{% if language.anchor-name %}{{ language.anchor-name }}{% else %}{{ language.name | downcase }}{% endif %})
+{% endfor %}
+
+</nav>
+
+<!-- To add a hyper-schema library, add it in _data/hyper-schema-libraries.yml -->
+
+<ul>
+  {% for language in hyper-schema-libraries %}
+  <li>
+    {{language.name}} <a id="hyper-schema-{% if language.anchor-name %}{{ language.anchor-name }}{% else %}{{ language.name | downcase }}{% endif %}"></a>
+    <ul>
+    {% for implementation in language.implementations %}
+        <li>
+        <a href="{{implementation.url}}">{{ implementation.name }}</a>
+
+        {% if implementation.draft %}
+            <em>draft-0{{ implementation.draft | join: ", -0" }}</em>
+        {% endif %}
+
+        {{implementation.notes | markdownify | remove: '<p>' | remove: '</p>'}}
+
+        {% if implementation.license %}
+            ({{ implementation.license | join: ", " }})
+        {% endif %}
+
+        {% if implementation.last-updated %}
+          <br />
+          <em>Information last updated:</em>
+          {{ implementation.last-updated }}
+        {% endif %}
+
+
+        </li>
+    {% endfor %}
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  {% endfor %}
+</ul>
diff --git a/index.md b/index.md
index ad0e121d..6d2a709c 100644
--- a/index.md
+++ b/index.md
@@ -1,39 +1,98 @@
 ---
-layout: page
+layout: default
 title: JSON Schema
 permalink: /
 ---
 
-**JSON Schema** is a vocabulary that allows you to **annotate** and **validate** JSON documents.
+<div class="text-center" markdown="1">
+**JSON Schema** is a declarative language that allows you to **annotate** and **validate** JSON documents.
 
-Advantages
-----------
+JSON Schema enables the confident and reliable use of the JSON data format.
+</div>
+
+
+## Benefits
 
-<div class="block" style="float:left;width:50%;" markdown="1">
+<div class="block" markdown="1">
 
-### JSON Schema
+* Describes your existing data format(s).
+* Provides clear human- and machine- readable documentation.
+* Validates data which is useful for:
+    * Automated testing.
+    * Ensuring quality of client submitted data.
 
--   describes your existing data format
--   clear, human- and machine-readable documentation
--   complete structural validation, useful for
-    -   automated testing
-    -   validating client-submitted data
 </div>
 
-<div class="block" style="float:right;width:50%;" markdown="1">
+## Announcements and Feedback Solicitation: Specification Process
 
-### JSON Hyper-Schema
+* The JSON Schema media types (`application/schema+json` and `application/schema-instance+json`) will be published as an [IETF RFC](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpapi-rest-api-mediatypes/), which has already been adopted by the HTTP APIs working group.
+* As an [Incubation-status OpenJS Foundation project](https://openjsf.org/projects/#incubating), we continue to work through our governance [todo list](https://github.com/json-schema-org/community/issues/129) to move to either At-Large or Impact status.
+* The bulk of our specification will be published under a new process currently [under public discussion](https://github.com/orgs/json-schema-org/discussions/234).  All are encouraged to provide feedback!  Our goals with this process include:
+    * In the next release, offer stability guarantees for long-stable aspects of JSON Schema.
+    * Provide clarity regarding which other aspects are close to a stable form, and which are more experimental.
+    * Publish our specifications in a way similar to OpenAPI and AsyncAPI, which are also part of the Linux Foundation (the larger umbrella under which the OpenJS Foundation exists).
+* We are working on finding the right path for Relative JSON Pointer to reach standardization in the near future.  An IETF RFC currently remains the most likely path, although several details are still being worked out.
 
--   describes your existing API - no new structures required
--   links (including [URI Templates](http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6570) for target URIs)
--   forms - specify a JSON Schema for the desired data
+## What now?
 
+Learn, Get help, Shape the Community, Chat, with the JSON Schema team and Community!
+
+<div class="wrapper text-center buttons">
+    <a class="button border button-center" href="/learn/getting-started-step-by-step">👋 Getting Started</a>
+    <a class="button border button-center" href="/slack" target="_blank"><img class="small-svg-logo" src="/assets/logo-slack.svg" height="1.3em" width="1.3em"> Open JSON Schema Slack</a>
+    <a class="button border button-center" href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/community/discussions" target="_blank">💬 Community Discussions</a>
 </div>
 
-<div style="clear:both"></div>
+## Regular Activities
+
+We hold weekly Office Hours and twice monthly Open Community Working Meetings.
+
+<div class="wrapper text-center buttons">
+    <a class="button border button-center" href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/community/discussions/34" target="_blank">🧑‍💻 Office Hours</a>
+    <a class="button border button-center" href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/community/discussions/35" target="_blank">👷 Open Community Working Meetings</a>
+</div>
+
+Office Hours are every first Tuesday of the month at 15:00 BST, and by appointment.
+
+Open Community Working Meetings are every Monday at 14:00 PT.
+
+If either of these are cancelled or moved for any reason, we will aim to announce such via the Slack announcement channel and Twitter.
+See our [community calendar](https://calendar.google.com/calendar/u/0/embed?src=c_8r4g9r3etmrmt83fm2gljbatos@group.calendar.google.com) (and make sure to check the time zone).
+
+## Need more?
+
+We have our other [learning resources](/learn), including the [Understanding JSON Schema documentation](/understanding-json-schema).
+
+## About Our Community
+
+We have an active and growing community. All are welcome to be part of our community, help shape it, or simply observe.
+
+We want to keep our community welcoming and inclusive, so please read our [JSON Schema Organizational Code of Conduct](https://github.com/json-schema-org/.github/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md). (This is a combination of the Contributor Covenant and IETF BCP 54.)
+
+The JSON Schema team and community are here to help!
+
+At any point, feel free to join our [Slack server](/slack).
 
-Quickstart
-----------
+Our Slack server has limited history, so we also use [GitHub Discussions](https://github.com/json-schema-org/community/discussions).
+
+We monitor the `jsonschema` tag on StackOverflow.
+
+## Project Status
+
+2022-06-10: A patch release of Draft 2020-12 has been published with no functional changes.
+
+The new IETF document IDs are of the form `draft-bhutton-*-01`.
+
+2021-02-01: Draft 2020-12 has been published!
+
+The IETF document IDs are of the form `draft-bhutton-*-00`.
+
+We are using dates for meta-schemas, which are what implementations should use to determine behavior,
+so we will usually refer to `2020-12` (without the word "draft") on this web site.
+
+See the [Specification page](specification.html) for details about naming and numbering.
+
+## Quickstart
 
 The JSON document being validated or described we call the *instance*, and the document containing the description is called the *schema*.
 
@@ -43,28 +102,37 @@ The most basic schema is a blank JSON object, which constrains nothing, allows a
 {}
 ```
 
-You can apply constraints on an instance by adding validation keywords to the schema. For instance, the "type" keyword can be used to restrict an instance to an object, array, string, number, boolean, or null:
+You can apply constraints on an instance by adding validation keywords to the schema. For example, the "type" keyword can be used to restrict an instance to an object, array, string, number, boolean, or null:
 
 ```json
-{"type": "string"}
+{ "type": "string" }
 ```
 
 JSON Schema is hypermedia ready, and ideal for annotating your existing JSON-based HTTP API. JSON Schema documents are identified by URIs, which can be used in HTTP Link headers, and inside JSON Schema documents to allow recursive definitions.
 
-More
-----
+## JSON Hyper-Schema
 
-Interested? Check out:
+JSON Hyper-Schema is on hiatus / not currently maintained as of 2021.
 
--   the [specification](documentation.md)
--   some [examples](examples.md)
--   this [excellent guide](http://spacetelescope.github.io/understanding-json-schema/) for schema authors, from the [Space Telescope Science Institute](http://www.stsci.edu/)
--   the growing list of [JSON (Hyper-)Schema software](implementations.md)
+This allows the team to focus the little time they do donate on JSON Schema core and validation.
 
-Questions? Feeling helpful? Get involved on:
+We may revisit JSON Hyper-Schema at a later date.
+
+## More Links
 
--   the [GitHub repo](http://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec)
--   the [Google Group](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/json-schema)
--   the [IRC channel](irc://chat.freenode.net/json-schema) ([Freenode Webchat](https://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=json-schema))
+Interested? Check out:
+
+* [Understanding JSON Schema](/understanding-json-schema/)
+* The [specification](./specification.md)
+* [Learning resources](./learn/index.md)
+* the growing list of [JSON Schema software](./implementations.md)
 
+We encourage updating to the latest specification where possible, which is 2020-12.
