frontend-patterns/research/catalog/ClassificationCoverage.md

Classification coverage

Generated by python3 scripts/classification_coverage.py; assessment: 2026-09-28.

18 developed drafts; 16 original seeds at 2a5dabd. 7 original seeds developed, 9 without dedicated drafts, 11 later additions. All current candidates remain hypotheses; classification confers no admission or new evidence.

The original comparison above is the compact 16-entry table. The broader initial patterns README lists 59 seed names; it is a separate discovery inventory, not 59 developed records or a release quota.

Families/scales come from current candidate metadata. Responsibilities and forces are provisional author-model interpretations in ClassificationCoverage.json, with candidate hashes and per-record rationale. They are separate from canonical metadata.

Count a candidate once per assigned label; labels overlap. Responsibilities describe the direct mechanism, not every prerequisite or downstream effect. Forces are selected trade-offs, not exhaustive coverage or measured outcomes.

A zero means no assigned direct coverage, not absence of discussion. Force direction describes an intended favorable effect or accepted cost, not a measured result. A classification refresh requires reading changed candidates; do not merely replace hashes.

Families

Family	Original seeds	Developed drafts
authority	3	2
address	1	1
projection	4	4
affordance	2	6
mutation	0	4
synchronization	2	5
composition	2	5
execution	0	4
quality	2	3

Scales

Scale	Original seeds	Developed drafts
L0	0	0
L1	0	1
L2	3	6
L3	7	5
L4	2	4
L5	1	2
L6	4	13
L7	0	0
cross-scale	1	0

Responsibilities

These are direct-mechanism assignments, not family aliases. In particular, reconciliation is a responsibility and quality is a family.

Responsibility	Drafts
address	1
authority	2
projection	4
affordance	6
mutation	4
synchronization	2
reconciliation	4
composition	4
execution	3

Forces

Selected trade-offs only. Counts are unique candidates per force, even if a force appears on both sides. Unassigned forces remain research questions; the mapping does not certify a benefit.

Force	Intended benefit	Cost / tension	Distinct drafts
interaction-latency	0	0	0
perceived-responsiveness	0	1	1
continuity-of-interaction	3	1	4
discoverability	0	0	0
addressability	1	0	1
accessibility	1	0	1
recoverability	7	0	7
offline-usability	2	0	2
authoritative-consistency	2	0	2
freshness	1	1	2
cacheability	0	0	0
conflict-probability	0	0	0
collaborative-concurrency	0	0	0
data-locality	0	0	0
privacy	0	2	2
information-completeness	3	0	3
first-content-latency	0	0	0
hydration-cost	0	0	0
client-compute-cost	1	1	2
server-compute-cost	0	0	0
bandwidth-cost	0	1	1
connection-lifetime	0	0	0
network-reliability	0	0	0
startup-cost	0	0	0
incremental-update-cost	0	0	0
feature-change-frequency	1	0	1
schema-change-frequency	0	0	0
independent-deployability	1	0	1
team-autonomy	1	0	1
release-coupling	0	0	0
compatibility-pressure	0	3	3
implementation-complexity	0	10	10
reconciliation-complexity	0	2	2
cognitive-load	0	3	3
testability	1	0	1
observability	0	0	0
debuggability	0	0	0
portability	2	0	2
security-exposure	0	0	0
scalability	0	0	0
fault-containment	1	0	1
deployment-complexity	0	1	1
cache-invalidation-complexity	0	2	2
telemetry-quality	0	0	0
incident-recoverability	0	0	0

