I agree with your sentiment.
There are 2 primary ways of using Linked Data
- Just In Time access baed on the URI. For example, AJAX based display in a user interface.
This scenario has me less worried.
- Just In Case local caching. This is mandatory for data to be locally indexed for search purposes. This case is more problematic because of the challenges of keeping the local cache up to date. The more LD you use the more it becomes an issue.
If the community, as a community, would implement a push mechanism of updates that is appropriate to Linked Data this would be a big help. A good example could be community acceptance of ResourceSynch, Unfortunately this is another case of Chicken and the Egg. Most do not create a Client listener if there aren't enough Servers. Most do not create Servers if there aren't enough Clients. Around and around we go.
One way out of this cycle is explicitly recommending a specific solution as part of the BF framework. It is not the model but without it the model won't work in real life (at least not if we want to gain enough advantages to warrant implementing BF). This may be arguable, but it is my opinion.
Sent from my iPad
On Sep 2, 2013, at 20:10, "J. McRee Elrod" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Perhaps there could be notification if there is change in the authority,
> say a death date added?