Build the T08 domain core with the engine behind a seam
approval-engine APPROVAL-WP-0002-T01 is still progress and its namespace has no
pods, so the live end-to-end proof cannot run. Built everything that does not
depend on it, with the engine behind a Protocol plus a fake carrying its real
refusal semantics, so its arrival is a wiring change rather than a build.
- memo.py: the Decision Memo, versions, binding document. Principal, Scope,
Awareness and Hat are dataclasses rather than dicts because the canonicalizer
requires a shape and a missing key should fail at construction rather than
deep inside hashing — which is exactly how it failed twice while building
this. Field names follow the governed canonicalizer (item_id, severity,
locator): the published vectors are the contract, so the object was aligned to
them rather than the reverse.
- presentation.py: the sole writer of view_hash. One writer, one canonicalizer,
one place to audit. Acknowledgment is an explicit method call and nothing
infers it from scroll, dwell or focus.
- disposition.py: verbs and guards G_NOAGENT, G_STEP, G_PRES, G_ACK, G_REASONS,
G_SEALED. accept is ABSENT from weak steps rather than present-and-disabled,
because a greyed-out accept still teaches the wrong model. Only accept reaches
the engine; a memo return is not represented there at all.
- provenance.py: claim routes per A-16. assert_human_control_dischargeable
refuses a registration-supplied human, so PR-11's limitation fires at the
point of use instead of sitting in a document.
- evidence.py: local outbox, commitment-only records carrying the
GH-DEC-2026-014 §4 existence assertion, per-class reconciliation counts, and a
custody-locator guard that rejects credentialed URLs (PR-12).
- approval_client.py: 409 duplicate_approver is success, 409 conflict terminal,
503 fail-closed, approval:consume refused before a token is requested.
87 tests pass, including every negative case in the Use Case Catalog and that a
fail-closed outcome is recorded as a stance application with no verb field —
never as a decline, because the human did not make one.
T08 stays progress: the live proof is the remainder.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-10 20:38:20 +02:00
|
|
|
"""The Decision Memo object.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One question per memo. A memo carries the question, the requested act, the
|
|
|
|
|
binding level, the brief, a hashed packet, highlights pointing into it, and the
|
|
|
|
|
binding slice committing *which scope this act is being entered into*.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
`binding.target` is the **act-scope**. It is never derived from the token's
|
|
|
|
|
`tenant` claim, which is a membership fact about the principal
|
|
|
|
|
(`GH-DEC-2026-013` §5, PR-08).
|
|
|
|
|
"""
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
from __future__ import annotations
|
|
|
|
|
|
Activate nesting per GH-DEC-2026-015: view_hash carries binding.digest
approval-engine met the condition. Verified here rather than taken on report:
their docs/approval-claim.md carries "Presentation exclusion — GH-DEC-2026-015
§4" in normative language, and I ran
tests/test_claim_contract.py::test_presentation_changes_cannot_change_the_approved_act
myself — 1 passed. That test pins the digest input set from BOTH sides, and the
narrowing half is what makes it real: without it a digest over four fields, or
over a constant, would pass the widening half perfectly.
view_hash now carries binding.digest and the act-scope is no longer
independently canonicalized here, so the act has exactly one canonicalization
computed by the layer that owns it. approval_binding_digest is validated for
shape and refused without its approval id — it is carried, never computed.
The three published vectors are unchanged: they do not carry the new key, so
pick omits it. Asserted, not assumed.
The cycle condition did not disappear, its protection moved — from refusing
nesting to approval-engine's normative exclusion. layer.yaml carries it as
cycle_condition with a test, so a future widening meets a rule rather than
silence.
One thing not assumed. Both gate-house and approval-engine said our binding
slice canonicalizes principal and target, two of their five fields. target
plainly is act material and is now dropped. But their principal is the party ON
WHOSE BEHALF the approval was issued, while ours is the person being BOUND — the
approver. Different roles, and dropping ours would remove who was shown this
from view_hash and gut the promise. Kept it, declared principal_role_overlap
open in layer.yaml, tested that changing the approver still moves view_hash, and
raised it rather than silently resolving it either way.
L0/L2 are unaffected: with no approval there is no digest to defer to, and
test_act_scope_still_binds_when_there_is_no_carried_digest pins that.
100 tests pass.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-10 20:58:22 +02:00
|
|
|
import re
|
Build the T08 domain core with the engine behind a seam
approval-engine APPROVAL-WP-0002-T01 is still progress and its namespace has no
pods, so the live end-to-end proof cannot run. Built everything that does not
depend on it, with the engine behind a Protocol plus a fake carrying its real
refusal semantics, so its arrival is a wiring change rather than a build.
- memo.py: the Decision Memo, versions, binding document. Principal, Scope,
Awareness and Hat are dataclasses rather than dicts because the canonicalizer
requires a shape and a missing key should fail at construction rather than
deep inside hashing — which is exactly how it failed twice while building
this. Field names follow the governed canonicalizer (item_id, severity,
locator): the published vectors are the contract, so the object was aligned to
them rather than the reverse.
- presentation.py: the sole writer of view_hash. One writer, one canonicalizer,
one place to audit. Acknowledgment is an explicit method call and nothing
infers it from scroll, dwell or focus.
- disposition.py: verbs and guards G_NOAGENT, G_STEP, G_PRES, G_ACK, G_REASONS,
G_SEALED. accept is ABSENT from weak steps rather than present-and-disabled,
because a greyed-out accept still teaches the wrong model. Only accept reaches
the engine; a memo return is not represented there at all.
- provenance.py: claim routes per A-16. assert_human_control_dischargeable
refuses a registration-supplied human, so PR-11's limitation fires at the
point of use instead of sitting in a document.
- evidence.py: local outbox, commitment-only records carrying the
GH-DEC-2026-014 §4 existence assertion, per-class reconciliation counts, and a
custody-locator guard that rejects credentialed URLs (PR-12).
- approval_client.py: 409 duplicate_approver is success, 409 conflict terminal,
503 fail-closed, approval:consume refused before a token is requested.
87 tests pass, including every negative case in the Use Case Catalog and that a
fail-closed outcome is recorded as a stance application with no verb field —
never as a decline, because the human did not make one.
T08 stays progress: the live proof is the remainder.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-10 20:38:20 +02:00
|
|
|
from dataclasses import dataclass, field, replace
|
|
|
|
|
from enum import Enum
|
|
|
|
|
|
Activate nesting per GH-DEC-2026-015: view_hash carries binding.digest
approval-engine met the condition. Verified here rather than taken on report:
their docs/approval-claim.md carries "Presentation exclusion — GH-DEC-2026-015
§4" in normative language, and I ran
tests/test_claim_contract.py::test_presentation_changes_cannot_change_the_approved_act
myself — 1 passed. That test pins the digest input set from BOTH sides, and the
narrowing half is what makes it real: without it a digest over four fields, or
over a constant, would pass the widening half perfectly.
view_hash now carries binding.digest and the act-scope is no longer
independently canonicalized here, so the act has exactly one canonicalization
computed by the layer that owns it. approval_binding_digest is validated for
shape and refused without its approval id — it is carried, never computed.
The three published vectors are unchanged: they do not carry the new key, so
pick omits it. Asserted, not assumed.
The cycle condition did not disappear, its protection moved — from refusing
nesting to approval-engine's normative exclusion. layer.yaml carries it as
cycle_condition with a test, so a future widening meets a rule rather than
silence.
One thing not assumed. Both gate-house and approval-engine said our binding
slice canonicalizes principal and target, two of their five fields. target
plainly is act material and is now dropped. But their principal is the party ON
WHOSE BEHALF the approval was issued, while ours is the person being BOUND — the
approver. Different roles, and dropping ours would remove who was shown this
from view_hash and gut the promise. Kept it, declared principal_role_overlap
open in layer.yaml, tested that changing the approver still moves view_hash, and
raised it rather than silently resolving it either way.
L0/L2 are unaffected: with no approval there is no digest to defer to, and
test_act_scope_still_binds_when_there_is_no_carried_digest pins that.
