Open machawk1 opened 5 years ago
Yep. I agree.
We should also support the Accept-Datetime
request header. Need index improvements (#12) for that.
@ato I agree re:Accept-Datetime
but I figured getting the capture/memento to report what it is would be a start for further negotiation.
For the endpoint that is receiving the Accept-Datetime
header, be sure to have the Vary: Accept-Datetime
in the response (see RFC7089 §2.1.2).
For the capture (memento) itself, you may also want to report a Link
response header to relate the capture (at a URI-M) to the live web URI (URI-R) with rel="original"
, e.g., example in §4.1.1.
I noticed that replaying WARCs provides a 14-digit datetime placeholder. As I anticipate this will eventually be semantic, it need not necessarily be. However, providing Memento (RFC7089) HTTP response headers would give some temporal context to the capture.
As a start, initially providing the Memento-Datetime HTTP response header (in RFC1123 format, e.g.,
Memento-Datetime: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:00:00 GMT
) when viewing a capture from the WARC would be useful for further integration into other systems.