How could registers be mothballed?

[nacnudus]

Context

• RFC code:

Explanation

So far all the registers are relevant and have active custodians. There are two (or more?) ways this could change:

• A custodian could stop maintaining the register
• A register could become obsolete because the state of the world changes, e.g. if allergens are no longer regulated
• The scope of a register could change, e.g. if powers are devolved

Given that registers won't ever be deleted, they ought to declare whether they are currently valid or not. How to do this?

End-date all the records

A possible workaround, but it implies that all the things in the register no longer exist.

Tombstone all the records

We don't use tombstoning for anything yet.

Give every record equal start-date and end-dates, with 1-second precision

This is a current workaround for invalidating records, and we don't like it.

Invalidate all records

When we have implemented this. It's a bit too strong -- the records were valid.

End-date the record in the register register

The register register doesn't have start-date and end-date fields. Even if it did, users of registers would have to look here for the state of any register.

Set the custodian and registry to empty strings

This is a bit weak. It might be something to do as well as mothball the register.

[arnau]

My gut feeling is that the register should be able to express it's no longer active (ended, closed, …) at the register metadata level, not at the record level.