coulomb/info-tech-canon
4
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Name the founder instead of "the operator" in repo-owned prose
All checks were successful
CI Smoke / host-smoke (push) Successful in 0s
Details
CI Smoke / container-smoke (push) Successful in 3s
Details

Browse source 
The agent environment orientation (§8) reserves "operator": Operator is a
CARING lifecycle role and OPERATE is an Auth Mode, so the founder's decisions
are written as the founder exercising GOVERN @ estate. Only authorization
references changed. The canon's own domain use of operator — CARING roles,
network operators, operator hours — is correct and untouched, as are preserved
seeds, assimilation sources, history records and consumer-authored feedback.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 121421@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 36f8657c-ebfa-4a2e-9ba0-bff06738f233
This commit is contained in:
tegwick 2026-09-22 22:29:41 +02:00
parent 5cd7728366
commit 3efe5c27e1
3 changed files with 10 additions and 10 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

4
demand/EmissionActivityScope.md
View file

@ -13,8 +13,8 @@
## Demand signal
The first source-owned declaration came from a source that can emit only while
an attended process runs: `local-identity serve`, plus operator-invoked CLI
commands. For such a source, silence has two meanings. Silence while the
an attended process runs: `local-identity serve`, plus attended CLI
invocations. For such a source, silence has two meanings. Silence while the
process runs may be a finding. Silence while the process is not running
carries no information. The contract cannot tell the two apart:

8
workplans/INFO-WP-0019-conformance-and-maintenance.md
View file

@ -17,8 +17,8 @@ state_hub_workstream_id: "b29261ba-c1e4-5533-8185-ab2d5b433685"
Implements the optimization recommendations in
`history/2026-09-05_002437+0200-scope-against-intent.md`.
Reviewed against the current working tree; authorized by the operator on
2026-09-05. Uses the AGENTS.md INFO-WP file convention.
Reviewed against the current working tree; authorized by the founder
(`GOVERN @ estate`) on 2026-09-05. Uses the AGENTS.md INFO-WP file convention.
## Reusable conformance and coverage
@ -133,12 +133,12 @@ The blocker is therefore not readiness. It is that no external source owner has
been asked. The contract came from the King's Guard taxonomy and the evidence
classes remain owned by NetKingdom, which makes `netkingdom` the obvious first
source owner; a second must be independent of it. Asking them is an outward
action this workplan does not authorize, so T06 stays `wait` until the operator
action this workplan does not authorize, so T06 stays `wait` until the founder
decides whether to solicit declarations, and from whom.
### Result — 2026-09-21 (T06)
Closed by restating the gate rather than by evidence arriving, on the operator's
Closed by restating the gate rather than by evidence arriving, on the founder's
decision of 2026-09-21 after the third recheck found the evidence unchanged.
Recorded as INFO-DEC-2026-002, with the reasoning in
`history/2026-09-21_000846+0200-emission-cadence-promotion-gate.md`.

8
workplans/INFO-WP-0029-emission-cadence-adoption.md
View file

@ -17,8 +17,8 @@ state_hub_workstream_id: "d743e220-9d2d-52d8-8df3-880805269639"
INFO-DEC-2026-002 split the promotion gate and moved the standard to candidate,
which asserts a specified contract and no adoption. This workplan pursues the
other half: the evidence the stable level requires. Authorized by the operator
on 2026-09-21, which lifts the restriction INFO-WP-0019-T06 carried against
other half: the evidence the stable level requires. Authorized by the founder
(`GOVERN @ estate`) on 2026-09-21, which lifts the restriction INFO-WP-0019-T06 carried against
outward messages.
Success is not "two declarations arrive". Success is learning whether the
@ -149,9 +149,9 @@ since there is nothing to evaluate before then.
## Honest limit on what this can prove
Both candidate owners are repositories in the same operator's fleet. They are
Both candidate owners are repositories in the same founder's fleet. They are
independent of each other and of this repository in the sense the standard's
section 10 requires, and that is the sense the gate was written in — but they
are not independent of the operator. Evidence gathered here demonstrates that
are not independent of the founder. Evidence gathered here demonstrates that
the contract is implementable by parties who did not write it. It does not
demonstrate ecosystem adoption, and no promotion note may claim otherwise.