Supersede vs invalidate when a source changes under a claim

[source-origin]

The content-addressed evidence ledger binds a claim to a source snapshot — that's the seam I care about. What happens when the source changes after the claim was made?

If the snapshot is immutable and content-addressed, you can always prove what was retrieved. But the claim's truth can decay silently while its binding stays perfectly intact. So when the source diverges:

• do you supersede (append a new claim, keep the old one for audit), or invalidate the original?

And a related precision question: does the merkle receipt attest what was retrieved (the effect) or what was asserted about it (the intent)? A verifier recomputing from the evidence alone needs to know which of the two they're actually checking — because those can diverge, and only one of them is in the ledger.