Why would implementation details be led by product? “Undo” is an action that the user may want, which would be led by product. Not the implementation in the db.

▲

strken 4 hours ago | parent [-]

I believe that was the point. Soft delete isn't a product requirement, it's an implementation detail, so product teams should talk about the user experience using language like "delete" or "archive" or "undo" or "customer support retrieves deleted data".

	▲	Terr_ 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Yeah: You don't "delete" a bank account, you close it, and you don't "undo", you reopen it, etc. The processes have conditions, audit rules, attached information, side-effects, etc. In some cases the same entity can't be restored, and you have to instead create a successor. "Undo" may work as shorthand for "whatever the best reversing actions happen to be", but as any system grows it stops being simple.
	▲	dpark 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Sure. Did someone say that the behavior should be described to customers as soft delete, though? I read a blog about a technical topic aimed at engineers, not customers.