100 tests pass.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-10 20:58:22 +02:00
|
|
|
#: approval-engine's digest format. We validate the shape and NEVER compute one.
|
|
|
|
|
APPROVAL_DIGEST_RE = re.compile(r"^sha256:[0-9a-f]{64}$")
|
|
|
|
|
|
Build the T08 domain core with the engine behind a seam
approval-engine APPROVAL-WP-0002-T01 is still progress and its namespace has no
pods, so the live end-to-end proof cannot run. Built everything that does not
depend on it, with the engine behind a Protocol plus a fake carrying its real
refusal semantics, so its arrival is a wiring change rather than a build.
- memo.py: the Decision Memo, versions, binding document. Principal, Scope,
Awareness and Hat are dataclasses rather than dicts because the canonicalizer
requires a shape and a missing key should fail at construction rather than
deep inside hashing — which is exactly how it failed twice while building
this. Field names follow the governed canonicalizer (item_id, severity,
locator): the published vectors are the contract, so the object was aligned to
them rather than the reverse.
- presentation.py: the sole writer of view_hash. One writer, one canonicalizer,
one place to audit. Acknowledgment is an explicit method call and nothing
infers it from scroll, dwell or focus.
- disposition.py: verbs and guards G_NOAGENT, G_STEP, G_PRES, G_ACK, G_REASONS,
G_SEALED. accept is ABSENT from weak steps rather than present-and-disabled,
because a greyed-out accept still teaches the wrong model. Only accept reaches
the engine; a memo return is not represented there at all.
- provenance.py: claim routes per A-16. assert_human_control_dischargeable
refuses a registration-supplied human, so PR-11's limitation fires at the
point of use instead of sitting in a document.
- evidence.py: local outbox, commitment-only records carrying the
GH-DEC-2026-014 §4 existence assertion, per-class reconciliation counts, and a
custody-locator guard that rejects credentialed URLs (PR-12).
- approval_client.py: 409 duplicate_approver is success, 409 conflict terminal,
503 fail-closed, approval:consume refused before a token is requested.
87 tests pass, including every negative case in the Use Case Catalog and that a
fail-closed outcome is recorded as a stance application with no verb field —
never as a decline, because the human did not make one.
T08 stays progress: the live proof is the remainder.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-10 20:38:20 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
class BindingLevel(str, Enum):
|
|
|
|
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENT = "acknowledgment"
|
|
|
|
|
ORGANIZATIONAL = "organizational"
|
|
|
|
|
AES = "aes"
|
|
|
|
|
QES = "qes"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
class StepKind(str, Enum):
|
|
|
|
|
# Weak — acknowledgment only. `accept` is illegal here on purpose.
|
|
|
|
|
INFORM = "inform"
|
|
|
|
|
COMMENT = "comment"
|
|
|
|
|
REVIEW = "review"
|
|
|
|
|
ACKNOWLEDGE = "acknowledge"
|
|
|
|
|
# Co-sign
|
|
|
|
|
MITZEICHNUNG = "mitzeichnung"
|
|
|
|
|
APPROVE = "approve"
|
|
|
|
|
# Bind
|
|
|
|
|
SCHLUSSZEICHNUNG = "schlusszeichnung"
|
|
|
|
|
SIGN = "sign"
|
|
|
|
|
SEAL = "seal"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@property
|
|
|
|
|
def is_weak(self) -> bool:
|
|
|
|
|
return self in (StepKind.INFORM, StepKind.COMMENT, StepKind.REVIEW, StepKind.ACKNOWLEDGE)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@property
|
|
|
|
|
def is_bind(self) -> bool:
|
|
|
|
|
return self in (StepKind.SCHLUSSZEICHNUNG, StepKind.SIGN, StepKind.SEAL)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@dataclass(frozen=True)
|
|
|
|
|
class PacketItem:
|
|
|
|
|
"""A hashed document in the packet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Field names follow ``canonicalize.normalize_packet``, which is the governed
|
|
|
|
|
contract the published vectors depend on — ``item_id``, not ``id``. ``label``
|
|
|
|
|
is UI-only and is deliberately outside the hash: renaming a document does
|
|
|
|
|
not change what was shown.
|
|
|
|
|
"""
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
item_id: str
|
|
|
|
|
label: str
|
|
|
|
|
hash: str
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@dataclass(frozen=True)
|
|
|
|
|
class Highlight:
|
|
|
|
|
"""A pointer into the packet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Highlights are an aid to attention, never a filter. Acknowledging them does
|
|
|
|
|
not narrow what is bound — the whole instrument is bound (PR-12/W-highlights).