Per-candidate responsibility and force rationale

Candidate	Responsibilities	Intended benefit	Cost / tension	Rationale
Capability Contract Boundary	composition	portability	implementation-complexity, compatibility-pressure	Separates a semantic capability interface from its runtime carrier to support host portability; versioning, enforcement and cross-host compatibility add work. Declaring the contract alone supplies neither runtime isolation nor independent release.
Conflict Copy	reconciliation	recoverability, information-completeness	cognitive-load, reconciliation-complexity	Preserves divergent content for later semantic resolution; unresolved copies impose review and merge work.
Derived State	projection	authoritative-consistency	client-compute-cost, cache-invalidation-complexity	Projects coherent inputs without separately mutable derived copies; recomputation and cached dependency tracking cost work.
Explicit Reconciliation	reconciliation, affordance	information-completeness, recoverability	cognitive-load, continuity-of-interaction	Makes semantic resolution an explicit comparison task; deciding among versions interrupts ordinary work.
Failure Boundary	composition, affordance	fault-containment, continuity-of-interaction	implementation-complexity	Contains declared failures and supplies recovery interaction; partial-state recovery and escalation add complexity.
Focus Return	affordance	continuity-of-interaction, accessibility	implementation-complexity	Restores a meaningful keyboard continuation; disappearing targets and nested ownership require lifecycle handling.
Independent Feature Boundary	composition, execution	independent-deployability, team-autonomy	compatibility-pressure, deployment-complexity	Separates release and activation through composition contracts; version compatibility and session transitions add obligations.
Invalidate and Reproject	synchronization, projection	freshness	bandwidth-cost, cache-invalidation-complexity	Refreshes affected observations after accepted writes; scope and ordering of network/cache work need explicit management.
Islands of Interactivity	projection, execution	client-compute-cost	implementation-complexity	Scopes activation to selected regions; intended compute savings compete with loading and inter-region coordination. Savings require measurement.
Local Commit Boundary	authority, mutation	recoverability, offline-usability	implementation-complexity, perceived-responsiveness	Defines acknowledged local acceptance separately from visual input; atomic persistence and waiting for completion add cost.
Local Draft State	affordance, mutation	recoverability, continuity-of-interaction	implementation-complexity, privacy	Preserves editable intent separately from refreshed observations; lifetime management adds complexity and sensitive-data retention risk.
Mutation Outcome Tracking	mutation, reconciliation	recoverability, information-completeness	implementation-complexity	Tracks uncertain write outcomes and resolves them through receipt lookup or bounded replay; identity/retention state adds cost.
Pending Synchronization	synchronization	offline-usability, recoverability	freshness, reconciliation-complexity	Keeps locally accepted work queued across disconnection; remote freshness is delayed and retry/reconciliation contracts are required.
Presentation Model	projection, affordance	testability, portability	implementation-complexity	Separates presentation decisions from widget APIs; model/view binding and synchronization add a failure surface.
Progressive Enhancement	execution, affordance	recoverability	implementation-complexity	Preserves an essential baseline when optional scripts fail; equivalent task semantics and recovery across paths add design work.
URL-addressable State	address	addressability	privacy, compatibility-pressure	Makes selected views reconstructible from addresses; exposure and evolving URL contracts constrain what can be encoded.
Version-Checked Mutation	authority, mutation, reconciliation	authoritative-consistency	cognitive-load	Checks stale bases at commit and exposes rejected proposals for reconsideration; contention adds repeated user review.
Vertical Feature Slice	composition	feature-change-frequency	implementation-complexity	Localizes a capability change behind an interface; shared concepts and interfaces require maintenance. Benefit means coping with frequent changes, not changing their frequency.

Original seeds without dedicated drafts

• Server Authority
• Local Authority
• Replicated Authority
• Server Projection
• Client Projection
• Streaming Projection
• Local Interaction State
• Optimistic Overlay
• Persistent Subscription

Research implication

The developed corpus concentrates on interaction/recovery; authority placement and basic projection choices remain underdeveloped. Family membership alone hides this gap. The completed authority/projection comparison separates scoped acceptance, projection placement and delivery; it retains all six seeds without adding drafts. Keep the navigation fixture paused; pending Zulip applicability questions remain in WP-0003 T01.

This inventory is a coverage aid, not a maturity score, empirical learning cycle, graph export or proof that the initial ontology is sufficient.