[db-wg] last-modified:, a succesor to changed:

Dear Job

If we implement attributes with generated values is there any point in 
keeping the "changed:" attribute at all?

It:
-is user set to a vast range of dates (user's choice) with as many or 
few instances as you wish
-is unreliable and possibly miss-leading to anyone else
-will become, even if correct, a duplication of both the generated 
values and --list-versions output
-requires mandatory email address
-invites abuse

Maybe it could be deprecated if the proposed attributes are implemented?

Regards
Denis Walker
Business Analyst
RIPE NCC Database Team

On 17/04/2014 13:38, Job Snijders wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 04:33:12PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> On Apr 15, Job Snijders <job at instituut.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I look forward to the group's feedback! Also, I'm interested in how
>>> people would use this attribute in their workflows or automation.
>> No objections to an automatically enforced last-modified attribute,
>> but then I would demote changed to an optional attribute to allow
>> removing duplicate information. I already use changed this way, by
>> only keeping the last one.
> I think making changed: optional is good addition to the proposal.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Job
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/attachments/20140417/e5676850/attachment.html>