coulomb/frontend-patterns
5
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Complete the bounded language 0.1 research preview

Browse source 
Assistant: codex
Assistant-Model: gpt-6-astra
Assistant-Session: 01a0e241-8285-7a63-8c0c-51c9cb824dc3
This commit is contained in:
tegwick 2026-09-27 11:49:48 +02:00
parent 8cc7016e1f
commit 53bb65e7a6
26 changed files with 2497 additions and 33 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

32
reference/0.1/Catalog.md Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
# Candidate reference — 0.1
All records are draft hypotheses. Classification is provisional; linked candidate prose contains context, alternatives and consequences. Evidence locators describe partial support, not full-contract recurrence.
## Core
| Candidate / decision | Families; scales | Evidence limits |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [CAND-0001 — Conflict Copy](../../research/candidates/ConflictCopy.md) — Preserve competing versions instead of silently losing one. | synchronization; L2, L6 | Authorized retention and export are separate decisions. Complete contract recurrence and fault-tested deployed behavior remain unverified. |
| [CAND-0002 — Local Commit Boundary](../../research/candidates/LocalCommitBoundary.md) — Define when a local change is durably accepted. | mutation, authority; L2, L6 | No executed storage crash or backup test. Local acceptance is not off-device recovery. |
| [CAND-0003 — Pending Synchronization](../../research/candidates/PendingSynchronization.md) — Keep accepted local intent visible until synchronization resolves. | synchronization; L2, L6 | Atomic supersession and retry contract proposed, not storage-tested. |
| [CAND-0004 — Explicit Reconciliation](../../research/candidates/ExplicitReconciliation.md) — Resolve divergent content while retaining provenance. | synchronization, affordance; L2, L6 | Atomic resolution/provenance UI not executed. Overlap with Conflict Copy remains an open merge question. |
| [CAND-0005 — Local Draft State](../../research/candidates/LocalDraftState.md) — Separate unfinished intent from refreshed authoritative data. | affordance, mutation; L6 | No native-unload, crash, multiple-tab or access-revocation guarantee. Full base/draft/current merge contract is not verified in deployed frontends. |
| [CAND-0006 — Version-Checked Mutation](../../research/candidates/VersionCheckedMutation.md) — Reject an operation whose observed base is stale. | mutation, authority; L2, L6 | Distributed atomicity and complete frontend recurrence remain unverified. Refetch does not authorize overwriting conflicting intent. |
| [CAND-0007 — Mutation Outcome Tracking](../../research/candidates/MutationOutcomeTracking.md) — Retain operation identity when transport outcome is uncertain. | mutation, synchronization; L2, L6 | No production server deduplication or complete retention-window guarantee. Cancelling local UI is not remote compensation. |
| [CAND-0008 — Invalidate and Reproject](../../research/candidates/InvalidateAndReproject.md) — Refresh a projection after mutation without equating acceptance and visibility. | projection, synchronization; L3, L6 | Read-your-write and acceptance/refresh distinction still proposed. No independent deployed full-contract observation. |
## Extensions
| Candidate / decision | Families; scales | Evidence limits |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [CAND-0009 — URL-addressable State](../../research/candidates/URLAddressableState.md) — Make a navigable state reconstructible from its URL. | address, projection; L3 | Independent application recurrence and human/AT validation remain unverified. Pending history disclosure, multiple history misses, redirects, nonzero swap delays, bfcache, lifecycle cleanup, interrupted/late enhancement and offline availability remain open. Zulip auxiliary target/anchor callbacks, deferred editing focus and search callback wiring remain unverified; static guards do not prove whole-application ownership. |
| [CAND-0010 — Progressive Enhancement](../../research/candidates/ProgressiveEnhancement.md) — Keep essential actions usable when enhancement is unavailable. | quality, execution, affordance; L3, L6 | Independent application recurrence and human/AT validation remain unverified. Pending history disclosure, multiple history misses, redirects, nonzero swap delays, bfcache, lifecycle cleanup, interrupted/late enhancement and offline availability remain open. Zulip auxiliary target/anchor callbacks, deferred editing focus and search callback wiring remain unverified; static guards do not prove whole-application ownership. |
| [CAND-0011 — Presentation Model](../../research/candidates/PresentationModel.md) — Separate presentation decisions from view mechanisms. | composition, affordance; L4, L6 | No executed model/view integration or independently reviewed full-contract use. |
| [CAND-0012 — Derived State](../../research/candidates/DerivedState.md) — Compute a result from explicit authoritative inputs. | projection, affordance; L3, L6 | Snapshot coherence and changed-locale cache test still planned. |
