tegwick
53bb65e7a6
Assistant: codex Assistant-Model: gpt-6-astra Assistant-Session: 01a0e241-8285-7a63-8c0c-51c9cb824dc3
51 lines
2.9 KiB
Markdown
51 lines
2.9 KiB
Markdown
# Local-first source review — authority placement
|
|
|
|
Status: extracted; initial manual review, 2026-09-24, codex (self-review).
|
|
Source: SRC-0002, Kleppmann, Wiggins, van Hardenberg and McGranaghan,
|
|
[April 2019 web essay](https://www.inkandswitch.com/essay/local-first/).
|
|
Conference DOI: 10.1145/3359591.3359737. The manual claims below predate the assisted investigation.
|
|
|
|
| Claim | Original locator | Source statement, paraphrased | Our interpretation |
|
|
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
|
| C01 | Seven ideals, paragraph 3 | The device's data copy becomes primary rather than subordinate to a server. | Local Authority differs from caching. |
|
|
| C02 | Ideal 3, paragraph beginning Since local-first applications | Local reading/writing can continue offline; synchronization follows connectivity. | Commit location and synchronization timing are separate decisions. |
|
|
| C03 | Introduction, paragraph beginning The software we are talking about | The discussion targets documents and personal repositories, excluding several centralized service domains. | Do not generalize the proposal to every transaction. |
|
|
|
|
C02/C03 were checked manually beyond the bench excerpt.
|
|
|
|
## Limits and counterexample
|
|
|
|
A hypothetical shared inventory reservation requires a separate concurrency argument;
|
|
local durability alone does not prove that a reservation is globally valid.
|
|
The excerpt does not establish a merge algorithm or access-revocation semantics.
|
|
|
|
## Disposition
|
|
|
|
Retain Local Authority as a hypothesis candidate. Review persistence, synchronization,
|
|
conflict handling and independent implementations before admission or maturity changes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Assisted packet review — 2026-09-25
|
|
|
|
`local-first-authority-06` completed through llm-connect. Its narrower packet yielded
|
|
no justified pattern candidates and no relations. Its C02 is an interpretive leap
|
|
from primary to authoritative, distinct from manual C02 above. Retain Local Authority
|
|
as a manual hypothesis; do not use the negative packet result to reject the broader
|
|
source or infer recurrence. See [diagnosis and review](../reviews/TruncationDiagnosis.md).
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Expanded evidence — 2026-09-25
|
|
|
|
[LocalFirstEvidenceExpansion](../reviews/LocalFirstEvidenceExpansion.md) adds located
|
|
storage/synchronization/conflict/recovery evidence and two documented application
|
|
uses. It supports a separate Conflict Copy candidate and distinguishes local-primary
|
|
storage from globally winning every merge. Earlier fragment-only negative findings
|
|
remain valid for their limited packets. Crash durability and runtime recovery remain
|
|
untested; this source review is still extracted rather than fully reviewed.
|
|
|
|
## Preview source assessment — 2026-09-27
|
|
|
|
The [bounded source-readiness review](../reviews/SourceReadiness-0.1.md) completes
|
|
editorial traceability assessment for WP-0002 T02. The original extraction above is
|
|
preserved; external claims were not re-fetched. Implementation/recurrence and human
|
|
validation remain open in the named successor tasks; no maturity promotion.
|