|
|
|
|
|
"""
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
id: str
|
|
|
|
|
item_id: str
|
|
|
|
|
note: str
|
|
|
|
|
required_ack: bool = False
|
|
|
|
|
severity: str = "informational"
|
|
|
|
|
locator: dict = field(default_factory=dict)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@dataclass(frozen=True)
|
|
|
|
|
class Identifier:
|
|
|
|
|
scheme: str
|
|
|
|
|
value: str
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@dataclass(frozen=True)
|
|
|
|
|
class Principal:
|
|
|
|
|
"""A party in the binding slice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A dataclass rather than a dict because the canonicalizer requires
|
|
|
|
|
``display_name``, ``id`` and ``kind``, and a missing one is a runtime
|
|
|
|
|
KeyError deep inside hashing rather than a visible defect at construction.
|
|
|
|
|
"""
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
id: str
|
|
|
|
|
kind: str
|
|
|
|
|
display_name: str
|
|
|
|
|
role: str | None = None
|
|
|
|
|
identifiers: tuple[Identifier, ...] = ()
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
def as_document(self) -> dict:
|
|
|
|
|
out: dict = {"display_name": self.display_name, "id": self.id, "kind": self.kind}
|
|
|
|
|
if self.role:
|
|
|
|
|
out["role"] = self.role
|
|
|
|
|
if self.identifiers:
|
|
|
|
|
out["identifiers"] = [
|
|
|
|
|
{"scheme": i.scheme, "value": i.value} for i in self.identifiers
|
|
|
|
|
]
|
|
|
|
|
return out
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@dataclass(frozen=True)
|
|
|
|
|
class Scope:
|
|
|
|
|
"""The act-scope. What the person is entering, not who they are."""
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kind: str
|
|
|
|
|
id: str
|
|
|
|
|
label: str
|
|
|
|
|
environment: str | None = None
|
|
|
|
|
requires_new_bind: bool = False
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@dataclass(frozen=True)
|
|
|
|
|
class BindingSlice:
|
|
|
|
|
"""Committed and signed. Inside ``view_hash``."""
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
principal: Principal
|
|
|
|
|
target: Scope
|
|
|
|
|
terms: str | None = None
|
|
|
|
|
justification: str | None = None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@dataclass(frozen=True)
|
|
|
|
|
class Hat:
|
|
|
|
|
"""A role. Not a scope — `hats are not scopes` (INTENT invariant)."""
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
id: str
|
|
|
|
|
label: str
|
|
|
|
|
elevates: bool = False
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
def as_document(self) -> dict:
|
|
|
|
|
return {"id": self.id, "label": self.label, "elevates": self.elevates}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@dataclass(frozen=True)
|
|
|
|
|
class Awareness:
|
|
|
|
|
"""Shown on the same surface, hashed separately, never signed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Typed for the same reason ``Principal`` is: the canonicalizer requires a
|
|
|
|
|
shape, and a malformed one should fail at construction rather than deep
|
|
|
|
|
inside hashing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nothing here enters ``view_hash``. Defaulting a hat to last-used is required
|
|
|
|
|
for situational awareness and forbidden from silently entering the signed
|
|
|
|
|
payload (INTENT principle 11).