| [CAND-0013 — Vertical Feature Slice](../../research/candidates/VerticalFeatureSlice.md) — Group a capability across UI, state and behavior with explicit interfaces. | composition; L4 | Build/import enforcement not executed. Feature organization does not establish independent activation. |
| [CAND-0014 — Islands of Interactivity](../../research/candidates/IslandsOfInteractivity.md) — Activate selected interactive regions within a document. | projection, execution; L3, L5 | No executed island fixture, performance comparison or complete recurrence study. |
| [CAND-0015 — Failure Boundary](../../research/candidates/FailureBoundary.md) — Contain specified failure classes while preserving useful neighboring work. | quality, composition; L5, L6 | Synthetic host, not full application recurrence. Boundary cannot imply containment for all asynchronous failures. |
| [CAND-0016 — Focus Return](../../research/candidates/FocusReturn.md) — Restore meaningful focus after a temporary interaction ends. | quality, affordance; L6 | One implementation family; repeated trials are not independent uses. Animated exits and competing owners remain untested; no production repair claim. Route ownership is a contrast, not independent modal recurrence; AT speech and broader history/lifecycle cases remain unverified. Zulip auxiliary target/anchor callbacks, deferred editing focus and search callback wiring remain unverified; static guards do not prove whole-application ownership. |
| [CAND-0017 — Independent Feature Boundary](../../research/candidates/IndependentFeatureBoundary.md) — Separate feature release, activation and session transition contracts. | composition, execution; L1, L4 | No upstream deployment or real team/release-independence validation. Distributed atomicity, retention authorization and native-unload/crash behavior remain open. |
Extensions are optional research leads. VC-03/06 remain provisional; other planned cases are unsupported. Follow the [starting guide](../../START.md) for the two core contexts.

99
reference/0.1/DevelopmentChecks.md Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
# Disclosed development navigation checks
Author-model review; scenarios and answers were authored together. These checks validate navigation and stated boundaries, not measured retrieval or independent usefulness.
## D01 — My shared record changed while I was editing.
[transactional](../../sequences/TransactionalApplication.md) → CAND-0005, CAND-0006.
Preserve the proposal, inspect the current record and reconsider after a stale-base rejection.
Boundary: The endpoint must atomically enforce the expected-version contract.
Reject: Blind retry against a new version or overwriting input.
Editorial disposition: pass-with-stated-limits.
## D02 — The write timed out. Can I retry with a new ID?
[transactional](../../sequences/TransactionalApplication.md) → CAND-0007.
Keep outcome unknown; look up the original operation or replay only within its verified identity/retention contract.
Boundary: Without lookup/deduplication evidence, stop automatic retry and reconcile.
Reject: Inferring rejection from timeout or declaring a fresh identity safe.
Editorial disposition: pass-with-stated-limits.
## D03 — The write was accepted but refreshing the list failed.
[transactional](../../sequences/TransactionalApplication.md) → CAND-0007, CAND-0008.
Keep acceptance established and show stale-view recovery separately.
Boundary: The receipt must refer to this operation, and obsolete observations cannot erase newer work.
Reject: Retrying the mutation because the refresh failed.
Editorial disposition: pass-with-stated-limits.
## D04 — I need notes to survive an offline restart and synchronize later.
[offline](../../sequences/LocalFirstApplication.md) → CAND-0002, CAND-0003.
Define a recoverable local commit and persistent pending propagation; verify storage and receiver semantics.
Boundary: This preview supplies a proposed contract, not tested storage guarantees.
Reject: Equating a cache or visible typing with a durable save.
Editorial disposition: pass-with-stated-limits.
## D05 — Two offline versions disagree, but our revision store already retains both.
[offline](../../sequences/LocalFirstApplication.md) → CAND-0004.
Consider explicit comparison using the existing revision store; a separate conflict file is optional.
Boundary: The store must provide authorized, recoverable alternatives and provenance.
Reject: Making Conflict Copy an unconditional dependency of reconciliation.
Editorial disposition: pass-with-stated-limits.
## D06 — Can I approve a globally exclusive reservation while disconnected from every authority?
[start](../../START.md) → clarify / abstain.
Identify the incompatible acceptance requirement; neither supported sequence provides that guarantee.
Boundary: Clarify/change the domain contract or require connectivity; no pattern recommendation establishes it.
Reject: Treating locally saved data or replica convergence as global exclusivity.
Editorial disposition: pass-with-stated-limits.
