[Design] Do we want to be able to annotate read-only items?

[Alec Flett]

Morgen Sagen wrote:
> Stamping an item changes its 'kind' under the hood; an item's kind is 
> one of the pieces of information that is always shared.  The next time 
> you synced, the item would be 'unstamped' back to the whatever it is 
> stamped as on the server. 
But I think this model is going to change, under the hood. Its something 
we've been talking about since that design meeting a few weeks ago. 
Obviously we have some implementation details to work out, but if 
stamping were done more as some sort of specific referencing  (i.e. a 
well-known attribute under the hood) then you could imagine that one 
half of that link could be read only and shared on the server, and the 
other have stored locally.

We could make that distinction at the time of the stamping (i.e. if this 
item is read-only them add this to the 'annotated stamped list' else add 
it to the real stamped list, or something like that)

Alec