+
+Questions? Feeling helpful? Get involved on:
 
+* [GitHub](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec)
+* [GitHub Discussions](https://github.com/json-schema-org/community/discussions)
+* [Google Groups](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/json-schema)
+* [Slack](/slack)
+* [Open Collective](https://opencollective.com/json-schema)
diff --git a/interfaces b/interfaces
deleted file mode 100644
index c1c08fc3..00000000
--- a/interfaces
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,23 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "extends":"http://json-schema.org/hyper-schema",
-    "description":"A schema for schema interface definitions that describe programmatic class structures using JSON schema syntax",
-    "properties":{
-        "methods":{
-            "type":"object",
-            "description":"This defines the set of methods available to the class instances",
-            "additionalProperties":{
-            	"type":"object",
-            	"description":"The definition of the method",
-            	"properties":{
-            		"parameters":{
-            			"type":"array",
-            			"description":"The set of parameters that should be passed to the method when it is called",
-            			"items":"#",
-            			"required": true
-            		},
-            		"returns":"#"
-            	}
-            }
-        }    
-    }
-}
diff --git a/js/prism.js b/js/prism.js
deleted file mode 100644
index 1c4e252d..00000000
--- a/js/prism.js
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,4 +0,0 @@
-/* http://prismjs.com/download.html?themes=prism&languages=json&plugins=normalize-whitespace */
-var _self="undefined"!=typeof window?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope?self:{},Prism=function(){var e=/\blang(?:uage)?-(\w+)\b/i,t=0,n=_self.Prism={util:{encode:function(e){return e instanceof a?new a(e.type,n.util.encode(e.content),e.alias):"Array"===n.util.type(e)?e.map(n.util.encode):e.replace(/&/g,"&amp;").replace(/</g,"&lt;").replace(/\u00a0/g," ")},type:function(e){return Object.prototype.toString.call(e).match(/\[object (\w+)\]/)[1]},objId:function(e){return e.__id||Object.defineProperty(e,"__id",{value:++t}),e.__id},clone:function(e){var t=n.util.type(e);switch(t){case"Object":var a={};for(var r in e)e.hasOwnProperty(r)&&(a[r]=n.util.clone(e[r]));return a;case"Array":return e.map&&e.map(function(e){return n.util.clone(e)})}return e}},languages:{extend:function(e,t){var a=n.util.clone(n.languages[e]);for(var r in t)a[r]=t[r];return a},insertBefore:function(e,t,a,r){r=r||n.languages;var i=r[e];if(2==arguments.length){a=arguments[1];for(var l in a)a.hasOwnProperty(l)&&(i[l]=a[l]);return i}var o={};for(var s in i)if(i.hasOwnProperty(s)){if(s==t)for(var l in a)a.hasOwnProperty(l)&&(o[l]=a[l]);o[s]=i[s]}return n.languages.DFS(n.languages,function(t,n){n===r[e]&&t!=e&&(this[t]=o)}),r[e]=o},DFS:function(e,t,a,r){r=r||{};for(var i in e)e.hasOwnProperty(i)&&(t.call(e,i,e[i],a||i),"Object"!==n.util.type(e[i])||r[n.util.objId(e[i])]?"Array"!==n.util.type(e[i])||r[n.util.objId(e[i])]||(r[n.util.objId(e[i])]=!0,n.languages.DFS(e[i],t,i,r)):(r[n.util.objId(e[i])]=!0,n.languages.DFS(e[i],t,null,r)))}},plugins:{},highlightAll:function(e,t){var a={callback:t,selector:'code[class*="language-"], [class*="language-"] code, code[class*="lang-"], [class*="lang-"] code'};n.hooks.run("before-highlightall",a);for(var r,i=a.elements||document.querySelectorAll(a.selector),l=0;r=i[l++];)n.highlightElement(r,e===!0,a.callback)},highlightElement:function(t,a,r){for(var i,l,o=t;o&&!e.test(o.className);)o=o.parentNode;o&&(i=(o.className.match(e)||[,""])[1].toLowerCase(),l=n.languages[i]),t.className=t.className.replace(e,"").replace(/\s+/g," ")+" language-"+i,o=t.parentNode,/pre/i.test(o.nodeName)&&(o.className=o.className.replace(e,"").replace(/\s+/g," ")+" language-"+i);var s=t.textContent,u={element:t,language:i,grammar:l,code:s};if(n.hooks.run("before-sanity-check",u),!u.code||!u.grammar)return n.hooks.run("complete",u),void 0;if(n.hooks.run("before-highlight",u),a&&_self.Worker){var g=new Worker(n.filename);g.onmessage=function(e){u.highlightedCode=e.data,n.hooks.run("before-insert",u),u.element.innerHTML=u.highlightedCode,r&&r.call(u.element),n.hooks.run("after-highlight",u),n.hooks.run("complete",u)},g.postMessage(JSON.stringify({language:u.language,code:u.code,immediateClose:!0}))}else u.highlightedCode=n.highlight(u.code,u.grammar,u.language),n.hooks.run("before-insert",u),u.element.innerHTML=u.highlightedCode,r&&r.call(t),n.hooks.run("after-highlight",u),n.hooks.run("complete",u)},highlight:function(e,t,r){var i=n.tokenize(e,t);return a.stringify(n.util.encode(i),r)},tokenize:function(e,t){var a=n.Token,r=[e],i=t.rest;if(i){for(var l in i)t[l]=i[l];delete t.rest}e:for(var l in t)if(t.hasOwnProperty(l)&&t[l]){var o=t[l];o="Array"===n.util.type(o)?o:[o];for(var s=0;s<o.length;++s){var u=o[s],g=u.inside,c=!!u.lookbehind,h=!!u.greedy,f=0,d=u.alias;if(h&&!u.pattern.global){var p=u.pattern.toString().match(/[imuy]*$/)[0];u.pattern=RegExp(u.pattern.source,p+"g")}u=u.pattern||u;for(var m=0,y=0;m<r.length;y+=r[m].length,++m){var v=r[m];if(r.length>e.length)break e;if(!(v instanceof a)){u.lastIndex=0;var b=u.exec(v),k=1;if(!b&&h&&m!=r.length-1){if(u.lastIndex=y,b=u.exec(e),!b)break;for(var w=b.index+(c?b[1].length:0),_=b.index+b[0].length,A=m,P=y,j=r.length;j>A&&_>P;++A)P+=r[A].length,w>=P&&(++m,y=P);if(r[m]instanceof a||r[A-1].greedy)continue;k=A-m,v=e.slice(y,P),b.index-=y}if(b){c&&(f=b[1].length);var w=b.index+f,b=b[0].slice(f),_=w+b.length,O=v.slice(0,w),x=v.slice(_),S=[m,k];O&&S.push(O);var N=new a(l,g?n.tokenize(b,g):b,d,b,h);S.push(N),x&&S.push(x),Array.prototype.splice.apply(r,S)}}}}}return r},hooks:{all:{},add:function(e,t){var a=n.hooks.all;a[e]=a[e]||[],a[e].push(t)},run:function(e,t){var a=n.hooks.all[e];if(a&&a.length)for(var r,i=0;r=a[i++];)r(t)}}},a=n.Token=function(e,t,n,a,r){this.type=e,this.content=t,this.alias=n,this.length=0|(a||"").length,this.greedy=!!r};if(a.stringify=function(e,t,r){if("string"==typeof e)return e;if("Array"===n.util.type(e))return e.map(function(n){return a.stringify(n,t,e)}).join("");var i={type:e.type,content:a.stringify(e.content,t,r),tag:"span",classes:["token",e.type],attributes:{},language:t,parent:r};if("comment"==i.type&&(i.attributes.spellcheck="true"),e.alias){var l="Array"===n.util.type(e.alias)?e.alias:[e.alias];Array.prototype.push.apply(i.classes,l)}n.hooks.run("wrap",i);var o=Object.keys(i.attributes).map(function(e){return e+'="'+(i.attributes[e]||"").replace(/"/g,"&quot;")+'"'}).join(" ");return"<"+i.tag+' class="'+i.classes.join(" ")+'"'+(o?" "+o:"")+">"+i.content+"</"+i.tag+">"},!_self.document)return _self.addEventListener?(_self.addEventListener("message",function(e){var t=JSON.parse(e.data),a=t.language,r=t.code,i=t.immediateClose;_self.postMessage(n.highlight(r,n.languages[a],a)),i&&_self.close()},!1),_self.Prism):_self.Prism;var r=document.currentScript||[].slice.call(document.getElementsByTagName("script")).pop();return r&&(n.filename=r.src,document.addEventListener&&!r.hasAttribute("data-manual")&&("loading"!==document.readyState?window.requestAnimationFrame?window.requestAnimationFrame(n.highlightAll):window.setTimeout(n.highlightAll,16):document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded",n.highlightAll))),_self.Prism}();"undefined"!=typeof module&&module.exports&&(module.exports=Prism),"undefined"!=typeof global&&(global.Prism=Prism);
-Prism.languages.json={property:/"(?:\\.|[^|"])*"(?=\s*:)/gi,string:/"(?!:)(?:\\.|[^|"])*"(?!:)/g,number:/\b-?(0x[\dA-Fa-f]+|\d*\.?\d+([Ee][+-]?\d+)?)\b/g,punctuation:/[{}[\]);,]/g,operator:/:/g,"boolean":/\b(true|false)\b/gi,"null":/\bnull\b/gi},Prism.languages.jsonp=Prism.languages.json;
-!function(){function e(e){this.defaults=r({},e)}function n(e){return e.replace(/-(\w)/g,function(e,n){return n.toUpperCase()})}function t(e){for(var n=0,t=0;t<e.length;++t)e.charCodeAt(t)=="	".charCodeAt(0)&&(n+=3);return e.length+n}if("undefined"!=typeof self&&self.Prism&&self.document){var r=Object.assign||function(e,n){for(var t in n)n.hasOwnProperty(t)&&(e[t]=n[t]);return e};e.prototype={setDefaults:function(e){this.defaults=r(this.defaults,e)},normalize:function(e,t){t=r(this.defaults,t);for(var i in t){var o=n(i);"normalize"!==i&&"setDefaults"!==o&&t[i]&&this[o]&&(e=this[o].call(this,e,t[i]))}return e},leftTrim:function(e){return e.replace(/^\s+/,"")},rightTrim:function(e){return e.replace(/\s+$/,"")},tabsToSpaces:function(e,n){return n=0|n||4,e.replace(/\t/g,new Array(++n).join(" "))},spacesToTabs:function(e,n){return n=0|n||4,e.replace(new RegExp(" {"+n+"}","g"),"	")},removeTrailing:function(e){return e.replace(/\s*?$/gm,"")},removeInitialLineFeed:function(e){return e.replace(/^(?:\r?\n|\r)/,"")},removeIndent:function(e){var n=e.match(/^[^\S\n\r]*(?=\S)/gm);return n&&n[0].length?(n.sort(function(e,n){return e.length-n.length}),n[0].length?e.replace(new RegExp("^"+n[0],"gm"),""):e):e},indent:function(e,n){return e.replace(/^[^\S\n\r]*(?=\S)/gm,new Array(++n).join("	")+"$&")},breakLines:function(e,n){n=n===!0?80:0|n||80;for(var r=e.split("\n"),i=0;i<r.length;++i)if(!(t(r[i])<=n)){for(var o=r[i].split(/(\s+)/g),a=0,s=0;s<o.length;++s){var l=t(o[s]);a+=l,a>n&&(o[s]="\n"+o[s],a=l)}r[i]=o.join("")}return r.join("\n")}},Prism.plugins.NormalizeWhitespace=new e({"remove-trailing":!0,"remove-indent":!0,"left-trim":!0,"right-trim":!0}),Prism.hooks.add("before-sanity-check",function(e){var n=e.element.parentNode,t=/\bno-whitespace-normalization\b/;if(!(!e.code||!n||"pre"!==n.nodeName.toLowerCase()||e.settings&&e.settings["whitespace-normalization"]===!1||t.test(n.className)||t.test(e.element.className))){for(var r=n.childNodes,i="",o="",a=!1,s=Prism.plugins.NormalizeWhitespace,l=0;l<r.length;++l){var c=r[l];c==e.element?a=!0:"#text"===c.nodeName&&(a?o+=c.nodeValue:i+=c.nodeValue,n.removeChild(c),--l)}if(e.element.children.length&&Prism.plugins.KeepMarkup){var u=i+e.element.innerHTML+o;e.element.innerHTML=s.normalize(u,e.settings),e.code=e.element.textContent}else e.code=i+e.code+o,e.code=s.normalize(e.code,e.settings)}})}}();
diff --git a/latest/json-schema-core.md b/latest/json-schema-core.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..921902a6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/latest/json-schema-core.md
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+---
+redirect_to: "/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html"
+title: "JSON Schema: A Media Type for Describing JSON Documents"
+---
+
diff --git a/latest/json-schema-validation.md b/latest/json-schema-validation.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..c285f6df
--- /dev/null
+++ b/latest/json-schema-validation.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: "/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html"
+title: "JSON Schema Validation: A Vocabulary for Structural Validation of JSON"
+---
diff --git a/latest/relative-json-pointer.md b/latest/relative-json-pointer.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..5b5de6c4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/latest/relative-json-pointer.md
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+redirect_to: "/draft/2020-12/relative-json-pointer.html"
+title: "Relative JSON Pointers"
+---
diff --git a/learn/examples/address.schema.json b/learn/examples/address.schema.json
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..7b62083a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/learn/examples/address.schema.json
@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/address.schema.json",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "description": "An address similar to http://microformats.org/wiki/h-card",
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "post-office-box": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "extended-address": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "street-address": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "locality": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "region": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "postal-code": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "country-name": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [ "locality", "region", "country-name" ],
+  "dependentRequired": {
+    "post-office-box": [ "street-address" ],
+    "extended-address": [ "street-address" ]
+  }
+}
diff --git a/learn/examples/calendar.schema.json b/learn/examples/calendar.schema.json
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..afc40c51
--- /dev/null
+++ b/learn/examples/calendar.schema.json
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/calendar.schema.json",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "description": "A representation of an event",
+  "type": "object",
+  "required": [ "dtstart", "summary" ],
+  "properties": {
+    "dtstart": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "description": "Event starting time"
+    },
+    "dtend": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "description": "Event ending time"
+    },
+    "summary": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "location": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "duration": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "description": "Event duration"
+    },
+    "rdate": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "description": "Recurrence date"
+    },
+    "rrule": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "description": "Recurrence rule"
+    },
+    "category": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "description": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "geo": {
+      "$ref": "https://example.com/geographical-location.schema.json"
+    }
+  }
+}
diff --git a/learn/examples/card.schema.json b/learn/examples/card.schema.json
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..acb33e2a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/learn/examples/card.schema.json
@@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/card.schema.json",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "description": "A representation of a person, company, organization, or place",
+  "type": "object",
+  "required": [ "familyName", "givenName" ],
+  "properties": {
+    "fn": {
+      "description": "Formatted Name",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "familyName": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "givenName": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "additionalName": {
+      "type": "array",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "honorificPrefix": {
+      "type": "array",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "honorificSuffix": {
+      "type": "array",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "nickname": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "email": {
+      "type": "object",
+      "properties": {
+        "type": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "value": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      }
+    },
+    "tel": {
+      "type": "object",
+      "properties": {
+        "type": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "value": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      }
+    },
+    "adr": { "$ref": "https://example.com/address.schema.json" },
+    "geo": { "$ref": "https://example.com/geographical-location.schema.json" },
+    "tz": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "photo": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "logo": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "sound": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "bday": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "title": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "role": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "org": {
+      "type": "object",
+      "properties": {
+        "organizationName": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "organizationUnit": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      }
+    }
+  }
+}
diff --git a/learn/examples/geographical-location.schema.json b/learn/examples/geographical-location.schema.json
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..758dca8f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/learn/examples/geographical-location.schema.json
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/geographical-location.schema.json",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "title": "Longitude and Latitude Values",
+  "description": "A geographical coordinate.",
+  "required": [ "latitude", "longitude" ],
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "latitude": {
+      "type": "number",
+      "minimum": -90,
+      "maximum": 90
+    },
+    "longitude": {
+      "type": "number",
+      "minimum": -180,
+      "maximum": 180
+    }
+  }
+}
diff --git a/learn/file-system.md b/learn/file-system.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..0544e423
--- /dev/null
+++ b/learn/file-system.md
@@ -0,0 +1,419 @@
+---
+layout: page
+title: Modeling a file system with JSON Schema
+---
+
+* [Introduction](#introduction)
+* [Creating the `fstab` schema](#fstab-schema)
+* [Starting the `entry` schema](#entry-schema)
+* [Constraining an entry](#constraining-entry)
+* [The `diskDevice` definition](#diskdevice)
+* [The `diskUUID` definition](#diskuuid)
+* [The `nfs` definition](#nfs)
+* [The `tmpfs` definition](#tmpfs)
+* [The full entry schema](#full-entry)
+* [Referencing the `entry` schema in the `fstab` schema](#referencing-entry)
+
+## <a name="introduction"></a>Introduction
+
+> Not all constraints to an fstab file can be modeled using JSON Schema alone; however, it can represent a good number of them and the exercise is useful to demonstrate how constraints work. The examples provided are illustrative of the JSON Schema concepts rather than a real, working schema for an fstab file.