## D07 — Which state-management pattern should I use?
[start](../../START.md) → clarify / abstain.
Ask who accepts changes, what must survive restart, whether writers can conflict and what may be retained.
Boundary: Underspecified; do not infer that either core sequence applies.
Reject: Picking a universal state architecture without context.
Editorial disposition: pass-with-stated-limits.
## D08 — Give me a complete secure collaborative editor with guaranteed real-time latency.
[start](../../START.md) → clarify / abstain.
State that full collaborative/security/latency design is outside the supported core and identify the missing domain evidence.
Boundary: Unsupported need; request a narrower brief and additional evidence.
Reject: Assembling extension names into a certified complete architecture.
Editorial disposition: pass-with-stated-limits.

31
reference/0.1/README.md Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
# Frontend pattern language 0.1 — research preview
Start with the [decision guide](../../START.md), then choose
[transactional editing](../../sequences/TransactionalApplication.md) or
[offline local work](../../sequences/LocalFirstApplication.md).
This version packages **17 draft hypotheses**, with **8 connected core candidates**
and **9 extensions**. Publication version 0.1 does not mean canonical maturity,
PatternSchema compliance, completed M1/M2/M3 or demonstrated usefulness.
- [Candidate catalog](Catalog.md): decisions, context, evidence and extension limits.
- [Machine-readable reference](index.json): stable CAND identities, proposed edges
and qualified evidence. Conditions are part of each edge; do not infer transitivity.
- [Manifest](manifest.json): selected corpus, input digests, reference paths and scope.
- [Release review](ReleaseReview.md) and [release notes](ReleaseNotes.md): acceptance
evidence, reviewer role, remaining work and update policy.
- [Development navigation checks](DevelopmentChecks.md): disclosed scenarios and
manual reasoning review, not independent human or held-out evaluation.
- [Evidence evolution](../../research/evolution/EvolutionReport.md): transparent
learning and evidence profiles, with immutable historical snapshots.
Candidate bodies and evidence are pinned by the manifest to a recorded Git revision.
Relative links in a later checkout may show newer files; use that revision for the
recorded corpus. The index includes the pinned hashes and profile/classification
information for this preview. Future incompatible changes require a new version;
errata must explain the correction and preserve prior records in Git.
Unsupported promises include offline global exclusivity, universal crash-safe storage,
permanent deduplication, accessibility conformance, automatic merge correctness and
production release independence. The extension list is a research surface, not a
complete guide to every frontend architecture.

26
reference/0.1/ReleaseNotes.md Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
# 0.1 research preview notes
2026-09-27. This is a versioned research reference, with no canonical admission or
production certification. Candidate corpus revision:
`8cc7016e1fbcb08b670091a174672fcdd8d07640`.
The preview provides a starting guide, transactional and offline decision sequences,
eight connected core candidates, nine optional extensions, scoped mechanism mappings,
a candidate JSON export and eight disclosed development navigation checks. Existing
candidate contracts and evidence maturity are unchanged by packaging.
Source traceability passes its bounded documentary review. M1 remains revise/defer;
M2/M3 and independent human usefulness remain open. Conflict Copy and Explicit
Reconciliation retain separate identities with a conditional relationship. No new
external source verification or live inference was performed for this packaging.
Storage/receiver validation transferred from WP-0002 T02 to WP-0003 T04. Existing
research owners are listed in the manifest. No additional release-blocking residual
was identified in the bounded review.
Later corrections must retain prior claims in Git, name the affected identities and
context, and explain the evidence and changed decision. An incompatible corpus or
classification change requires a new version and reviewed manifest; never refresh
hashes as a substitute for review. Preserve supersession links when splitting,
merging or retiring candidates. Documentation errata must identify the corrected
preview and remain distinguishable from new empirical evidence.

32
reference/0.1/ReleaseReview.md Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
# 0.1 preview acceptance review
2026-09-27 · Reviewer: Codex, author-model editorial and deterministic review.
