---
id: capability.infotech.frontend-pattern-language
name: Frontend architecture pattern reference
summary: Reason about frontend shared edits, offline recovery, navigation and rendering with versioned candidate patterns, alternatives and evidence limits.
owner: frontend-patterns
status: draft
domain: infotech
tags: [frontend, architecture, patterns, offline, mutation, recovery, navigation, rendering]
maturity:
  discovery:
    current: D3
    target: D4
    confidence: medium
    rationale: Two bounded decision sequences, qualified source reviews, alternatives and explicit gaps; ecosystem usefulness remains unverified.
  availability:
    current: A0
    target: A0
    confidence: high
    rationale: Informational Markdown and JSON reference; no frontend runtime or service offered.
external_evidence:
  completeness:
    level: C1
    confidence: medium
    basis: scope_vs_intent_and_consumer_expectations
    satisfied_expectations: [two core decision paths and seventeen qualified candidate records]
    broken_expectations: []
    out_of_scope_expectations: [complete implementation recipes and production guarantees]
  reliability:
    level: R0
    confidence: high
    basis: consumer_quality_signals
    known_reliability_risks: [no measured ecosystem consumer outcomes, full-contract recurrence unassessed]
discovery:
  intent: Help a consumer turn frontend constraints into a small explainable configuration and implementation questions.
  includes: [transactional edit recovery, local offline work, candidate relations, mechanism mappings, stated abstention boundaries]
  excludes: [complete security architecture, offline global exclusivity, framework rankings, certified production recipes]
  assumptions: [consumer checks applicability and implementation contracts, draft hypotheses retain their evidence limits]
  use_cases: [VC-01, VC-02]
  research_memos: [research/reviews/M1-SeedReview.md, research/reviews/PreviewOntology-0.1.md]
availability:
  current_level: A0
  target_level: A0
  current_artifacts: [START.md, reference/0.1/index.json, reference/0.1/manifest.json]
  target_artifacts: []
  consumption_modes: [informational, markdown, json]
relations:
  depends_on: []
  supports: []
  related_to: []
evidence:
  documentation: [START.md, reference/0.1/ReleaseReview.md, docs/ReuseAndImprovementLoop.md]
  tests: [tests/test_reference_preview.py, tests/test_reference_consume.py]
  consumer_feedback: []
  bug_reports: []
  incidents: []
consumer_guidance:
  recommended_for: [frontend architectural decision notes, reviewing shared-edit and offline-recovery assumptions]
  not_recommended_for: [claiming canonical maturity or production guarantees, treating a match score as applicability proof]
  known_limitations: [all candidates are hypotheses, no independent human usefulness result, no enrolled consumers, admitted improvement and automatic publication remain open]
promotion_history: []
---

# Frontend architecture pattern reference

Start at [the decision guide](../../START.md). Pin the reference version and packaging
commit, inspect the candidate contracts, and cite selected IDs and unresolved conditions
in your decision note. The [JSON export](../../reference/0.1/index.json) supports agent
navigation; it is a research candidate surface, not an admitted canonical graph.

Qualified extension hypotheses cover navigation, rendering and feature/interaction
boundaries. Their presence does not imply a complete sequence for those contexts.

The [reuse and improvement contract](../../docs/ReuseAndImprovementLoop.md) defines
how consumer decisions and later outcomes will improve this language. Receipt collection
and deterministic reporting are operational through activity-core; consumer closeout
integration, actual outcomes and admitted improvement remain WP-0008 acceptance work.
The [local lookup/receipt helper](../../feedback/ConsumerIntegration.md#local-lookup-and-closeout-helper)
provides verified pins and immutable producer files; it does not establish hosted
registration, consumer value or automatic improvement. Recording `reused` in registry
telemetry does not measure helpfulness.