Ehhh, I think HTSQL is too generic. What if a peer wanted to delete a submission it had made? It could use a HTSQL command to delete the entry from another peer(s). But how is this deletion propagated to other peers that the original contributor doesn't know about at that moment? They'll still have the record intended for deletion and be out of sync with the other peers. Instead the record should be marked as revoked by it's author, and polite peers should remove the record from their local storage while keeping a key for the record with a deletion tag. So other peers that sync at a later time can discover the deletion event and decide how to handle it then, and peers that search for that specific record key may see a message that it was deleted by its author.
HTSQL is perfect for making read only queries though. I want to make the mutator requests safer, but without restricting it too much. Ideally the application wouldn't need to worry about the details of keeping things in sync. This should be taken care of by the thing and the application would just make potentially detailed reading queries, pushing binary blob items with meta information out to the other peers, and maybe making requests to the network at large, like please delete this naked picture I uploaded while drunk, and maybe other misc requests like that.