search

braid-org / braid-spec

Working area for Braid extensions to HTTP
https://braid.org
231 stars 16 forks source link

Memento protocol #133

Open hvdsomp opened 6 months ago

hvdsomp commented 6 months ago

When it comes to resource versioning, it seems appropriate that braid would reference RFC7089: HTTP Framework for Time-Based Access to Resource States -- Memento.

toomim commented 6 months ago

Yeah, that would be a good idea, thanks!

I've looked into Memento a bit, and the first big blocker is that it represents time using a computer's local time. Unfortunately, that doesn't work for synchronization over a distributed network, because time becomes relative, and you can't rely on clocks. Instead, you need to construct a partial order of events.

I other words, Memento models time like:

  o  - 4:38pm June 4rd 2023
  |
  o - 11:30am July 2nd 2023
  |
  o - 2:02pm August 1 2023
  |
  v

But for distributed sync, we need something like:

        o - x35
       / \
h3u - o   o - 7bx
       \ /
        o - 73h

In the long run, though, we'd like to be able to support all the features we need for versioning and time in HTTP. For instance, we want to support local times as time identifiers too, so this works in Braid:

        o - 11:30am July 1 2023
       / \
h3u - o   o - 8:32pm July 9 2023
       \ /
        o - 10:55am August 4 2023

There might be useful features in Memento for history representations that we don't have in Braid, and should consider merging in. What do you think?

toomim commented 6 months ago

^ Updated my comment above

hvdsomp commented 6 months ago

@toomim I do understand the difference in perspective. Before I share some ideas re how Memento could still be used in relation to braid, I have a question: While version identifiers are crucial in braid, is it safe to assume that the datetimes of these versions are available too?