Skip to content

Temporal Knowledge and Expiry Framework

Every claim is a photograph

I am TANK, and I keep this framework's account. Time is my element, and every claim swims in it: true of the moment it was made, and owed a looking-again before the world drifts past it. The slow discipline is naming the moment, naming the ageing, and never letting the photograph pass for a window.

Expiry is the honest end of that bookwork. A claim aged past its footing is not deleted like a shame; it is expired like a certificate, its state explicit, its history kept, and its place taken only by a claim with newer footing. This framework binds the records of all of it.

Continue to the Knowledge Privacy and Data Minimization Framework, where the estate is asked how little it needed to know.

Purpose

The temporal states are already law: KNOW-R019 binds expiry, retention, deletion, legal hold, and right-to-correct states to be explicit and enforceable for source and personal content, with protected historical metadata and evidence of the correction kept sufficient to explain the record. What this framework binds is the knowledge record's own temporal form: the clocks a claim must carry, the review it must name, and the expiry it must record. Confidence keeps its own expiry under KNOW-R047; a source's states keep their reassessment under KNOW-R050; a trust score shows its age under KNOW-R063; and a calibration expires under KNOW-R072; each of those stands untouched in its own domain.

The keeping of the clocks

Two clocks run through every claim, the moment it speaks of and the moment it was recorded, and the slow discipline is never letting one impersonate the other. I have carried enough years to know: the past does not change, but what we said about it was said on a date, and the date matters. RASP forecasts what the ageing will do; I keep the dates it does it to.

The temporal record is a small set of honest clocks: when the world was as claimed, when the claim was made, when it was last examined, and when it must be examined again. Everything else in this framework follows from keeping the clocks apart.

  • KNOW-R084: A consequential knowledge record SHALL carry its temporal footing: the acquisition time and review date the Book's evidence requirements already name, the creation time KNOW-R012 binds beside them, and, as this framework's own addition, the time the claim speaks of, its spoken time, kept distinct from the time it was recorded, so that the world's clock and the record's clock never blur.
  • KNOW-R085: Consequential knowledge SHALL have a defined reviewer role and review interval, the Book's review and accountability discipline given record form here, this framework adding the record form and no duty on the conduct of review; and, as this framework's own addition, the defined reviewer role SHALL set the interval from what could age the claim, never from the calendar's convenience.
  • KNOW-R086: A claim past its review date SHALL show its age rather than stand as current, the discipline KNOW-R063 binds for trust scores and KNOW-R072 binds for calibrations applying here, as this framework's own extension, to every consequential knowledge record.
  • KNOW-R087: A record SHALL state what could age its claim, this framework's own duty, kin to the occasions KNOW-R036 binds for confidence reassessment and KNOW-R050 binds for source states, each standing whole where it stands; and a claim nothing could age SHALL say so, the timeless state this framework's own, its review interval standing on the recheck of that state rather than on the claim's ageing.
  • KNOW-R088: Expiry SHALL be a recorded state transition, explicit and enforceable as KNOW-R019 binds for source and personal content, that bar extended as this framework's own to every consequential knowledge record; an expiry record SHALL show any legal hold or retention rule standing over the claim, those states subject to applicable legal holds as the same clause already binds them; and, as this framework's own additions, the expired state SHALL remain discoverable within the protected historical metadata that KNOW-R019 keeps, with evidence of the correction, sufficient to explain the record, and the expired state SHALL travel to every summary and derived record built over the claim.
  • KNOW-R089: A claim SHALL speak of its spoken time only: use of a claim outside its spoken time SHALL be recorded as a new claim carrying its own footing, this framework's own rule, so that yesterday's truth is never silently today's.
  • KNOW-R090: Refresh SHALL append: a re-verification SHALL append in the form KNOW-R018 binds for corrections and supersession, this framework extending that form to re-verifications, the refreshed assessment a new record linked to the old; and, as this framework's own addition, a refresh SHALL NOT extend the old assessment's footing, only establish its own.
  • KNOW-R091: The estate's knowledge SHALL admit a temporal reading, this framework's own rule: which claims stand current, ageing, overdue, or expired SHALL be answerable from the temporal footing KNOW-R084 binds and the state transitions KNOW-R088 records, without reading the claims themselves; freshness is read from the record, not estimated.
  • KNOW-R092: This framework defines temporal-knowledge records only. It SHALL NOT expire, refresh, review, or delete any claim, schedule anything, or extend any footing, and it SHALL NOT create authority. A review date is never evidence that the review happened, and the youngest record in the estate is still a photograph.

This Draft dates nothing: it binds the form of the clocks, and nothing in it has aged, expired, or refreshed a claim.

Operating model and interpretation cases

Expiry frightens people, as if letting a claim age out were losing it. It is the opposite. The claim that admits its moment can be trusted about its moment forever; only the claim pretending to be timeless is dangerous, and even the honestly timeless one keeps its recheck, because the state itself can age.

Temporal review reads the clocks first and the content second: the claim's spoken time against its use, the review date against the day, the named ageing against the world's movement. The failures here are carryovers: the photograph passed off as a window, the review date read as an anniversary of the record rather than a question about it, and the estate's freshness estimated by the confidence of whoever answered last.

  • Conforming: The record keeps its clocks apart, names what could age it, and shows its age when past review.
  • Prohibited: A claim's age is hidden to keep an answer looking decisive, or a refresh quietly extends an old assessment's footing.
  • Boundary: A claim nothing could age says so, and the timeless state stands as a stated finding, never a default.
  • Failure: A review falls overdue, and the claim answers with its age on its face rather than as current.
  • Loophole: Each use of an old claim shifts its spoken time slightly forward, no single use enough to name, and the spoken time has walked a year without a record of the walk.
  • Misuse: Expiry is used as deletion, the historical metadata stripped so the record cannot explain what it once held.
  • Care-control: What is recorded about persons ages like everything else, and an expired claim about a person stays expired in every summary that once carried it.

Design evidence

Temporal review should read each record's clocks against each other and against the day: the spoken time inside the acquisition time, the review interval derived from the named ageing, the age showing wherever it must. The oldest defect in any estate is the answer that was right when filed, and the clocks exist so that filed and right stop travelling together unexamined.

Where this document sits

This block is generated from the archive's own records when the site is built. It records position only and creates no authority.