+
+This example shows a possible JSON Schema representation of file system mount points as represented in an [`/etc/fstab`](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fstab) file.
+
+An entry in an fstab file can have many different forms; Here is an example:
+
+```json
+{
+  "/": {
+    "storage": {
+      "type": "disk",
+      "device": "/dev/sda1"
+    },
+    "fstype": "btrfs",
+    "readonly": true
+  },
+  "/var": {
+    "storage": {
+      "type": "disk",
+      "label": "8f3ba6f4-5c70-46ec-83af-0d5434953e5f"
+    },
+    "fstype": "ext4",
+    "options": [ "nosuid" ]
+  },
+  "/tmp": {
+    "storage": {
+      "type": "tmpfs",
+      "sizeInMB": 64
+    }
+  },
+  "/var/www": {
+    "storage": {
+      "type": "nfs",
+      "server": "my.nfs.server",
+      "remotePath": "/exports/mypath"
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+## <a name="fstab-schema"></a>Creating the `fstab` schema
+
+We will start with a base JSON Schema expressing the following constraints:
+
+* the list of entries is a JSON object;
+* the member names (or property names) of this object must all be valid, absolute paths;
+* there must be an entry for the root filesystem (ie, `/`).
+
+Building out our JSON Schema from top to bottom:
+
+* The [`$id`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#section-8.2.1) keyword.
+* The [`$schema`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#section-8.1.1) keyword.
+* The [`type`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.1.1) validation keyword.
+* The [`required`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.5.3) validation keyword.
+* The [`properties`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#section-10.3.2.1) validation keyword.
+  * The `/` key is empty now; We will fill it out later.
+* The [`patternProperties`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#section-10.3.2.2) validation keyword.
+  * This matches other property names via a regular expression. Note: it does not match `/`.
+  * The `^(/[^/]+)+$` key is empty now; We will fill it out later.
+* The [`additionalProperties`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#section-10.3.2.3) validation keyword.
+  * The value here is `false` to constrain object properties to be either `/` or to match the regular expression.
+
+> You will notice that the regular expression is explicitly anchored (with `^` and `$`): in JSON Schema, regular expressions (in `patternProperties` and in `pattern`) are not anchored by default.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/fstab",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "type": "object",
+  "required": [ "/" ],
+  "properties": {
+    "/": {}
+  },
+  "patternProperties": {
+    "^(/[^/]+)+$": {}
+  },
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+}
+```
+
+## <a name="entry-schema"></a>Starting the `entry` schema
+
+We will start with an outline of the JSON schema which adds new concepts to what we've already demonstrated.
+
+We saw these keywords in the prior exercise: `$id`, `$schema`, `type`, `required` and `properties`.
+
+To this we add:
+
+* The [`description`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-9.1) annotation keyword.
+* The [`oneOf`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#section-10.2.1.3) keyword.
+* The [`$ref`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#section-8.2.3.1) keyword.
+  * In this case, all references used are local to the schema using a relative fragment URI (`#/...`).
+* The [`$defs`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#section-8.2.4) keyword.
+  * Including several key names which we will define later.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/entry-schema",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "description": "JSON Schema for an fstab entry",
+  "type": "object",
+  "required": [ "storage" ],
+  "properties": {
+    "storage": {
+      "type": "object",
+      "oneOf": [
+        { "$ref": "#/$defs/diskDevice" },
+        { "$ref": "#/$defs/diskUUID" },
+        { "$ref": "#/$defs/nfs" },
+        { "$ref": "#/$defs/tmpfs" }
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "$defs": {
+    "diskDevice": {},
+    "diskUUID": {},
+    "nfs": {},
+    "tmpfs": {}
+  }
+}
+```
+
+## <a name="constraining-entry"></a>Constraining an entry
+
+Let's now extend this skeleton to add constraints to some of the properties.
+
+* Our `fstype` key uses the [`enum`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.1.2) validation keyword.
+* Our `options` key uses the following:
+  * The `type` validation keyword (see above).
+  * The [`minItems`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.4.2) validation keyword.
+  * The [`items`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#section-10.3.1.2) validation keyword.
+  * The [`uniqueItems`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.4.3) validation keyword.
+  * Together these say: `options` must be an array, and the items therein must be strings, there must be at least one item, and all items should be unique.
+* We have a `readonly` key.
+
+With these added constraints, the schema now looks like this:
+
+```json
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/entry-schema",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "description": "JSON Schema for an fstab entry",
+  "type": "object",
+  "required": [ "storage" ],
+  "properties": {
+    "storage": {
+      "type": "object",
+      "oneOf": [
+        { "$ref": "#/$defs/diskDevice" },
+        { "$ref": "#/$defs/diskUUID" },
+        { "$ref": "#/$defs/nfs" },
+        { "$ref": "#/$defs/tmpfs" }
+      ]
+    },
+    "fstype": {
+      "enum": [ "ext3", "ext4", "btrfs" ]
+    },
+    "options": {
+      "type": "array",
+      "minItems": 1,
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "uniqueItems": true
+    },
+    "readonly": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "$defs": {
+    "diskDevice": {},
+    "diskUUID": {},
+    "nfs": {},
+    "tmpfs": {}
+  }
+}
+```
+
+## <a name="diskdevice"></a>The `diskDevice` definition
+
+One new keyword is introduced here:
+
+* The [`pattern`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.3.3) validation keyword notes the `device` key must be an absolute path starting with */dev*.
+
+```json
+{
+  "diskDevice": {
+    "properties": {
+      "type": {
+        "enum": [ "disk" ]
+      },
+      "device": {
+        "type": "string",
+        "pattern": "^/dev/[^/]+(/[^/]+)*$"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [ "type", "device" ],
+    "additionalProperties": false
+  }
+}
+```
+
+## <a name="diskuuid"></a>The `diskUUID` definition
+
+No new keywords are introduced here.
+
+We do have a new key: `label` and the `pattern` validation keyword states it must be a valid UUID.
+
+```json
+{
+  "diskUUID": {
+    "properties": {
+      "type": {
+        "enum": [ "disk" ]
+      },
+      "label": {
+        "type": "string",
+        "pattern": "^[a-fA-F0-9]{8}-[a-fA-F0-9]{4}-[a-fA-F0-9]{4}-[a-fA-F0-9]{4}-[a-fA-F0-9]{12}$"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [ "type", "label" ],
+    "additionalProperties": false
+  }
+}
+```
+
+## <a name="nfs"></a>The `nfs` definition
+
+We find another new keyword:
+
+* The [`format`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-7) annotation and assertion keyword.
+
+```json
+{
+  "nfs": {
+    "properties": {
+      "type": { "enum": [ "nfs" ] },
+      "remotePath": {
+        "type": "string",
+        "pattern": "^(/[^/]+)+$"
+      },
+      "server": {
+        "type": "string",
+        "oneOf": [
+          { "format": "hostname" },
+          { "format": "ipv4" },
+          { "format": "ipv6" }
+        ]
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [ "type", "server", "remotePath" ],
+    "additionalProperties": false
+  }
+}
+```
+
+## <a name="tmpfs"></a>The `tmpfs` definition
+
+Our last definition introduces two new keywords:
+
+* The [`minimum`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.2.4) validation keyword.
+* The [`maximum`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.2.2) validation keyword.
+* Together these require the size be between 16 and 512, inclusive.
+
+```json
+{
+  "tmpfs": {
+    "properties": {
+      "type": { "enum": [ "tmpfs" ] },
+      "sizeInMB": {
+        "type": "integer",
+        "minimum": 16,
+        "maximum": 512
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [ "type", "sizeInMB" ],
+    "additionalProperties": false
+  }
+}
+```
+
+## <a name="full-entry"></a>The full entry schema
+
+The resulting schema is quite large:
+
+```json
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/entry-schema",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "description": "JSON Schema for an fstab entry",
+  "type": "object",
+  "required": [ "storage" ],
+  "properties": {
+    "storage": {
+      "type": "object",
+      "oneOf": [
+        { "$ref": "#/$defs/diskDevice" },
+        { "$ref": "#/$defs/diskUUID" },
+        { "$ref": "#/$defs/nfs" },
+        { "$ref": "#/$defs/tmpfs" }
+      ]
+    },
+    "fstype": {
+      "enum": [ "ext3", "ext4", "btrfs" ]
+    },
+    "options": {
+      "type": "array",
+      "minItems": 1,
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "uniqueItems": true
+    },
+    "readonly": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "$defs": {
+    "diskDevice": {
+      "properties": {
+        "type": {
+          "enum": [ "disk" ]
+        },
+        "device": {
+          "type": "string",
+          "pattern": "^/dev/[^/]+(/[^/]+)*$"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [ "type", "device" ],
+      "additionalProperties": false
+    },
+    "diskUUID": {
+      "properties": {
+        "type": {
+          "enum": [ "disk" ]
+        },
+        "label": {
+          "type": "string",
+          "pattern": "^[a-fA-F0-9]{8}-[a-fA-F0-9]{4}-[a-fA-F0-9]{4}-[a-fA-F0-9]{4}-[a-fA-F0-9]{12}$"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [ "type", "label" ],
+      "additionalProperties": false
+    },
+    "nfs": {
+      "properties": {
+        "type": { "enum": [ "nfs" ] },
+        "remotePath": {
+          "type": "string",
+          "pattern": "^(/[^/]+)+$"
+        },
+        "server": {
+          "type": "string",
+          "oneOf": [
+            { "format": "hostname" },
+            { "format": "ipv4" },
+            { "format": "ipv6" }
+          ]
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [ "type", "server", "remotePath" ],
+      "additionalProperties": false
+    },
+    "tmpfs": {
+      "properties": {
+        "type": { "enum": [ "tmpfs" ] },
+        "sizeInMB": {
+          "type": "integer",
+          "minimum": 16,
+          "maximum": 512
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [ "type", "sizeInMB" ],
+      "additionalProperties": false
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+## <a name="referencing-entry"></a>Referencing the `entry` schema in the `fstab` schema
+
+Coming full circle we use the `$ref` keyword to add our entry schema into the keys left empty at the start of the exercise:
+
+* The `/` key.