No independent human reviewer participated. **Disposition: ready as a bounded
research preview.** This does not pass M1/M2/M3 or canonical admission.
| Requirement | Evidence and disposition |
| --- | --- |
| Core selection and source readiness | [Source readiness](../../research/reviews/SourceReadiness-0.1.md) and [M1 review](../../research/reviews/M1-SeedReview.md); eight core contracts qualified, empirical gates deferred |
| Ontology disposition | [Ontology review](../../research/reviews/PreviewOntology-0.1.md); conditional proposals, separate preservation and resolution |
| Human reference paths | [Start](../../START.md), two sequences, two scoped mappings and catalog; alternatives and unsupported needs explicit |
| Machine reference | Export checks candidate digests against the pinned Git corpus, input hashes, identities, vocabulary, endpoints, evidence paths and live residual references |
| Development navigation | Eight disclosed [cases](DevelopmentChecks.md), including incompatible, underspecified and unsupported requests; editorial review only |
| Failure checks | Tests reject bad endpoints/types, missing evidence, empty conditions, duplicate selection, modified candidates, escaping paths and missing relation fields |
| Claim boundary | All seventeen records remain hypotheses; no empirical benefit, full-contract recurrence, accessibility conformance or production guarantees claimed |
Validation commands: `make reference-test reference-check schema-test bench-test
bench-plan evolution-check classification-check` and `git diff --check`. The review
also checks relative file links in the changed and new Markdown reference surface.
The development cases are authored answers with deterministic reference checks;
there is no search engine, live model retrieval result or held-out score.
The manifest pins existing candidate contracts to `8cc7016` and hashes profile,
classification and vocabulary inputs. Packaging files are versioned by the commit
containing this review; the baseline revision does not contain this new guide.
Relative links resolve against the checkout, so use the corpus revision to recover
original candidate content after future changes.
Research residuals remain live under WP-0002 T03; WP-0003 T01–T04; WP-0004
T01–T03; and WP-0006 T03, with paths in the manifest. WP-0003 T04 explicitly
records the source-review handoff origin. Finishing packaging closes none of those
gates. No tag or external release publication is part of this review.

115
reference/0.1/development-cases.json Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,115 @@
{
"kind": "disclosed-development-checks",
"method": "Author-model editorial navigation and reasoning review plus deterministic reference checks. Cases and answers are authored together; not a retrieval engine result, held-out comparison or independent human validation.",
"cases": [
{
"id": "D01",
"query": "My shared record changed while I was editing.",
"entrypoint": "transactional",
"expected_candidates": [
"CAND-0005",
"CAND-0006"
],
"reviewed_answer": "Preserve the proposal, inspect the current record and reconsider after a stale-base rejection.",
"prohibited_claim": "Blind retry against a new version or overwriting input.",
"boundary": "The endpoint must atomically enforce the expected-version contract.",
"review_result": "pass-with-stated-limits",
"reviewer": "Codex author-model",
"independent_human": false
},
{
"id": "D02",
"query": "The write timed out. Can I retry with a new ID?",
"entrypoint": "transactional",
"expected_candidates": [
"CAND-0007"
],
"reviewed_answer": "Keep outcome unknown; look up the original operation or replay only within its verified identity/retention contract.",
"prohibited_claim": "Inferring rejection from timeout or declaring a fresh identity safe.",
"boundary": "Without lookup/deduplication evidence, stop automatic retry and reconcile.",
"review_result": "pass-with-stated-limits",
"reviewer": "Codex author-model",
"independent_human": false
},
{
"id": "D03",
"query": "The write was accepted but refreshing the list failed.",
"entrypoint": "transactional",
"expected_candidates": [
"CAND-0007",
"CAND-0008"
],
"reviewed_answer": "Keep acceptance established and show stale-view recovery separately.",
"prohibited_claim": "Retrying the mutation because the refresh failed.",
"boundary": "The receipt must refer to this operation, and obsolete observations cannot erase newer work.",
"review_result": "pass-with-stated-limits",
"reviewer": "Codex author-model",
"independent_human": false
},
{
"id": "D04",
"query": "I need notes to survive an offline restart and synchronize later.",
"entrypoint": "offline",
"expected_candidates": [
"CAND-0002",
"CAND-0003"
],
"reviewed_answer": "Define a recoverable local commit and persistent pending propagation; verify storage and receiver semantics.",
"prohibited_claim": "Equating a cache or visible typing with a durable save.",
