internal/layer/conformance.go enforced A12 as "no key named standard_version",
and so could not see the same pin as a versioned standard: path or as
companion_version. It now detects a version of the standard or its companion
in any key or value of the declaration (INTENT.md frontmatter, layer.yaml),
including a version in a path, and excludes comments and schema_version. It
refuses to be applied to pep-stance.yaml, pip-claims.yaml or
evidence-classification.yaml, which A12 r2 does not reach (§3).
Every run of check_layer_conformance and of the estate survey now prints the
standard version it checks against (layer.ValidatedAgainst, kings-guard's
pattern) and its scope (§4). The survey applies the same detection to peers'
declarations; the receipt is refreshed because the survey's output changed
(no peer declaration currently carries a version).
Tests fail if a versioned standard: path or a companion_version comes back.
flex-auth's own INTENT.md needed no change.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 63291@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 8bd77868-ca68-4f49-bb1e-d539ecc0d703
GH-DEC-2026-017: the validator admitted {Staff, Engine, Tooling}, built from
section 4's catalog rows, and rejected Taxonomy, which section 3.1 defines.
railiance-master was conforming; the validator was the divergent artifact.
Now four tokens, ASCII case folded, section 4's spelling canonical, INTENT.md
governing while form disagreements are still reported, and every run states
its scope (section 11 binds section 4; volunteers are not non-conformances).
Also fixes the survey silently dropping audit-core's layer.yaml by decoding
peers into flex-auth's own struct.
GH-DEC-2026-018: flex-auth is a section 4 source of evidence. G2 closes as a
question and reopens as a dated gap (review 2026-10-19). cadence.yaml
publishes the per-event-class inventory: deny, redact, not_applicable and
audit_only rare load-bearing (heartbeat and reconciliation, rate forbidden);
allow volume load-bearing (expected-rate and reconciliation). INTENT.md
declares source_of_evidence and names it; tests assert both. Delivery is
FLEX-WP-0031.
FLEX-DEC-2026-015: resource.system follows the runtime, not the repository,
answering ops-warden's WARDEN-IN-0003.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 63291@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 8bd77868-ca68-4f49-bb1e-d539ecc0d703
B1 was found with a shell pipeline and published as a finding. The review it
appeared in had already argued that a mechanical check nobody can re-run is an
assertion, and §11's entire claim is mechanical checkability — so asserting B1
unmechanically was that defect committed by the repository reporting it.
tools/survey_layer_declarations.go reads both §11 forms per repository, reports
intra-repository disagreement, and writes a receipt. Run once, it showed the
published B1 was wrong: the estate does not spell layer: three ways across
repositories. The original pipeline took the first ^layer: match per repository
without recording which file it came from, reporting one value where there were
two.
The corrected finding is stronger. Nine of nine repositories carrying both §11
forms declare a different value in each: INTENT.md says Engine/Staff, layer.yaml
says engine/staff. The disagreement is within each repository, between the two
forms §11 permits, and it is universal rather than careless — two generators, two
conventions. Nobody is inconsistent with anybody else.
That relocates the question from casing to precedence: §11 accepts either form
and does not say which governs when both exist and disagree, so a conformance run
reading INTENT.md and one reading layer.yaml reach different answers for nine
repositories while both follow §11. flex-auth is the only declared repository
that cannot exhibit this, and only because it never wrote the second file.
The correction is recorded in the review rather than edited away: a published
review corrected silently is FLEX-DEC-2026-008's defect, and that rule has no
exception for the reviewer.
Four tests cover the disagreement case, the refusal to fold case, a missing
declaration, and the single-form shape that must not read as self-disagreement.
The survey checks only the §3 vocabulary and never applies flex-auth's house
rules to peers.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 28468@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: c76569b2-6056-4dad-aea4-49cd7a018f5d