+* The `^(/[^/]+)+$` key.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/fstab",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "type": "object",
+  "required": [ "/" ],
+  "properties": {
+    "/": { "$ref": "https://example.com/entry-schema" }
+  },
+  "patternProperties": {
+    "^(/[^/]+)+$":  { "$ref": "https://example.com/entry-schema" }
+  },
+  "additionalProperties": false
+}
+```
diff --git a/learn/getting-started-step-by-step.md b/learn/getting-started-step-by-step.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..5e299de1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/learn/getting-started-step-by-step.md
@@ -0,0 +1,382 @@
+---
+layout: page
+title: Getting Started Step-By-Step
+---
+
+* [Introduction](#intro)
+* [Starting the schema](#starting)
+* [Defining the properties](#properties)
+* [Going deeper with properties](#properties-deeper)
+* [Nesting data structures](#nesting)
+* [References outside the schema](#references)
+* [Taking a look at data for our defined JSON Schema](#data)
+
+## <a name="intro"></a>Introduction
+
+The following example is by no means definitive of all the value JSON Schema can provide. For this you will need to go deep into the specification itself -- learn more at [https://json-schema.org/specification.html](https://json-schema.org/specification.html).
+
+Let's pretend we're interacting with a JSON based product catalog. This catalog has a product which has:
+
+* An identifier: `productId`
+* A product name: `productName`
+* A selling cost for the consumer: `price`
+* An optional set of tags: `tags`.
+
+For example:
+
+```json
+{
+  "productId": 1,
+  "productName": "A green door",
+  "price": 12.50,
+  "tags": [ "home", "green" ]
+}
+```
+
+While generally straightforward, the example leaves some open questions. Here are just a few of them:
+
+* What is `productId`?
+* Is `productName` required?
+* Can the `price` be zero (0)?
+* Are all of the `tags` string values?
+
+When you're talking about a data format, you want to have metadata about what keys mean, including the valid inputs for those keys. **JSON Schema** is a proposed IETF standard how to answer those questions for data.
+
+## <a name="starting"></a>Starting the schema
+
+To start a schema definition, let's begin with a basic JSON schema.
+
+We start with four properties called **keywords** which are expressed as [JSON](https://www.json.org/) keys.
+
+> Yes. the standard uses a JSON data document to describe data documents, most often that are also JSON data documents but could be in any number of other content types like `text/xml`.
+
+* The [`$schema`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#section-8.1.1) keyword states that this schema is written according to a specific draft of the standard and used for a variety of reasons, primarily version control.
+* The [`$id`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#section-8.2.1) keyword defines a URI for the schema, and the base URI that other URI references within the schema are resolved against.
+* The [`title`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-9.1) and [`description`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-9.1) annotation keywords are descriptive only. They do not add constraints to the data being validated. The intent of the schema is stated with these two keywords.
+* The [`type`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.1.1) validation keyword defines the first constraint on our JSON data and in this case it has to be a JSON Object.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/product.schema.json",
+  "title": "Product",
+  "description": "A product in the catalog",
+  "type": "object"
+}
+```
+
+We introduce the following pieces of terminology when we start the schema:
+
+* [Schema Keyword](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#section-8.1.1): `$schema` and `$id`.
+* [Schema Annotations](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-9.1): `title` and `description`.
+* [Validation Keyword](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.1.1): `type`.
+
+## <a name="properties"></a>Defining the properties
+
+`productId` is a numeric value that uniquely identifies a product. Since this is the canonical identifier for a product, it doesn't make sense to have a product without one, so it is required.
+
+In JSON Schema terms, we update our schema to add:
+
+* The [`properties`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#section-10.3.2.1) validation keyword.
+* The `productId` key.
+  * `description` schema annotation and `type` validation keyword is noted -- we covered both of these in the previous section.
+* The [`required`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.5.3) validation keyword listing `productId`.
+
+
+```json
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/product.schema.json",
+  "title": "Product",
+  "description": "A product from Acme's catalog",
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "productId": {
+      "description": "The unique identifier for a product",
+      "type": "integer"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [ "productId" ]
+}
+```
+
+* `productName` is a string value that describes a product. Since there isn't much to a product without a name it also is required.
+* Since the `required` validation keyword is an array of strings we can note multiple keys as required; We now include `productName`.
+* There isn't really any difference between `productId` and `productName` -- we include both for completeness since computers typically pay attention to identifiers and humans typically pay attention to names.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/product.schema.json",
+  "title": "Product",
+  "description": "A product from Acme's catalog",
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "productId": {
+      "description": "The unique identifier for a product",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "productName": {
+      "description": "Name of the product",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [ "productId", "productName" ]
+}
+```
+
+## <a name="properties-deeper"></a>Going deeper with properties
+
+According to the store owner there are no free products. ;)
+
+* The `price` key is added with the usual `description` schema annotation and `type` validation keywords covered previously. It is also included in the array of keys defined by the `required` validation keyword.
+* We specify the value of `price` must be something other than zero using the [`exclusiveMinimum`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.2.5) validation keyword.
+  * If we wanted to include zero as a valid price we would have specified the [`minimum`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.2.4) validation keyword.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/product.schema.json",
+  "title": "Product",
+  "description": "A product from Acme's catalog",
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "productId": {
+      "description": "The unique identifier for a product",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "productName": {
+      "description": "Name of the product",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "price": {
+      "description": "The price of the product",
+      "type": "number",
+      "exclusiveMinimum": 0
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [ "productId", "productName", "price" ]
+}
+```
+
+Next, we come to the `tags` key.
+
+The store owner has said this:
+
+* If there are tags there must be at least one tag,
+* All tags must be unique; no duplication within a single product.
+* All tags must be text.
+* Tags are nice but they aren't required to be present.
+
+Therefore:
+
+* The `tags` key is added with the usual annotations and keywords.
+* This time the `type` validation keyword is `array`.
+* We introduce the [`items`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#section-10.3.1.2) validation keyword so we can define what appears in the array. In this case: `string` values via the `type` validation keyword.
+* The [`minItems`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.4.2) validation keyword is used to make sure there is at least one item in the array.
+* The [`uniqueItems`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.4.3) validation keyword notes all of the items in the array must be unique relative to one another.
+* We did not add this key to the `required` validation keyword array because it is optional.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/product.schema.json",
+  "title": "Product",
+  "description": "A product from Acme's catalog",
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "productId": {
+      "description": "The unique identifier for a product",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "productName": {
+      "description": "Name of the product",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "price": {
+      "description": "The price of the product",
+      "type": "number",
+      "exclusiveMinimum": 0
+    },
+    "tags": {
+      "description": "Tags for the product",
+      "type": "array",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "minItems": 1,
+      "uniqueItems": true
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [ "productId", "productName", "price" ]
+}
+```
+
+## <a name="nesting"></a>Nesting data structures
+
+Up until this point we've been dealing with a very flat schema -- only one level. This section demonstrates nested data structures.
+
+* The `dimensions` key is added using the concepts we've previously discovered. Since the `type` validation keyword is `object` we can use the `properties` validation keyword to define a nested data structure.
+  * We omitted the `description` annotation keyword for brevity in the example. While it's usually preferable to annotate thoroughly in this case the structure and key names are fairly familiar to most developers.
+* You will note the scope of the `required` validation keyword is applicable to the dimensions key and not beyond.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/product.schema.json",
+  "title": "Product",
+  "description": "A product from Acme's catalog",
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "productId": {
+      "description": "The unique identifier for a product",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "productName": {
+      "description": "Name of the product",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "price": {
+      "description": "The price of the product",
+      "type": "number",
+      "exclusiveMinimum": 0
+    },
+    "tags": {
+      "description": "Tags for the product",
+      "type": "array",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "minItems": 1,
+      "uniqueItems": true
+    },
+    "dimensions": {
+      "type": "object",
+      "properties": {
+        "length": {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "width": {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "height": {
+          "type": "number"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [ "length", "width", "height" ]
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [ "productId", "productName", "price" ]
+}
+```
+
+## <a name="references"></a>References outside the schema
+
+So far our JSON schema has been wholly self contained. It is very common to share JSON schema across many data structures for reuse, readability and maintainability among other reasons.
+
+For this example we introduce a new JSON Schema resource and for both properties therein:
+* We use the `minimum` validation keyword noted earlier.
+* We add the [`maximum`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#section-6.2.2) validation keyword.
+* Combined, these give us a range to use in validation.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/geographical-location.schema.json",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "title": "Longitude and Latitude",
+  "description": "A geographical coordinate on a planet (most commonly Earth).",
+  "required": [ "latitude", "longitude" ],
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "latitude": {
+      "type": "number",
+      "minimum": -90,
+      "maximum": 90
+    },
+    "longitude": {
+      "type": "number",
+      "minimum": -180,
+      "maximum": 180
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+Next we add a reference to this new schema so it can be incorporated.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "$id": "https://example.com/product.schema.json",
+  "title": "Product",
+  "description": "A product from Acme's catalog",
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "productId": {
+      "description": "The unique identifier for a product",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "productName": {
+      "description": "Name of the product",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "price": {
+      "description": "The price of the product",
+      "type": "number",
+      "exclusiveMinimum": 0
+    },
+    "tags": {
+      "description": "Tags for the product",
+      "type": "array",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "minItems": 1,
+      "uniqueItems": true
+    },
+    "dimensions": {
+      "type": "object",
+      "properties": {
+        "length": {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "width": {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "height": {
+          "type": "number"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [ "length", "width", "height" ]
+    },
+    "warehouseLocation": {
+      "description": "Coordinates of the warehouse where the product is located.",
+      "$ref": "https://example.com/geographical-location.schema.json"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [ "productId", "productName", "price" ]
+}
+```
+
+## <a name="data"></a>Taking a look at data for our defined JSON Schema
+
+We've certainly expanded on the concept of a product since our earliest sample data (scroll up to the top). Let's take a look at data which matches the JSON Schema we have defined.
+
+```json
+
+  {
+    "productId": 1,
+    "productName": "An ice sculpture",
+    "price": 12.50,
+    "tags": [ "cold", "ice" ],
+    "dimensions": {
+      "length": 7.0,
+      "width": 12.0,
+      "height": 9.5
+    },
+    "warehouseLocation": {
+      "latitude": -78.75,
+      "longitude": 20.4
+    }
+  }
+```
diff --git a/learn/glossary.md b/learn/glossary.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..8328a958
--- /dev/null
+++ b/learn/glossary.md
@@ -0,0 +1,130 @@
+---
+layout: page
+title: JSON Schema Glossary
+---
+
+This document collects short explanations of terminology one may encounter within the JSON Schema community.
+
+Whilst many of the entries below have precise technical definitions, preference is given to explanations of their conversational use, with additional references linked for further information.
+This page is not meant to be [normative](#normative), nor is it meant to contain fully original research or explanation.
+It is meant to aid the understanding of those less familiar with formal language used within JSON Schema, or within specifications more broadly.
+(In fact, entries below make effort to avoid terminology like "normative" itself for reasons just mentioned.)
+
+If you encounter a term you wish were defined here, please feel free to [file an issue requesting it](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/issues/new?title=Add%20a%20glossary%20entry%20for%20).
+
+The entries on this page can be linked to via anchor links (e.g. `https://json-schema.org/learn/glossary.html#vocabulary`) when sharing a definition with others.
+
+### dialect
+
+A cohesive collection of [keywords](#keyword) available for use within a schema, often representing a use-case specific single release of the JSON Schema specification.
+
+Dialects, particularly the 2019-09 and 2020-12 dialects, are often defined via a collection of [vocabularies](#vocabulary).
+
+Each dialect is identified by a URI, its *dialect identifier*, which [schemas](#schema) may then reference in their `$schema` [keyword](#keyword).
+Doing so identifies the schema as being written in the dialect, and thereby indicates which keywords are usable within it, along with their intended meaning.
+
+The JSON Schema specification defines a number of dialects, each of which enable vocabularies suitable for the dialect's specific use case.
+These vocabularies are [described](https://json-schema.org/specification.html#general-purpose-meta-schema) in meta-schemas.
+
+### draft
+
+An individual release of the JSON Schema specification.
+
+JSON Schema drafts are not intended to be provisional documents, as the layman's use of the word "draft" might indicate.
+
+While future drafts may introduce new behavior or changes to existing behavior, each draft is a completed, released document, batching together changes to the specification, and intended for implementation and use.
+
+The current list of drafts can be found [here](https://json-schema.org/specification-links.html#published-drafts).
+
+### JSON
+
+A pervasive data interchange format used for representing and transmitting data as human readable text.
+JSON is extremely widely used, and parsers which can read and write it exist for essentially every commonly-used programming language.
+
+JSON Schema, distinctly, is built *on top* of JSON, in that JSON [schemas](#schema) are themselves JSON objects which describe JSON values.
+The two are, however, entirely different pieces of the conceptual puzzle, with JSON being a concrete format for *representing* data, and JSON Schema being a way to *schematize* data which is written in a JSON-compatible format.
+
+The JSON format is an open format, with its own [homepage](https://www.json.org/), and specifications published in the [ECMA-404](http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/ECMA-404.pdf) and [RFC-8259](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8259) documents from ECMA and the IETF respectively.
+In particular, it is not managed or developed by the JSON Schema team, who simply make use of the format.
+
+
+### keyword
+
+A property appearing within a [schema](#schema) object.
+
+The [JSON Schema specification](https://json-schema.org/specification.html) defines behavior for a large library of keywords which can be used to describe [instances](#instance).
+
+### instance
+
+A piece of JSON data which is to be described by a [schema](#schema).
+
+JSON Schema can be used to describe JSON values of any type (as well as values from many JSON-like formats which can be reasonably represented as JSON).
+
+The JSON Schema specification makes no broad assumptions about the structure of instances themselves beyond those of the JSON specification itself.
+In particular it does not reserve any properties within a JSON object for its own use, or require parsers of JSON to support features beyond those already mandated of JSON implementations.
+
+### meta-schema
+
+A [schema](#schema) which is itself intended to describe other *schemas*.
+
+JSON Schema defines a language for describing any [instance](#instance) using a schema written in JSON.
+Since schemas are themselves JSON values, they may be also be treated as *instances*, and therefore described by other schemas.
+
+We refer to the schema-of-a-schema as a "meta-schema" to express this use.
+
+### normative
+
+In the context of JSON Schema, and formal specifications more broadly, a document which outlines standardized behavior.
+This is as distinct from *non*-normative or informational documents, meant to explain, simplify or offer opinions.
+
+Distinguishing between whether a document is normative or not is intended to clarify to those using the document whether its contents are allowed to contradict or augment behavior described in other normative documents.
+JSON Schema's normative documents notably include its [specification](https://json-schema.org/specification.html).
+This page for instance, not being a normative document, is not able to proscribe new JSON Schema behavior not already covered by the specification.
+
+#### See also
+
+* [normative](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Normative) and [non-normative](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/non-normative) in the Mozilla Glossary, and its links
+
+### schema
+
+A document, written according to the proscribed structure of the JSON Schema specification, which can be used to describe [instances](#instance).
+
+The rules constituting which schemas are conformant, as well as the rules governing their behavior when validating instances, are defined by the [JSON Schema specification](https://json-schema.org/specification.html).
+
+Strictly speaking, according to the specification, schemas are themselves [JSON documents](#JSON), though it is somewhat common for them to be authored or maintained in other languages which are easily translated to JSON, such as YAML.
+
+In recent [drafts](#draft) of the specification, a schema is either a JSON object or a JSON boolean value.
+
+### subschema
+
+A [schema](#schema) which is itself contained within a surrounding parent schema.
+Like schemas themselves, in recent [drafts](#draft) of JSON Schema, subschemas are either [JSON](#JSON) objects or JSON boolean values.
+
+Within the JSON Schema specification and its [dialects](#dialect), a number of [keywords](#keyword) take subschemas as part of their values.
+For example, the `not` keyword takes a subschema value and inverts its result, succeeding whenever the subschema does not succeed, such that the [instance](#instance) `12` is invalid under `{"type": "string"}` but valid under `{"not": {"type": "string"}}`, where `{"type": "string"}` is a subschema contained in the full schema.
+
+Some subschemas may appear in more complex nested locations within a parent schema.
+The `allOf` keyword, for instance, takes an array of multiple subschemas and succeeds whenever all of the subschemas do individually.
+
+Whether something that otherwise *appears* to be a schema (based on its contents) actually *is* a subschema can be misleading at first glance without context or knowlege about its location within the parent schema.
+Specifically, in our above example, `{"type": "string"}` was a subschema of a larger schema, but in the schema `{"const": {"type": "string"}}`, it is *not* a subschema.
+Even though as a value it looks the same, the `const` keyword, which compares instances against a specific expected value, does *not* take a subschema as its value, its value is an opaque value with no particular meaning (such that in this schema, the number 12 would be invalid, but the precise instance `{"type": "string"}` is valid).
+Said more plainly, whether a particular value is a subschema or not depends on its precise location within a parent schema, as interpretation of the value depends on the defined behavior of the keyword(s) it lives under.
+
+Subschemas may themselves contain sub-subschemas, though colloquially one generally uses the term "subschema" regardless of the level of nesting, further clarifying which larger schema is the parent schema whenever needed.
+
+### vocabulary
+
+A tightly related collection of [keywords](keyword), grouped to facilitate re-use.
+
+A vocabulary is specified by a prose document or specification which explains the semantics of its keywords in a way suitable for implementers and users of the vocabulary.
+It often also includes a [meta-schema](#meta-schema) (or multiple metaschemas) which define the syntax of its keywords.
+
+Anyone can create and publish a vocabulary, and implementations generally will include facilities for extending themselves with support for additional vocabularies and their keywords.
+The JSON Schema specification includes a number of vocabularies which cover each of the keywords it defines.
+
+In some [dialects](#dialect) of JSON Schema, the `$vocabulary` keyword can be used to include the keywords defined by a vocabulary into the dialect, as well as to indicate whether implementations must specifically recognize the vocabulary in order to be able to process schemas written in the dialect or not.
+
+#### See also
+
+* [`json-schema-vocabularies`](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-vocabularies), a repository which collects known third-party JSON Schema vocabularies
diff --git a/learn/index.md b/learn/index.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..f94aaff2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/learn/index.md
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+---
+layout: page
+title: Learn
+---
+
+* [Getting Started Step-By-Step](./getting-started-step-by-step.md) which covers a classic product catalog description.
+* [File System](./file-system.md) which uses JSON Schema to describe filesystem entries in a Unix-like file system. It is a little more in-depth / advanced than Getting Started.
+* [Miscellaneous Examples](./miscellaneous-examples.md)
+* Examples Collection
+  * [address.schema.json](./examples/address.schema.json)
+  * [calendar.schema.json](./examples/calendar.schema.json)
+  * [card.schema.json](./examples/card.schema.json)
+  * [geographical-location.schema.json](./examples/geographical-location.schema.json)
+* [Understanding JSON Schema](/understanding-json-schema/)
+* [JSON Schema reference documentation](https://www.learnjsonschema.com/)
+* [JSON Schema Glossary](./glossary.md) which attempts to explain conversational terminology
diff --git a/learn/miscellaneous-examples.md b/learn/miscellaneous-examples.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..946274fd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/learn/miscellaneous-examples.md
@@ -0,0 +1,159 @@
+---
+layout: page
+title: Miscellaneous Examples
+---
+
+## Basic
+
+This example provides a typical minimum you are likely to see in JSON Schema. It contains:
+
+* [`$id`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.8.2.1) keyword
+* [`$schema`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.8.1.1) keyword
+* [`title`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.9.1) annotation keyword
+* [`type`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.6.1.1) instance data model
+* [`properties`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.10.3.2.1) validation keyword
+* Three keys: `firstName`, `lastName` and `age` each with their own:
+  * [`description`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.9.1) annotation keyword.
+  * `type` instance data model (see above).
+* [`minimum`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.6.2.4) validation keyword on the `age` key.
+
+```json
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/person.schema.json",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "title": "Person",
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "firstName": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "description": "The person's first name."
+    },
+    "lastName": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "description": "The person's last name."
+    },
+    "age": {
+      "description": "Age in years which must be equal to or greater than zero.",
+      "type": "integer",
+      "minimum": 0
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+**Data**
+
+```json
+{
+  "firstName": "John",
+  "lastName": "Doe",
+  "age": 21
+}
+```
+
+## Describing geographical coordinates.
+
+This example introduces:
+
+* [`required`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.6.5.3) validation keyword
+* [`minimum`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.6.2.4) validation keyword
+* [`maximum`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.6.2.2) validation keyword
+
+```json
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/geographical-location.schema.json",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "title": "Longitude and Latitude Values",
+  "description": "A geographical coordinate.",
+  "required": [ "latitude", "longitude" ],
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "latitude": {
+      "type": "number",
+      "minimum": -90,
+      "maximum": 90
+    },
+    "longitude": {
+      "type": "number",
+      "minimum": -180,
+      "maximum": 180
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+**Data**
+
+```json
+{
+  "latitude": 48.858093,
+  "longitude": 2.294694
+}
+```
+
+## Arrays of things
+
+Arrays are fundamental structures in JSON -- here we demonstrate a couple of ways they can be described:
+
+* An array of string values.
+* An array of objects.
+
+We also introduce the following with this example:
+
+* [`$defs`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.8.2.4) keyword
+* [`$ref`](https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.8.2.3.1) keyword
+
+```json
+{
+  "$id": "https://example.com/arrays.schema.json",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "description": "A representation of a person, company, organization, or place",
+  "type": "object",
+  "properties": {
+    "fruits": {
+      "type": "array",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "vegetables": {
+      "type": "array",
+      "items": { "$ref": "#/$defs/veggie" }
+    }
+  },
+  "$defs": {
+    "veggie": {
+      "type": "object",
+      "required": [ "veggieName", "veggieLike" ],
+      "properties": {
+        "veggieName": {
+          "type": "string",
+          "description": "The name of the vegetable."
+        },
+        "veggieLike": {
+          "type": "boolean",
+          "description": "Do I like this vegetable?"
