Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add "memento" to Recommended Replacement in Deprecation Header spec #150

Open
hvdsomp opened this issue Dec 11, 2020 · 4 comments
Open

Add "memento" to Recommended Replacement in Deprecation Header spec #150

hvdsomp opened this issue Dec 11, 2020 · 4 comments

Comments

@hvdsomp
Copy link
Collaborator

hvdsomp commented Dec 11, 2020

It would be appropriate to add the memento link relation type defined in RFC7089 to the Recommended Replacement section of the Deprecation Header spec. A link with the memento link relation type points at an archived/frozen copy of the resource and expresses the archival date using the datetime attribute, see https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7089#section-2.2.4.

@dret
Copy link
Owner

dret commented Dec 12, 2020

not sure i fully agree, but that's certainly a matter of perspective and interpretation. for our main use cases, i'd like to be linked to a non-deprecated "version" of the resource, and for most APIs that would mean some still-functional version of the API that's serving it. being linked to an archived copy may sometimes be interesting, but that seems marginal to me (and of course could always can be done regardless of what we do or do not informally recommend).

@phonedude
Copy link

It would seem to me that the Sunset: header would combine nicely with Link: rel="memento" ...
If "this" URI will become unresponsive in the future, and the server has a hint as to where an archived copy could be found, why would it not provide this info?

@dret
Copy link
Owner

dret commented Dec 20, 2020 via email

@phonedude
Copy link

Section 5 is all about how Deprecation can be combined with Sunset. If you think the "memento" link relation doesn't belong in section 4 (with "successor-version", "latest-version", and "alternate"), a prescriptive example in section 5 would be helpful to the reader.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants