--- id: FEP-WP-0002 type: workplan title: "Validate the seed frontend pattern language" domain: infotech repo: frontend-patterns status: active quality_dor: DoR-Ok quality_dor_at: "2026-09-24" quality_dor_by: codex quality_dor_note: "Self-review against work-item-dor; see readiness assessment below." reviewed_at: "2026-09-24" reviewed_against_commit: "c161369ad58782ff0a13429c61cc7c8efc36e33d" owner: codex topic_slug: canon created: "2026-09-23" updated: "2026-09-24" state_hub_workstream_id: "3350b7f2-375a-54e8-8f7c-3bf7c7c3af71" --- # Validate the seed frontend pattern language First executable cycle of `research/plan/ResearchProgram.md`, following `REVIEW.md` and FEP-WP-0001. Readiness review on 2026-09-24: scaffold is present, source and walkthrough templates exist, VC-01/VC-02 are defined, and deliverables below are bounded. Schema reconciliation and source preparation began on 2026-09-24; full source investigation and the M1 evidence gate remain incomplete. T01 and source extraction in T02 can proceed independently. T03 requires both. Use `research/plan/ResearchProtocol.md`; track Q01–Q04 in the question ledger. ## Reconcile the metadata contract ```task id: FEP-WP-0002-T01 status: done priority: high state_hub_task_id: "e59295dd-a087-5dbc-9bb2-230488c48e96" ``` Resolve relation spelling, force and pattern IDs, prerequisite target types, multi-scale representation and editorial status versus evidence maturity. Done when schema and template agree and a worked example resolves every reference. ## Establish traceable source evidence ```task id: FEP-WP-0002-T02 status: progress priority: high state_hub_task_id: "0eb32b3e-07d6-5e16-a735-7d75d9dace83" ``` Complete the first source case and a contrasting local-first source review. Record source identity, URL, date/version, claim references, interpretations and counterexamples. Reconcile README maturity claims with the evidence. ## Validate a connected seed corpus ```task id: FEP-WP-0002-T03 status: todo priority: medium state_hub_task_id: "54940b04-1d0f-5bff-98d4-be290eca8048" ``` Author a small connected pattern set and exercise it in server-authoritative and local-first scenarios. Show forces, alternatives, ordering rationale, resulting contexts and failure modes. Record gaps, then define the minimum metadata validator and graph export needed by these examples. ## Phase acceptance Produce 6–10 connected draft patterns, complete VC-01 and VC-02, and write `research/reviews/M1-SeedReview.md` with evidence for each M1 criterion. Include rejected or merged candidates and any source-access limitations. Retain hypothesis maturity where evidence is incomplete. Handoff broader investigations to FEP-WP-0003; metadata tooling and empirical evaluation are tracked in FEP-WP-0004. ## Readiness assessment Self-reviewed by codex against State Hub `policies/work-item-dor.md` on 2026-09-24. Outcome: DoR-Ok for the plan structure; child tasks remain to be assessed before execution. - Scope: metadata reconciliation, two contrasting source reviews, 6–10 draft patterns and VC-01/VC-02. Broad coverage, tooling implementation and real-repo validation are outside this cycle and belong to FEP-WP-0003/0004. - Owner and repository: codex in frontend-patterns. No external intake; this follows the repository review and the user's research-program instruction. - Dependencies: scaffold and templates are committed. No known blocker prevents T01 or source discovery. T03 depends on T01/T02; inaccessible sources must be reported and alternatives assessed rather than evidence invented. - Execution boundary: documentation and read-only public-source research, with ordinary Git/State Hub synchronization. Deployments, purchases and third-party messaging are outside scope. This plan does not schedule background execution. - Verification: schema/template agreement, traceable claims and references, two walkthrough reviews, explicit counterevidence and the M1 acceptance review. - Done-condition: the phase acceptance section above; hypotheses may be rejected or deferred with reasons rather than falsely confirmed to close a task. ## Source investigation tooling FEP-WP-0005 established `research/bench/README.md` and `scripts/research_bench.py`. Use one isolated workspace per source excerpt, review original-source-grounded claims/candidates/relations/critique, and follow `research/bench/Admission.md`. The fixture run is synthetic and does not complete any task in this workplan. T02 still owns source acquisition/review; T03 owns cross-source synthesis and cases. ## 2026-09-24 execution evidence T01 completed: `canon/PatternSchema.md`, `canon/vocabulary.yaml` and the pattern template agree on identities, scales, force keys, statuses, evidence and typed relations. `research/examples/schema-contract.yaml` exercises resolved references; `make schema-test` verifies it. Review: `research/reviews/SchemaAndSourcePreparation.md`. T02 in progress: SRC-0001/SRC-0002 verified and indexed. Two original-passage workspaces and four-call preflight plans are prepared under `research/bench/infospaces/`. No live generation or complete source review is claimed. Selection of model/provider, source-grounded investigation, broader case review and counterexamples remain. ## First source investigation — 2026-09-24 Attempted the two four-stage source investigations with Gemini 2.5 Flash through OpenRouter. Both stopped at the first call; a separate authentication probe returned HTTP 401. No provider-generated research artifacts exist. The existing workload credential route does not apply to a generic workstation client; a correct route or provider was requested from the user. Failed receipts are retained. Manual authority-focused reviews are in `research/cases/CarniatoGrandUnifyingArchitecture.md` and `research/cases/LocalFirstAuthority.md`; synthesis/dispositions are in `research/reviews/AuthorityPilot.md`. Source catalog states are extracted, not fully reviewed. Added safe error status/model recording to the adapter and a regression check preventing raw sensitive diagnostic detail from entering receipts. T02 remains progress: broader evidence and independent known uses are still needed. Live reruns specifically depend on an authorized working credential; manual research can continue. No failure of the research hypothesis is inferred from provider failure. ## llm-connect execution — 2026-09-24 User clarified that live execution must use llm-connect. Replaced direct OpenRouter execution with the llm-connect service contract; no workstation credential required. Service model/usage/finish reason and safe failure receipts are retained. Carniato `-03` completed four stages; Carniato `-02` and local-first `-02` were truncated and rejected. Review: `research/reviews/LLMConnectPilot.md`. No proposal admitted. T02 remains progress and owns the next bounded steps: resolve local-first truncation with explicit research settings; tighten prompts and checks around unsourced known uses, recurrence and claim-vs-pattern relation targets; continue source evidence. These replace the earlier workstation-credential dependency. T03 remains todo.