+        }
+      }
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+**Data**
+
+```json
+{
+  "fruits": [ "apple", "orange", "pear" ],
+  "vegetables": [
+    {
+      "veggieName": "potato",
+      "veggieLike": true
+    },
+    {
+      "veggieName": "broccoli",
+      "veggieLike": false
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
diff --git a/links b/links
deleted file mode 100644
index da815919..00000000
--- a/links
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,42 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/hyper-schema#",
-    "id": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/links#",
-    "title": "Link Description Object",
-    "type": "object",
-    "required": [ "href", "rel" ],
-    "properties": {
-        "href": {
-            "description": "a URI template, as defined by RFC 6570, with the addition of the $, ( and ) characters for pre-processing",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "rel": {
-            "description": "relation to the target resource of the link",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "title": {
-            "description": "a title for the link",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "targetSchema": {
-            "description": "JSON Schema describing the link target",
-            "$ref": "hyper-schema#"
-        },
-        "mediaType": {
-            "description": "media type (as defined by RFC 2046) describing the link target",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "method": {
-            "description": "method for requesting the target of the link (e.g. for HTTP this might be \"GET\" or \"DELETE\")",
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "encType": {
-            "description": "The media type in which to submit data along with the request",
-            "type": "string",
-            "default": "application/json"
-        },
-        "schema": {
-            "description": "Schema describing the data to submit along with the request",
-            "$ref": "hyper-schema#"
-        }
-    }
-}
diff --git a/links.md b/links.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..c67e9a3b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/links.md
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2019-09/links
+---
diff --git a/obsolete-implementations.md b/obsolete-implementations.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..e8de25fb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/obsolete-implementations.md
@@ -0,0 +1,205 @@
+---
+layout: page
+title: Obsolete Implementations
+permalink: /obsolete-implementations.html
+---
+
+_**NOTE:** Due to the long gap after draft-04, many projects that implemented that draft became inactive by the time draft-06 was published, or are looking for new contributors to move forward.  Such projects are listed here_
+
+_For implementations supporting (or actively working towards) draft-06 or later, see the main [Implementations](implementations) page._
+
+_Projects supporting only draft-03 or earlier are no longer listed._
+
+* TOC
+{:toc}
+
+Implementations below are written in different languages, and support part, or all, of the specification.
+
+Implementations are classified based on their functionality. When known, the license of the project is also mentioned.
+
+If you have updates to this list, make a pull request on the [GitHub repo](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io).
+
+Validators
+----------
+
+### Libraries
+
+<nav class="intra" markdown="1">
+
+{% assign validator-libraries = site.data.validator-libraries-obsolete | sort:"name" %}
+
+{% for language in validator-libraries %}
+-   [{{ language.name }}](#validator-{% if language.anchor-name %}{{ language.anchor-name }}{% else %}{{ language.name | downcase }}{% endif %})
+{% endfor %}
+
+</nav>
+
+<!-- To add a validator library, add it in _data/validator-libraries-obsolete.yml -->
+
+<ul>
+  {% for language in validator-libraries %}
+  <li>
+    {{language.name}} <a id="validator-{% if language.anchor-name %}{{ language.anchor-name }}{% else %}{{ language.name | downcase }}{% endif %}"></a>
+    <ul>
+    {% for implementation in language.implementations %}
+        <li>
+        <a href="{{implementation.url}}">{{ implementation.name }}</a>
+
+        {% if implementation.draft %}
+            <em>supports draft {{ implementation.draft | join: ", draft " }}</em>
+        {% endif %}
+
+        {{implementation.notes | markdownify | remove: '<p>' | remove: '</p>'}}
+        ({{ implementation.license | join: ", " }})
+
+        </li>
+    {% endfor %}
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  {% endfor %}
+</ul>
+
+
+### Command Line
+
+<!-- To add a validator library, add it in _data/validator-libraries-obsolete.yml -->
+
+{% for tool in site.data.validator-cli %}
+- [{{ tool.name }}]({{ tool.url }}) [draft {{ tool.draft | join: ", draft " }}] ({{ tool.license | join: ", " }}){% if tool.notes %}
+  - {{ tool.notes }} {% endif %}{% endfor %}
+
+
+### Benchmarks
+
+-   Java
+    -   [json-schema-validator-benchmark](https://github.com/networknt/json-schema-validator-perftest) - compares performance of three JSON schema validator implementations (only one of which supports draft-06+) in Java(Apache 2.0)
+
+<!-- -->
+
+-   JavaScript
+    -   [z-schema validator benchmark](https://github.com/zaggino/z-schema#benchmarks) - compares performance in the individual tests from JSON-Schema Test Suite (MIT)
+    -   [JSCK validator benchmark](https://github.com/pandastrike/jsck#benchmarks) - shows performance for JSON-schemas of different complexity (MIT)
+
+
+Hyper-Schema
+---------------------
+
+<nav class="intra" markdown="1">
+
+{% assign hyper-schema-libraries = site.data.hyper-libraries-obsolete | sort:"name" %}
+
+{% for language in hyper-schema-libraries %}
+-   [{{ language.name }}](#hyper-schema-{% if language.anchor-name %}{{ language.anchor-name }}{% else %}{{ language.name | downcase }}{% endif %})
+{% endfor %}
+
+</nav>
+
+<!-- To add a hyper-schema library, add it in _data/hyper-schema-libraries.yml -->
+
+<ul>
+  {% for language in hyper-schema-libraries %}
+  <li>
+    {{language.name}} <a id="hyper-schema-{% if language.anchor-name %}{{ language.anchor-name }}{% else %}{{ language.name | downcase }}{% endif %}"></a>
+    <ul>
+    {% for implementation in language.implementations %}
+        <li>
+        <a href="{{implementation.url}}">{{ implementation.name }}</a>
+
+        {% if implementation.draft %}
+            <em>supports draft {{ implementation.draft | join: ", draft " }}</em>
+        {% endif %}
+
+        {{implementation.notes | markdownify | remove: '<p>' | remove: '</p>'}}
+        ({{ implementation.license | join: ", " }})
+
+        </li>
+    {% endfor %}
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  {% endfor %}
+</ul>
+
+Schema Generators
+-----------------
+
+-   Python
+    -   [JSL](https://github.com/aromanovich/jsl) (BSD) - a Python DSL for defining JSON Schemas
+-   JavaScript
+    -   [json-schema-generator](https://github.com/krg7880/json-schema-generator) (MIT) - Node.js library usable both as a CLI util and as a Node module
+-   TypeScript
+    -   [Typson](https://github.com/lbovet/typson) (Apache 2.0)
+-   Visual Studio
+    -   [JSON Schema Generator](https://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/b4515ef8-a518-41ca-b48c-bb1fd4e6faf7) - free extension
+-   Sparx Enterprise Architect
+    -   [API-Add-In](https://github.com/bayeslife/api-add-in) - Sparx EA extension for exporting JSON Schema from UML models
+
+Generators from schemas
+-----------------------
+
+#### Data from schemas
+
+-   JavaScript
+    -   [json-schema-generator](https://github.com/json-schema-faker) (MIT) - JSON-Schema + fake data generators
+
+Data Parsing and Code Generation
+--------------------------------
+
+-   Delphi
+    - [DJsonSchema](https://github.com/schlothauer-wauer/DJsonSchema) (MIT) - JSON Schema reader and code generator for Delphi.
+-   Haskell
+    -   [aeson-schema](https://github.com/Fuuzetsu/aeson-schema) (MIT) - generates code for a parser
+-   Ruby
+    -   [autoparse](https://github.com/google/autoparse) (ASL 2.0)
+-   Scala
+    -   [json-schema-codegen](https://github.com/VoxSupplyChain/json-schema-codegen) - Tool and SBT plugin for generating Scala, TypeScript models and parsers from Json-Schema definitions, *supports draft 4* (Apache 2.0)
+    -   [Argus](https://github.com/aishfenton/argus) (MIT) - Macros for building models from JSON Schemas
+-   Swift
+    -   [Bric-à-brac](https://github.com/glimpseio/BricBrac) (MIT) - generates idiomatic swift structs and parser/serializer from JSON schemas
+-   Golang
+    -  [gojsonschema](https://github.com/andy-zhangtao/gojsonschema)(Apache 2.0) - golang package for generating golang struct *support for Draft 4*. [Demo](http://json.golang.chinazt.cc)
+
+UI Generation
+-------------
+
+_TODO: Sort by draft support._
+
+Various levels of support for UI generation primarily from the validation vocabulary or combined with UI specific definition.
+
+-   JavaScript
+    -   [JSON Editor](https://github.com/jdorn/json-editor) (MIT)
+    -   [JSONForms](https://jsonforms.io) (EclipseSource) (MIT)
+    -   [Jsonary](https://jsonary.com/) (MIT)
+    -   [Metawidget](https://metawidget.org/) (LGPL)
+    -   [pure-form webcomponent](https://github.com/john-doherty/pure-form) (MIT)
+
+Editors
+-------
+
+-   [Liquid XML Studio 2016](https://www.liquid-technologies.com/json-schema-editor) - *Graphical JSON schema editor for draft 4, context sensitive intellisense for JSON documents.*
+-   [ReSharper 2016.1](https://www.jetbrains.com/resharper/) - *code completion, inspections and quick fixes for JSON schema in Visual Studio 2010 - 2015, including support for JSON Path and regular expressions for schema editing. Support for draft-4*
+-   [Visual Studio 2013](http://www.visualstudio.com/) - *Auto-completion and tooltips based on JSON schema draft 3 and draft 4*
+-   [JSON Schema Editor](https://json-schema-editor.tangramjs.com) - *An intuitive editor for JSON schema online*
+-   [JSON Editor](https://json-editor.tangramjs.com) - *An online, schema-aware editor for JSON document*
+
+Compatibility
+-------------
+
+-   JavaScript
+    -   [JSON Schema Compatibility](https://github.com/geraintluff/json-schema-compatability) - *converts draft 3 to draft 4* (Public Domain)
+
+
+Documentation generation
+------------------------
+
+-   JavaScript
+    -   [Matic](https://github.com/mattyod/matic) (MIT)
+    -   [Docson](https://github.com/lbovet/docson) (Apache 2.0)
+    -   [doca](https://github.com/cloudflare/doca/) (BSD) See [@cloudflare/doca](https://github.com/cloudflare/json-schema-tools/tree/master/workspaces/doca) for draft-06+ support
+    -   [prmd](https://github.com/interagent/prmd) (MIT)
+
+Other
+-----
+
+-   JavaScript
+    -   [Dojo](https://www.dojotoolkit.org/) (AFL or BSD) - supports some aspects of JSON Schema
+    -   [JSON Schema Random](https://github.com/andreineculau/json-schema-random) (Apache 2.0)
diff --git a/schema b/schema
deleted file mode 100644
index 85eb502a..00000000
--- a/schema
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,150 +0,0 @@
-{
-    "id": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
-    "description": "Core schema meta-schema",
-    "definitions": {
-        "schemaArray": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "minItems": 1,
-            "items": { "$ref": "#" }
-        },
-        "positiveInteger": {
-            "type": "integer",
-            "minimum": 0
-        },
-        "positiveIntegerDefault0": {
-            "allOf": [ { "$ref": "#/definitions/positiveInteger" }, { "default": 0 } ]
-        },
-        "simpleTypes": {
-            "enum": [ "array", "boolean", "integer", "null", "number", "object", "string" ]
-        },
-        "stringArray": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "items": { "type": "string" },
-            "minItems": 1,
-            "uniqueItems": true
-        }
-    },
-    "type": "object",
-    "properties": {
-        "id": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "uri"
-        },
-        "$schema": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "uri"
-        },
-        "title": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "description": {
-            "type": "string"
-        },
-        "default": {},
-        "multipleOf": {
-            "type": "number",
-            "minimum": 0,
-            "exclusiveMinimum": true
-        },
-        "maximum": {
-            "type": "number"
-        },
-        "exclusiveMaximum": {
-            "type": "boolean",
-            "default": false
-        },
-        "minimum": {
-            "type": "number"
-        },
-        "exclusiveMinimum": {
-            "type": "boolean",
-            "default": false
-        },
-        "maxLength": { "$ref": "#/definitions/positiveInteger" },
-        "minLength": { "$ref": "#/definitions/positiveIntegerDefault0" },
-        "pattern": {
-            "type": "string",
-            "format": "regex"
-        },
-        "additionalItems": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                { "type": "boolean" },
-                { "$ref": "#" }
-            ],
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "items": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                { "$ref": "#" },
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" }
-            ],
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "maxItems": { "$ref": "#/definitions/positiveInteger" },
-        "minItems": { "$ref": "#/definitions/positiveIntegerDefault0" },
-        "uniqueItems": {
-            "type": "boolean",
-            "default": false
-        },
-        "maxProperties": { "$ref": "#/definitions/positiveInteger" },
-        "minProperties": { "$ref": "#/definitions/positiveIntegerDefault0" },
-        "required": { "$ref": "#/definitions/stringArray" },
-        "additionalProperties": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                { "type": "boolean" },
-                { "$ref": "#" }
-            ],
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "definitions": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" },
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "properties": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" },
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "patternProperties": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": { "$ref": "#" },