"boundary": "This preview supplies a proposed contract, not tested storage guarantees.",
"review_result": "pass-with-stated-limits",
"reviewer": "Codex author-model",
"independent_human": false
},
{
"id": "D05",
"query": "Two offline versions disagree, but our revision store already retains both.",
"entrypoint": "offline",
"expected_candidates": [
"CAND-0004"
],
"reviewed_answer": "Consider explicit comparison using the existing revision store; a separate conflict file is optional.",
"prohibited_claim": "Making Conflict Copy an unconditional dependency of reconciliation.",
"boundary": "The store must provide authorized, recoverable alternatives and provenance.",
"review_result": "pass-with-stated-limits",
"reviewer": "Codex author-model",
"independent_human": false
},
{
"id": "D06",
"query": "Can I approve a globally exclusive reservation while disconnected from every authority?",
"entrypoint": "start",
"expected_candidates": [],
"reviewed_answer": "Identify the incompatible acceptance requirement; neither supported sequence provides that guarantee.",
"prohibited_claim": "Treating locally saved data or replica convergence as global exclusivity.",
"boundary": "Clarify/change the domain contract or require connectivity; no pattern recommendation establishes it.",
"review_result": "pass-with-stated-limits",
"reviewer": "Codex author-model",
"independent_human": false
},
{
"id": "D07",
"query": "Which state-management pattern should I use?",
"entrypoint": "start",
"expected_candidates": [],
"reviewed_answer": "Ask who accepts changes, what must survive restart, whether writers can conflict and what may be retained.",
"prohibited_claim": "Picking a universal state architecture without context.",
"boundary": "Underspecified; do not infer that either core sequence applies.",
"review_result": "pass-with-stated-limits",
"reviewer": "Codex author-model",
"independent_human": false
},
{
"id": "D08",
"query": "Give me a complete secure collaborative editor with guaranteed real-time latency.",
"entrypoint": "start",
"expected_candidates": [],
"reviewed_answer": "State that full collaborative/security/latency design is outside the supported core and identify the missing domain evidence.",
"prohibited_claim": "Assembling extension names into a certified complete architecture.",
"boundary": "Unsupported need; request a narrower brief and additional evidence.",
"review_result": "pass-with-stated-limits",
"reviewer": "Codex author-model",
"independent_human": false
}
]
}

1324
reference/0.1/index.json Normal file
View file

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load diff

210
reference/0.1/manifest.json Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,210 @@
{
"schema_version": 1,
"version": "0.1",
"status": "research-preview",
"corpus_revision": "8cc7016e1fbcb08b670091a174672fcdd8d07640",
"reviewer": {
"name": "Codex",
"role": "author-model",
"independent_human": false
},
"core": [
"CAND-0001",
"CAND-0002",
"CAND-0003",
"CAND-0004",
"CAND-0005",
"CAND-0006",
"CAND-0007",
"CAND-0008"
],
"extensions": [
"CAND-0009",
"CAND-0010",
"CAND-0011",
"CAND-0012",
"CAND-0013",
"CAND-0014",
"CAND-0015",
"CAND-0016",
"CAND-0017"
],
"inputs": {
"research/evolution/profiles.json": "46de3b9b2d3958aff00c339741a4418fb4b5110352975b6a2fe82400d1224ee1",
"research/catalog/ClassificationCoverage.json": "8abf11676fd67fc1e726795ebf4c424d5d6fe0a3ed1fa21ea747214306b8d879",
"canon/vocabulary.yaml": "527be0a9ee774a2c795c8c883a01b6721f16667b70a4c3c9c63746d0bfd8c0aa"
},
"entrypoints": {
"start": "START.md",
"transactional": "sequences/TransactionalApplication.md",
"offline": "sequences/LocalFirstApplication.md",
"transactional_mapping": "technologies/TransactionalRecovery.md",
"offline_mapping": "technologies/OfflineRecovery.md"
},
"relations": [
{
"source": "CAND-0002",
"type": "enables",
"target": "CAND-0003",
"status": "proposed",
"condition": "The local transaction records a revision and its pending propagation atomically.",
"rationale": "A recoverable origin allows pending work to resume after restart.",
"evidence_kind": "editorial-design-proposal",
"evidence_refs": [
"research/candidates/LocalCommitBoundary.md",
"research/candidates/PendingSynchronization.md"
],
"unknown": "No independent validation of this relation as a complete architectural contract."
},
{
"source": "CAND-0003",
"type": "creates-context-for",
"target": "CAND-0001",
"status": "proposed",
"condition": "Detected divergence requires retained alternatives and policy permits retention.",
"rationale": "Pending propagation can expose competing versions; not every synchronization needs a copy.",
"evidence_kind": "editorial-design-proposal",
"evidence_refs": [
"research/candidates/PendingSynchronization.md",
"research/candidates/ConflictCopy.md"
],
"unknown": "No independent validation of this relation as a complete architectural contract."
