generated: '2026-09-14'
method: searched
source: >-
  https://apisjson.org/format/apisjson_0.23.txt (sections 3.1-3.9) plus first-party
  schema https://raw.githubusercontent.com/apis-json/api-json/develop/spec/schema_0.23.yml,
  cross-checked against the IANA link-relation and media-type registries
provider: APIs.json
providerId: apis-json
description: >-
  Standards conformance of the APIs.json specification itself, read from the contract
  (the 0.23 draft and its JSON Schema) rather than from marketing prose. APIs.json is a
  document format, so the standards that apply to it are format and registry standards,
  not API runtime standards. Several registrations the draft describes are stated as
  INTENT and have not happened — those are recorded as conforms: false with the registry
  lookup that establishes it, because the difference is what decides whether a generic
  client can negotiate the format.
conformance:
  - id: json-schema-2020-12
    name: JSON Schema draft 2020-12
    conforms: true
    evidence: >-
      spec/schema_0.23.yml declares
      "$schema": https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema. Every published version
      from 0.14 forward ships a machine-readable schema of the same version number, and
      0.23 generates the specification's reserved-word listing from that schema so the
      two are verified to agree.
    source: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/apis-json/api-json/develop/spec/schema_0.23.yml
  - id: json
    name: JSON (RFC 8259)
    conforms: true
    evidence: >-
      Section 3.3.1 defines the formal syntax as JSON; the format's name is literally
      the file name.
    source: https://apisjson.org/format/apisjson_0.23.txt
  - id: yaml
    name: YAML 1.2 as an alternate serialization
    conforms: true
    evidence: >-
      Section 3.3.2 (Other Formats) admits YAML alongside JSON, and the specification
      publishes its own index as YAML at https://apisjson.org/apis.yml (HTTP 200,
      Content-Type text/yaml). The schema files are themselves YAML.
    source: https://apisjson.org/apis.yml
  - id: openapi
    name: OpenAPI as a referenced contract type
    conforms: true
    evidence: >-
      OpenAPI is a reserved property type; APIs.json wraps around a contract rather than
      replacing one, and the reserved-word listing carries OpenAPI, AsyncAPI, GraphQL,
      Protobuf, ALPS, Arazzo, JSONSchema and JSONStructure as sibling contract types.
    source: https://apisjson.org/properties/
  - id: iana-media-type-registration
    name: IANA media type registration (RFC 6838 / RFC 4288)
    conforms: false
    evidence: >-
      Section 3.5 states only an INTENT — "if there is sufficient traction, the media
      type application/apis+json or application/x-yaml will be submitted to IANA".
      The IANA media-types registry has no entry for application/apis+json
      (https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/apis+json returns 404,
      probed 2026-09-14). Consequence: there is no negotiable content type, and the
      provider's own index is served as the generic text/yaml.
    source: https://apisjson.org/format/apisjson_0.23.txt
  - id: iana-link-relation-registration
    name: IANA link relation registration (RFC 8288 / RFC 5988)
    conforms: false
    evidence: >-
      Section 3.8 defines in-page discovery via <link rel="api" ...> and states the
      intent to register the "api" relation "if there is sufficient traction". The IANA
      link-relations registry contains api-catalog (RFC 9727) but no "api" relation
      (probed 2026-09-14). An unregistered relation still works but is not
      interoperable by registry lookup.
    source: https://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xml
  - id: rfc8615-well-known-uri
    name: Well-Known URI registration (RFC 8615)
    conforms: false
    evidence: >-
      Section 3.7 states the intent to register "/apis.json" or "/apis.yaml" as a
      well-known location. It is not registered, and the specification's own site does
      not serve /.well-known/apis.json (404, probed 2026-09-14). The defined access
      method in section 3.1 remains a root-relative /apis.json, not a /.well-known/ path.
    source: well-known/apis-json-well-known.yml
  - id: rfc9727-api-catalog
    name: RFC 9727 api-catalog well-known URI
    conforms: false
    evidence: >-
      APIs.json is adjacent to, and complementary with, RFC 9727 — which registers
      /.well-known/api-catalog and a linkset of API descriptions — but the 0.23 draft
      makes no normative reference to RFC 9727, and APICatalog appears only as a
      reserved property TYPE promoted in 0.22. The provider tags RFC 9727 on its own
      index at https://apisjson.org/apis.yml; the RFC 9727 surface itself is served by
      apis.io (https://apis.apis.io/.well-known/api-catalog), a separate property.
    source: https://apisjson.org/apis.yml
  - id: rfc9457-problem-details
    name: RFC 9457 Problem Details
    conforms: false
    evidence: >-
      Not applicable rather than failed — the specification defines a document format
      and no HTTP error surface, so there is no error envelope to shape.
    applicable: false
  - id: oauth2
    name: OAuth 2.0
    conforms: false
    evidence: >-
      Not applicable. APIs.json defines no authenticated surface of its own; it carries
      Authentication, OAuthScopes, OpenIDConnect and APIKeys as reserved property types
      that point at the described API's auth, not its own.
    applicable: false
domain_standard:
  market: api-discovery-and-cataloging
  declares_domain_standard: true
  standard: APIs.json
  note: >-
    This record is the standard's own repository — APIs.json is the domain standard for
    machine-readable API discovery rather than a consumer of one. The nearest peer
    standards in the same market are RFC 9727 (api-catalog) and OpenAPI; the
    relationship to each is recorded above.
certifications: []
compliance_programs: []
compliance_note: >-
  No certification or compliance program is published, and none would be expected — the
  entity is an MIT-licensed open specification, not an operating service. No Compliance
  pointer is emitted.