-            "default": {}
-        },
-        "dependencies": {
-            "type": "object",
-            "additionalProperties": {
-                "anyOf": [
-                    { "$ref": "#" },
-                    { "$ref": "#/definitions/stringArray" }
-                ]
-            }
-        },
-        "enum": {
-            "type": "array",
-            "minItems": 1,
-            "uniqueItems": true
-        },
-        "type": {
-            "anyOf": [
-                { "$ref": "#/definitions/simpleTypes" },
-                {
-                    "type": "array",
-                    "items": { "$ref": "#/definitions/simpleTypes" },
-                    "minItems": 1,
-                    "uniqueItems": true
-                }
-            ]
-        },
-        "allOf": { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" },
-        "anyOf": { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" },
-        "oneOf": { "$ref": "#/definitions/schemaArray" },
-        "not": { "$ref": "#" }
-    },
-    "dependencies": {
-        "exclusiveMaximum": [ "maximum" ],
-        "exclusiveMinimum": [ "minimum" ]
-    },
-    "default": {}
-}
diff --git a/schema.md b/schema.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..056a8079
--- /dev/null
+++ b/schema.md
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+---
+redirect_to: /draft/2020-12/schema
+---
diff --git a/shared.html b/shared.html
deleted file mode 100644
index cc51cb05..00000000
--- a/shared.html
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,58 +0,0 @@
-<html>
-<head>
-<title>Common JSON Schema Definitions</title>
-</head>
-<body>
-
-<p>The following are a list of some of the future common JSON Schema definitions. Included is the URL to reference and download the schema and object type definition. These shared definitions can be referenced in JSON Schemas and SMDs using JSON referencing (<a href="http://www.json.com/2007/10/19/json-referencing-proposal-and-library/">here is a suggested method)</a>.<br></p>
-
-<ul>
-<li>card - A representation of a person, company, organization, or place as defined at: <a href="http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard">http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard</a><br></li>
-
-<ul>
-<li>schema - <a href="http://json-schema.org/card">http://json-schema.org/card</a></li>
-
-<li>object type definition - <a href="http://json-schema.org/card.properties">http://json-schema.org/card.properties</a>&nbsp;</li>
-</ul>
-
-<li>address - A street address, as defined at: http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard<br></li>
-
-<ul>
-<li>schema - <a href="http://json-schema.org/address">http://json-schema.org/address</a></li>
-
-<li>object type definition - <a href="http://json-schema.org/address.properties">http://json-schema.org/address.properties</a></li>
-</ul>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-<li>geo - A geographic coordinate<br></li>
-
-<ul>
-<li>schema - <a href="http://json-schema.org/geo">http://json-schema.org/geo</a></li>
-
-<li>object type definition - <a href="http://json-schema.org/geo.properties">http://json-schema.org/geo.properties</a></li>
-</ul>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-<li>schema - A JSON Schema<br></li>
-
-<ul>
-<li>schema - <a href="http://json-schema.org/schema">http://json-schema.org/schema</a></li>
-
-<li>object type definition - <a href="http://json-schema.org/schema.properties">http://json-schema.org/schema.properties</a></li>
-</ul>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-<li>calendar - A representation of an event as defined at: <a href="http://microformats.org/wiki/hcalendar">http://microformats.org/wiki/hcalendar</a></li>
-
-<ul>
-<li>schema - <a href="http://json-schema.org/calendar">http://json-schema.org/calendar</a></li>
-
-<li>object type definition - <a href="http://json-schema.org/calendar.properties">http://json-schema.org/calendar.properties</a><br></li>
-</ul>
-</ul>
-
-</body>
-</html>
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/slack.md b/slack.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..cc97f5ed
--- /dev/null
+++ b/slack.md
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+---
+redirect_to: https://join.slack.com/t/json-schema/shared_invite/zt-1ywpdj4yd-bXiBLjYEbKWUjzon0qiY9Q
+---
diff --git a/specification-links.md b/specification-links.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..155bfcca
--- /dev/null
+++ b/specification-links.md
@@ -0,0 +1,443 @@
+---
+title: Specification Links
+layout: page
+---
+
+<!-- Links on this page should be immutable - none of them should go to `/latest`, etc. -->
+
+You can find the latest released draft on the [Specification](/specification.html) page.  Older drafts are expired, but may be of historical interest.  The complex numbering and naming system for drafts and meta-schemas is fully explained here as well.
+
+* TOC
+{:toc}
+
+## Understanding draft names and numbers
+
+IETF Internet-Drafts (I-Ds) are named with the editor's name and a sequential number which resets with each new editor.  Meta-schemas were more-or-less numbered sequentially up through Draft 7, but the increasingly confusing mismatch between "draft-nn" versions on the meta-schemas and the IETF documents has made that unsustainable.  The practice of fixing meta-schema bugs in place to preserve the sequential numbering has also been controversial.
+
+Starting with what had been called "Draft 8" while it was being written, meta-schemas are identified by the year and month of publication.  This allows for bug fixes to be published with new URIs (as long as it is not more than once a month).
+
+### Table of All Versions of Everything
+
+The specification links here go to the IETF-hosted documents.
+
+For links to the somewhat more readably formatted versions on this web site, and for links to the various meta-schemas and other supplemental documents, see the the following sections.
+
+<table>
+  <tr>
+    <th>IETF identifiers</th>
+    <th>meta&#8209;schema identifiers</th>
+    <th>common name</th>
+    <th>notes</th>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-00">
+        draft&#8209;zyp&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;00
+      </a></small></tt></td>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small>draft&#8209;00</small></tt></td>
+    <td>
+      Draft 0
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      <small>due to a markup error, this draft was replaced by
+      <tt><small>draft&#8209;01</small></tt> on the same day</small>
+    </td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-01">
+        draft&#8209;zyp&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;01
+      </a></small></tt></td>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small>draft&#8209;01</small></tt>
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      Draft 1
+    </td>
+    <td></td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-02">
+        draft&#8209;zyp&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;02
+      </a></small></tt></td>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small>draft&#8209;02</small></tt>
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      Draft 2
+    </td>
+    <td></td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-03">
+        draft&#8209;zyp&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;03
+      </a></small></tt>
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small>draft&#8209;03</small></tt>
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      Draft 3
+    </td>
+    <td></td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-04">
+        draft&#8209;zyp&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;04
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fge-json-schema-validation-00">
+        draft&#8209;fge&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;validation&#8209;00
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-luff-json-hyper-schema-00">
+        draft&#8209;luff&#8209;json&#8209;hyper&#8209;schema&#8209;00
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pbryan-zyp-json-ref-03">
+        draft&#8209;pbryan&#8209;zyp&#8209;json&#8209;ref&#8209;03
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+    </td>
+    <td rowspan="2">
+      <tt><small>draft&#8209;04</small></tt>
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      Draft 4
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      <small>
+      <tt><small>json&#8209;ref</small></tt> drafts
+      <tt><small>00&#8209;02</small></tt> were all published between
+      <tt><small>json&#8209;schema&#8209;03</small></tt> and
+      <tt><small>json&#8209;schema&#8209;04</small></tt>
+      </small>
+    </td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-00">
+        draft&#8209;wright&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;00
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-validation-00">
+        draft&#8209;wright&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;validation&#8209;00
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-00">
+        draft&#8209;wright&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;hyperschema&#8209;00
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      Draft 5
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      <small>meta&#8209;schemas not changed, so
+      "<tt><small>draft&#8209;05</small></tt>" is really
+      <tt><small>draft&#8209;04</small></tt>
+      <br />
+      Milestone: <a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/milestone/1">draft-5 (2016-10-13)</a></small>
+    </td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-01">
+        draft&#8209;wright&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;01
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-validation-01">
+        draft&#8209;wright&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;validation&#8209;01
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-01">
+        draft&#8209;wright&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;hyperschema&#8209;01
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small>draft&#8209;06</small></tt>
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      Draft 6
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      <small>Milestones:
+      <a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/milestone/2">draft-6</a>,
+      <a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/milestone/4">Meta-schema draft-06</a>
+      </small>
+    </td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-00">
+        draft&#8209;handrews&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;00
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-00">
+        draft&#8209;handrews&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;validation&#8209;00
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-00">
+        draft&#8209;handrews&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;hyperschema&#8209;00
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-00">
+        draft&#8209;handrews&#8209;relative&#8209;json&#8209;pointer&#8209;00
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+    </td>
+    <td rowspan="3">
+      <tt><small>draft&#8209;07</small></tt>
+    </td>
+    <td rowspan="3">
+      Draft 7
+    </td>
+    <td rowspan="3">
+      <small>
+      the&nbsp;<tt><small>draft&#8209;handrews&#8209;*&#8209;01</small></tt> drafts were
+      bugfixes and/or clarifications without meta&#8209;schema or functional changes
+      <br />
+      Milestone:
+      <a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/milestone/5">draft-07</a>
+      </small>
+    </td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr><!-- This empty row keeps the row colors aligned properlty for the two "draft-07" versions --></tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-01">
+              draft&#8209;handrews&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;01
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01">
+              draft&#8209;handrews&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;validation&#8209;01
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-01">
+          draft&#8209;handrews&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;hyperschema&#8209;01
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01">
+          draft&#8209;handrews&#8209;relative&#8209;json&#8209;pointer&#8209;01
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+    </td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-02">
+        draft&#8209;handrews&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;02
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-02">
+        draft&#8209;handrews&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;validation&#8209;02
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-02">
+        draft&#8209;handrews&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;hyperschema&#8209;02
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-02">
+        draft&#8209;handrews&#8209;relative&#8209;json&#8209;pointer&#8209;02
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small>2019&#8209;09</small></tt>
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      Draft 2019-09
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      <small>Milestone:
+      <a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/milestone/6">draft-08</a>
+      </small>
+    </td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-00">
+        draft&#8209;bhutton&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;00
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-00">
+        draft&#8209;bhutton&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;validation&#8209;00
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-relative-json-pointer-00">
+        draft&#8209;bhutton&#8209;relative&#8209;json&#8209;pointer&#8209;00
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+    </td>
+    <td rowspan="3">
+      <tt><small>2020&#8209;12</small></tt>
+    </td>
+    <td rowspan="3">
+      Draft 2020-12
+    </td>
+    <td rowspan="3">
+      <small>
+      Milestone:
+      <a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/milestone/8">draft-08-patch-1</a>
+      <br/>
+      Changes and fixes as a result of discussion with the OpenAPI community. (Includes breaking changes.)