},
{
"source": "CAND-0001",
"type": "creates-context-for",
"target": "CAND-0004",
"status": "proposed",
"condition": "Preserved content remains semantically unresolved and a person must decide.",
"rationale": "Preservation supplies comparison material, not the resolution itself.",
"evidence_kind": "editorial-design-proposal",
"evidence_refs": [
"research/candidates/ConflictCopy.md",
"research/candidates/ExplicitReconciliation.md"
],
"unknown": "No independent validation of this relation as a complete architectural contract."
},
{
"source": "CAND-0004",
"type": "enables",
"target": "CAND-0002",
"status": "proposed",
"condition": "The resolution becomes a new locally accepted revision.",
"rationale": "A chosen result still needs the local commit and pending-work contract.",
"evidence_kind": "editorial-design-proposal",
"evidence_refs": [
"research/candidates/ExplicitReconciliation.md",
"research/candidates/LocalCommitBoundary.md"
],
"unknown": "No independent validation of this relation as a complete architectural contract."
},
{
"source": "CAND-0005",
"type": "complements",
"target": "CAND-0006",
"status": "proposed",
"condition": "An editable proposal uses a stale-base precondition.",
"rationale": "Keeping the proposal separate supports recovery from a rejected conditional write.",
"evidence_kind": "editorial-design-proposal",
"evidence_refs": [
"research/candidates/LocalDraftState.md",
"research/candidates/VersionCheckedMutation.md"
],
"unknown": "No independent validation of this relation as a complete architectural contract."
},
{
"source": "CAND-0006",
"type": "complements",
"target": "CAND-0007",
"status": "proposed",
"condition": "A conditional write may have an uncertain transport outcome.",
"rationale": "A version precondition and an operation identity answer different questions.",
"evidence_kind": "editorial-design-proposal",
"evidence_refs": [
"research/candidates/VersionCheckedMutation.md",
"research/candidates/MutationOutcomeTracking.md"
],
"unknown": "No independent validation of this relation as a complete architectural contract."
},
{
"source": "CAND-0007",
"type": "enables",
"target": "CAND-0008",
"status": "proposed",
"condition": "Acceptance is established and affected observations need refreshing.",
"rationale": "Domain acceptance can trigger refresh without treating its failure as rejected mutation.",
"evidence_kind": "editorial-design-proposal",
"evidence_refs": [
"research/candidates/MutationOutcomeTracking.md",
"research/candidates/InvalidateAndReproject.md"
],
"unknown": "No independent validation of this relation as a complete architectural contract."
},
{
"source": "CAND-0008",
"type": "complements",
"target": "CAND-0005",
"status": "proposed",
"condition": "Refreshing observations can arrive while newer input exists.",
"rationale": "Separate draft ownership prevents reprojected data from replacing unfinished intent.",
"evidence_kind": "editorial-design-proposal",
"evidence_refs": [
"research/candidates/InvalidateAndReproject.md",
"research/candidates/LocalDraftState.md"
],
"unknown": "No independent validation of this relation as a complete architectural contract."
},
{
"source": "CAND-0003",
"type": "complements",
"target": "CAND-0007",
"status": "proposed",
"condition": "Remote propagation acknowledgement may be lost.",
"rationale": "Locally accepted work and unknown remote receipt need separately scoped outcome evidence.",
"evidence_kind": "editorial-design-proposal",
"evidence_refs": [
"research/candidates/PendingSynchronization.md",
"research/candidates/MutationOutcomeTracking.md"
],
"unknown": "No independent validation of this relation as a complete architectural contract."
}
],
"open_work": [
{
"id": "FEP-WP-0002-T03",
"path": "workplans/FEP-WP-0002-seed-language-validation.md"
},
{
"id": "FEP-WP-0003-T01",
"path": "workplans/FEP-WP-0003-contrasting-schools.md"
},
{
"id": "FEP-WP-0003-T02",
"path": "workplans/FEP-WP-0003-contrasting-schools.md"
},
{
"id": "FEP-WP-0003-T03",
"path": "workplans/FEP-WP-0003-contrasting-schools.md"
},
{
"id": "FEP-WP-0003-T04",
"path": "workplans/FEP-WP-0003-contrasting-schools.md"
},
{
"id": "FEP-WP-0004-T01",
"path": "workplans/FEP-WP-0004-reference-surface.md"
},
{
"id": "FEP-WP-0004-T02",
"path": "workplans/FEP-WP-0004-reference-surface.md"
},
{
"id": "FEP-WP-0004-T03",
"path": "workplans/FEP-WP-0004-reference-surface.md"
},
{
"id": "FEP-WP-0006-T03",
"path": "workplans/FEP-WP-0006-language-evolution.md"
}
]
}