Re: [apps-discuss] HTTP header field for "URI lifetime"

[Erik Wilde <[e-mail]>]

hello graham.

On 2015-05-20 11:30, Graham Klyne wrote:
> Following the subsequent couple of messages, this seems like the goals
> might be somewhat experimental.  For such purposes, I think the desired
> effect *could* be achieved using a Link: header with a URI link
> relation; e.g., something like:
>      Link: <http://example.org/RetentionInformation>;
>            rel=http://linktype.example.org/retentionPolicy/
> (If you don't want to store the retention information separately, maybe
> a data: URI?)
> I see an advantage of such an approach is that you could experiment with
> different kinds of retention information by changing the link relation
> URI, and the approach might play nicely with a wider linked data
> infrastructure. Just a thought.

interesting idea. however, this shifts the problem from the header field 
to a well-known link relation *and* and well-known representation to 
even get the date. the reason why we were discussing a header field was 
also that it would be very clear to find in the uniform interface and 
very easy to process, and by default, no link would need to be 
dereferenced to get to the most important piece of information. so the 
potential header field might look something like this:

Sunset: "Mon, 06 Jul 2015 09:00:00 GMT", reason = "We're shutting down 
for good", reasonURI = http://example.com/goodbye.html

and both the human-readable label and the link to the sunset information 
resource would be optional. this seems to be a bit more explicit than 
what you're suggesting, but i do agree that in the end, both approaches 
are representing (almost) the same information.

cheers,

dret.

-- 
erik wilde | mailto:[e-mail]  -  tel:[phone] |
            | UC Berkeley  -  School of Information (ISchool) |
            | http://dret.net/netdret http://twitter.com/dret |