+      </small>
+    </td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr><!-- This empty row keeps the row colors aligned properlty for the two "2020-12" versions --></tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-01">
+        draft&#8209;bhutton&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;01
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <tt><small><a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-01">
+        draft&#8209;bhutton&#8209;json&#8209;schema&#8209;validation&#8209;01
+      </a></small></tt><br>
+      <br/>
+    </td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>
+      <small><i>(TBD)</i></small>
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      <small><i>(TBD)</i></small>
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      2022-NN
+    </td>
+    <td>
+      <small>Milestone:
+      <a href="https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/milestone/7">2022-NN</a>
+      </small>
+    </td>
+  </tr>
+
+</table>
+
+## Published Drafts
+
+### 2020-12
+
+- Specifications
+    - Core: [draft-bhutton-json-schema-01](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-01) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-01#appendix-G))
+    - Validation: [draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-01](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-01) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-01#appendix-C))
+    - Relative JSON Pointer: [draft-bhutton-relative-json-pointer-00](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-relative-json-pointer-00) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-relative-json-pointer-00#appendix-A))
+- General use meta-schemas
+    - [JSON Schema meta-schema](draft/2020-12/schema)
+    - [JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema](draft/2020-12/hyper-schema) (2019-09 Hyper-Schema with 2020-12 Validation)
+    - [JSON Hyper-Schema Link Description Object meta-schema](draft/2020-12/links)
+- Individual vocabulary meta-schemas
+  - [Core Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/core)
+  - [Applicator Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/applicator)
+  - [Validation Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/validation)
+  - [Unevaluated Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/unevaluated)
+  - [Format Annotation Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/format-annotation)
+  - [Format Assertion Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/format-assertion)
+  - [Content Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/content)
+  - [Meta-Data Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/meta-data)
+- Output schemas
+    - [JSON Schema recommended output schema](draft/2020-12/output/schema)
+- Output examples
+    - [JSON Schema verbose output example](draft/2020-12/output/verbose-example)
+
+#### Obsolete Draft 2020-12 Documents
+
+_These were updated without changing functionality or meta-schemas due to a few errors and unclear sections._
+
+- Core: [draft-bhutton-json-schema-00](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-00) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-00#appendix-G))
+- Validation: [draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-00](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-00) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-00#appendix-C))
+
+### Draft 2019-09 (formerly known as Draft 8)
+
+_**NOTE:** All meta-schema URIs now use `https://`.  While currently also available over plain HTTP due to the limitations of GitHub pages and the need to keep prior drafts available over HTTP, only the HTTPS URIs should be used._
+
+- Specifications
+    - Core: [draft-handrews-json-schema-02](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-02) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-02#appendix-G))
+    - Validation: [draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-02](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-02) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-02#appendix-C))
+    - Hyper-Schema: [draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-02](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-02) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-02#appendix-B))
+    - Relative JSON Pointer: [draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-02](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-02) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-02#appendix-A))
+- General use meta-schemas
+    - [JSON Schema meta-schema](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/schema)
+    - [JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/hyper-schema)
+    - [JSON Hyper-Schema Link Description Object meta-schema](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/links)
+- Individual vocabulary meta-schemas
+    - [Core Vocabulary meta-schema](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/core)
+    - [Applicator Vocabulary meta-schema](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/applicator)
+    - [Validation Vocabulary meta-schema](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/validation)
+    - [Format Vocabulary meta-schema](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/format)
+    - [Content Vocabulary meta-schema](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/content)
+    - [Meta-Data Vocabulary meta-schema](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/meta-data)
+    - [Hyper-Schema Vocabulary meta-schema](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/meta/hyper-schema)
+- Output schemas
+    - [JSON Schema recommended output schema](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/output/schema)
+    - [JSON Hyper-Schema recommended output schema](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/output/hyper-schema)
+- Output examples
+    - [JSON Schema verbose output example](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/output/verbose-example)
+
+### Draft 7
+
+- Core: [draft-handrews-json-schema-01](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-01) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-01#appendix-B))
+- Validation: [draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01#appendix-B))
+- Hyper-Schema: [draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-01](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-01) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-01#appendix-B))
+- [JSON Schema meta-schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema)
+- [JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema)
+- [JSON Hyper-Schema Link Description Object meta-schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-07/links)
+- [JSON Hyper-Schema recommended output schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-07/hyper-schema-output)
+- Relative JSON Pointer: [draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-01#appendix-B))
+
+#### Obsolete Draft 7 Documents
+
+_These were updated without changing functionality or meta-schemas due to a few errors and unclear sections._
+
+- Core: [draft-handrews-json-schema-00](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-00) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-00#appendix-B))
+- Validation: [draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-00](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-00) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-00#appendix-B))
+- Hyper-Schema: [draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-00](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-00) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-hyperschema-00#appendix-B))
+- Relative JSON Pointer: [draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-00](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-00) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-relative-json-pointer-00#appendix-B))
+
+### Draft 6
+
+- Core: [draft-wright-json-schema-01](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-01) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-01#appendix-B))
+- Validation: [draft-wright-json-schema-validation-01](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-validation-01) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-validation-01#appendix-B)) ([schema migration FAQ](draft-06/json-schema-migration-faq.html))
+- Hyper-Schema: [draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-01](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-01) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-01#appendix-B)) ([hyper-schema migration FAQ](draft-06/json-hyper-schema-migration-faq.html))
+- [JSON Schema meta-schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-06/schema)
+- [JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-06/hyper-schema)
+
+### Draft 5
+
+ - Core: [draft-wright-json-schema-00](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-00) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-00#appendix-B))
+ - Validation: [draft-wright-json-schema-validation-00](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-validation-00) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-validation-00#appendix-B))
+ - Hyper-Schema: [draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-00](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-00) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-hyperschema-00#appendix-B))
+ - Draft 5 was primarily a cleanup of Draft 4 and continued to use the Draft 4 meta-schemas.
+
+### Draft 4
+
+ - Core: [draft-zyp-json-schema-04](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-04) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-04#appendix-A))
+ - Validation: [draft-fge-json-schema-validation-00](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fge-json-schema-validation-00) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fge-json-schema-validation-00#appendix-A))
+ - Hyper-Schema: [draft-luff-json-hyper-schema-00](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-luff-json-hyper-schema-00) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-luff-json-hyper-schema-00#appendix-A))
+ - JSON Reference: [draft-pbryan-zyp-json-ref-03](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pbryan-zyp-json-ref-03) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pbryan-zyp-json-ref-03#appendix-A))
+ * [JSON Schema meta-schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema)
+ * [JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-04/hyper-schema)
+
+### Draft 3
+
+ - Complete Specification: [draft-zyp-json-schema-03](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-03) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-03#appendix-A))
+* [JSON Schema meta-schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-03/schema)
+* [JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-03/hyper-schema)
+
+### Draft 2
+
+ - Complete Specification: [draft-zyp-json-schema-02](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-02) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-02#appendix-A))
+* [JSON Schema meta-schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-02/schema)
+* [JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-02/hyper-schema)
+
+### Draft 1
+
+ - Complete Specification: [draft-zyp-json-schema-01](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-01) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-01#appendix-A))
+* [JSON Schema meta-schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-01/schema)
+* [JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-01/hyper-schema)
+
+### Draft 0
+
+_Note that Draft 0 erroneously claimed to update another RFC, and was replaced the same day by Draft 1.  It is included here for completeness only._
+
+ - Specification: [draft-zyp-json-schema-00](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-00) ([changes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-00#appendix-A))
+* [JSON Schema meta-schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-00/schema)
+* [JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema](http://json-schema.org/draft-00/hyper-schema)
+
+## Latest Snapshot (work in progress)
+
+The next unreleased draft is a work in progress.  You can [give feedback and get involved on GitHub](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec).
+
+The specification links here link to the XML and JSON sources.  We do not provide rendered [work-in-progress](work-in-progress) drafts except near the very end of a publication cycle, during the final review period.
+
+ - Core: [jsonschema-core.xml](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/blob/master/jsonschema-core.xml)
+ - Validation: [jsonschema-validation.xml](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/blob/master/jsonschema-validation.xml)
+ - Hyper-Schema: [jsonschema-hyperschema.xml](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/blob/master/jsonschema-hyperschema.xml)
+- Relative JSON Pointer: [relative-json-pointer.xml](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/blob/master/relative-json-pointer.xml)
+- [JSON Schema meta-schema](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/blob/master/schema.json)
+- [JSON Hyper-Schema meta-schema](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/blob/master/hyper-schema.json)
+- [JSON Hyper-Schema Link Description Object meta-schema](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/blob/master/links.json)
+- [JSON Schema Vocabulary meta-schemas](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/blob/master/meta/)
+- [JSON Schema Output schemas and examples](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/blob/master/output/)
+
diff --git a/specification.md b/specification.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..742d633c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/specification.md
@@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
+---
+layout: page
+redirect_from: "/documentation.html"
+permalink: /specification.html
+title: Specification
+---
+
+The current version is *2020-12*!
+The previous version was 2019-09.
+
+Specification documents
+-----------------------
+
+See also the release notes / change log (Work in progress).
+
+The specification is split into two parts, Core and Validation. We also publish
+the Relative JSON Pointers spec although it's not currently used by Core or
+Validation in any significant way.
+
+|--------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------|
+| [JSON Schema Core](draft/2020-12/json-schema-core.html)             | defines the basic foundation of JSON Schema           |
+| [JSON Schema Validation](draft/2020-12/json-schema-validation.html) | defines the validation keywords of JSON Schema        |
+| [Relative JSON Pointers](draft/2020-12/relative-json-pointer.html)  | extends the JSON Pointer syntax for relative pointers |
+
+They are also available on the IETF main site:
+* [draft-bhutton-json-schema-01 (core)](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-01)
+* [draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-01](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-01)
+* [draft-bhutton-relative-json-pointer-00](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-relative-json-pointer-00)
+
+Meta-schemas
+------------
+
+The meta-schemas are schemas against which other schemas can be validated. It is self-descriptive: the JSON Schema meta-schema validates itself.
+
+The latest meta-schema is **2020-12**.  For an explanation of the change to date-based identifiers, see the [Specification Links](specification-links.html) page.
+
+_If you are accessing these JSON document links **from a web browser**, you will need to **save the file** then open it as a JSON document.  This is due to limitations with GitHub Pages._
+
+## General-purpose meta-schema
+
+Please note, additional vocabulary specific schema files are needed to fully construct and use the Core/Validation Dialect meta-schema.
+
+|--------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------|
+| [Core/Validation Dialect meta-schema](draft/2020-12/schema)  | Used for schemas written for pure validation.              |
+| [Hyper-Schema Dialect meta-schema](draft/2020-12/hyper-schema) | Used for schemas written for validation (2020-12) and hyper-linking (2019-09).|
+| [Recommended Output meta-schema](draft/2020-12/output/schema)| Recommended output structure of the application process.   |
+
+## Single-vocabulary meta-schemas
+
+These are relevant primarily to people who want to write their own meta-schemas that build on specific parts of the existing specification.
+
+- [Core Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/core)
+- [Applicator Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/applicator)
+- [Validation Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/validation)
+- [Unevaluated Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/unevaluated)
+- [Format Annotation Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/format-annotation)
+- [Format Assertion Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/format-assertion)
+- [Content Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/content)
+- [Meta-Data Vocabulary meta-schema](draft/2020-12/meta/meta-data)
+
+## Output schemas and examples
+- [JSON Schema recommended output schema](draft/2020-12/output/schema)
+- [JSON Schema verbose output example](draft/2020-12/output/verbose-example)
+
+Migrating from older drafts
+-------------
+
+The release notes discuss the changes impacting users and implementers:
+
+- JSON Schema Core and Validation
+    - [Draft 2019-09 to Draft 2020-12](draft/2020-12/release-notes.html)
+    - [Draft-07 to Draft 2019-09](draft/2019-09/release-notes.html)
+    - [Draft-06 to Draft-07](draft-07/json-schema-release-notes.html)
+    - [Draft-04 to Draft-06](draft-06/json-schema-release-notes.html)
+- JSON Hyper-Schema
+    - There was no JSON Hyper-Schema draft for 2020-12 releases.
+    - [Draft-07 to 2019-09](draft/2019-09/release-notes.html#hyper-schema-vocabulary)
+    - [Draft-04 to Draft-07](draft-07/json-hyper-schema-release-notes.html)
+    - [Draft-04 to Draft-06](draft-06/json-hyper-schema-release-notes.html)
+
+Older drafts
+------------
+
+Please see [Specification Links](specification-links.md) for older drafts and the latest unreleased version of the specification.
diff --git a/work-in-progress/index.md b/work-in-progress/index.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..ba28d738
--- /dev/null
+++ b/work-in-progress/index.md
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+---
+layout: page
+title: Work In Progress Feedback
+permalink: /work-in-progress
+---
+
+* TOC
+{:toc}
+
+We're working towards draft 2022-NN.
+
+See the [GitHub repository](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec) for ongoing spec work.