tegwick
eaa1608771
history/260927-ComplexWebAppUiComponents_chatgpt.txt is a pasted AI-chat transcript on UI-integration architecture. It fails this repo's primary-source bar (unauthored, unverifiable broken citation markers), so it is screened as a leads-only document, not cataloged as a source, and never cited as evidence. Instead read the two real specs it pointed to: MDN Custom Elements (SRC-0046) and webpack Module Federation (SRC-0047). Neither defines a semantic UI capability contract (inputs/events/commands/slots) as a first-class concept; that gap motivates the new draft hypothesis, distinct from the existing Independent Feature Boundary (release cadence) and Vertical Feature Slice (source grouping) candidates. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Assistant: claude-code Assistant-Model: sonnet Assistant-Process: 290719@bnt-lap001 Assistant-Session: 55cbe504-1bfe-4932-b761-29016523c87b
29 lines
3.6 KiB
Markdown
29 lines
3.6 KiB
Markdown
# Capability contract boundary — real-spec source review
|
|
|
|
2026-09-27. Codex author-model review, documentary evidence only; no application
|
|
or runtime execution. Prompted by a non-primary lead
|
|
(`history/260927-ComplexWebAppUiComponents_chatgpt.txt`, a pasted AI-chat
|
|
transcript with unverifiable, broken citation markers) that is **not** treated
|
|
as a source or cited as evidence anywhere below — only the two real specs it
|
|
pointed to were actually read. See [SourceCatalog.md](../catalog/SourceCatalog.md).
|
|
|
|
## Located claims
|
|
|
|
| Claim | Located text | Interpretation / limit |
|
|
| --- | --- | --- |
|
|
| CC01 — Custom Elements lifecycle contract | [MDN, Using custom elements](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_components/Using_custom_elements): a custom element class declares `static observedAttributes`, and the platform calls `connectedCallback()`, `disconnectedCallback()`, `adoptedCallback()` and `attributeChangedCallback(name, oldValue, newValue)` at defined lifecycle points. | This is a real, browser-native lifecycle/attribute-change notification mechanism. It is narrower than a full "capability contract": this specific page documents attributes and lifecycle callbacks, not a standardized way to declare *semantic* events, commands or slots for a component's public interface — those are separate platform features (custom events, `<slot>`) that this page does not cover in the sections read. |
|
|
| CC02 — Module Federation's expose/consume contract | [webpack, Module Federation](https://webpack.js.org/concepts/module-federation/): a build acts as a "container" that exposes modules through a two-step contract (async load, then sync evaluate); other builds consume it as a "remote module." Shared modules are negotiated through a "share scope" with a `packageName`/`requiredVersion`, not bundled per build. | This is a real, documented mechanism for *code loading and dependency sharing* across independently built bundles. It says nothing about the shape of a UI component's semantic interface (props/events/commands) — Module Federation operates at the module-resolution layer, one layer below any UI-facing contract. |
|
|
| CC03 — the two mechanisms are complementary, not equivalent | Neither CC01 nor CC02 defines a semantic "capability contract" (inputs/events/commands/slots/lifecycle as a declared, versioned interface) as a first-class platform or tool concept. | A semantic capability contract, if adopted, would need to be authored *on top of* one or both of these mechanisms (e.g., attributes/custom-events on a Custom Element, or an exposed module's function signature in Module Federation) — it is not something either spec hands you directly. This is the gap the reviewed lead's "Interface Capability" idea was pointing at, but the lead itself is not evidence that anyone has actually built or standardized it. |
|
|
|
|
## Disposition
|
|
|
|
Draft [Capability Contract Boundary](../candidates/CapabilityContractBoundary.md)
|
|
(CAND-0018) as a new hypothesis, distinct from [Independent Feature Boundary](../candidates/IndependentFeatureBoundary.md)
|
|
(release/activation cadence) and [Vertical Feature Slice](../candidates/VerticalFeatureSlice.md)
|
|
(source-code grouping): this pattern concerns the *shape* of a UI capability's
|
|
public semantic surface, independent of which runtime-isolation mechanism
|
|
(package, Web Component, Module Federation remote, micro-frontend, iframe)
|
|
implements it. Two documentary sources, one family each (Web Components,
|
|
webpack); no independent known use of a capability contract itself is claimed —
|
|
only that its two candidate substrates are real and independently documented.
|
|
No canonical admission, no application/runtime evidence, no M1/M2 status change.
|