|
|
|
|
|
"""
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
proposed_hat: Hat | None = None
|
|
|
|
|
proposed_hat_source: str | None = None
|
|
|
|
|
available_hats: tuple[Hat, ...] = ()
|
|
|
|
|
situation_note: str | None = None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
def as_document(self) -> dict:
|
|
|
|
|
out: dict = {}
|
|
|
|
|
if self.proposed_hat is not None:
|
|
|
|
|
out["proposed_hat"] = self.proposed_hat.as_document()
|
|
|
|
|
if self.proposed_hat_source is not None:
|
|
|
|
|
out["proposed_hat_source"] = self.proposed_hat_source
|
|
|
|
|
if self.available_hats:
|
|
|
|
|
out["available_hats"] = [h.as_document() for h in self.available_hats]
|
|
|
|
|
if self.situation_note is not None:
|
|
|
|
|
out["situation_note"] = self.situation_note
|
|
|
|
|
return out
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@dataclass(frozen=True)
|
|
|
|
|
class Memo:
|
|
|
|
|
id: str
|
|
|
|
|
version: int
|
|
|
|
|
question: str
|
|
|
|
|
requested_act: str
|
|
|
|
|
binding_level: BindingLevel
|
|
|
|
|
brief: str
|
|
|
|
|
binding: BindingSlice
|
|
|
|
|
step_kind: StepKind
|
|
|
|
|
packet: tuple[PacketItem, ...] = ()
|
|
|
|
|
highlights: tuple[Highlight, ...] = ()
|
|
|
|
|
locale: str = "en"
|
|
|
|
|
ui_release: str = "informed-decision@0.1.0"
|
Activate nesting per GH-DEC-2026-015: view_hash carries binding.digest
approval-engine met the condition. Verified here rather than taken on report:
their docs/approval-claim.md carries "Presentation exclusion — GH-DEC-2026-015
§4" in normative language, and I ran
tests/test_claim_contract.py::test_presentation_changes_cannot_change_the_approved_act
myself — 1 passed. That test pins the digest input set from BOTH sides, and the
narrowing half is what makes it real: without it a digest over four fields, or
over a constant, would pass the widening half perfectly.
view_hash now carries binding.digest and the act-scope is no longer
independently canonicalized here, so the act has exactly one canonicalization
computed by the layer that owns it. approval_binding_digest is validated for
shape and refused without its approval id — it is carried, never computed.
The three published vectors are unchanged: they do not carry the new key, so
pick omits it. Asserted, not assumed.
The cycle condition did not disappear, its protection moved — from refusing
nesting to approval-engine's normative exclusion. layer.yaml carries it as
cycle_condition with a test, so a future widening meets a rule rather than
silence.
One thing not assumed. Both gate-house and approval-engine said our binding
slice canonicalizes principal and target, two of their five fields. target
plainly is act material and is now dropped. But their principal is the party ON
WHOSE BEHALF the approval was issued, while ours is the person being BOUND — the
approver. Different roles, and dropping ours would remove who was shown this
from view_hash and gut the promise. Kept it, declared principal_role_overlap
open in layer.yaml, tested that changing the approver still moves view_hash, and
raised it rather than silently resolving it either way.
L0/L2 are unaffected: with no approval there is no digest to defer to, and
test_act_scope_still_binds_when_there_is_no_carried_digest pins that.
100 tests pass.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-10 20:58:22 +02:00
|
|
|
#: Co-reference to the act this memo presents.
|
Build the T08 domain core with the engine behind a seam
approval-engine APPROVAL-WP-0002-T01 is still progress and its namespace has no
pods, so the live end-to-end proof cannot run. Built everything that does not
depend on it, with the engine behind a Protocol plus a fake carrying its real
refusal semantics, so its arrival is a wiring change rather than a build.
- memo.py: the Decision Memo, versions, binding document. Principal, Scope,
Awareness and Hat are dataclasses rather than dicts because the canonicalizer
requires a shape and a missing key should fail at construction rather than
deep inside hashing — which is exactly how it failed twice while building
this. Field names follow the governed canonicalizer (item_id, severity,
locator): the published vectors are the contract, so the object was aligned to
them rather than the reverse.
- presentation.py: the sole writer of view_hash. One writer, one canonicalizer,
one place to audit. Acknowledgment is an explicit method call and nothing
infers it from scroll, dwell or focus.
- disposition.py: verbs and guards G_NOAGENT, G_STEP, G_PRES, G_ACK, G_REASONS,
G_SEALED. accept is ABSENT from weak steps rather than present-and-disabled,
because a greyed-out accept still teaches the wrong model. Only accept reaches
the engine; a memo return is not represented there at all.
- provenance.py: claim routes per A-16. assert_human_control_dischargeable
refuses a registration-supplied human, so PR-11's limitation fires at the
point of use instead of sitting in a document.
- evidence.py: local outbox, commitment-only records carrying the
GH-DEC-2026-014 §4 existence assertion, per-class reconciliation counts, and a
custody-locator guard that rejects credentialed URLs (PR-12).
- approval_client.py: 409 duplicate_approver is success, 409 conflict terminal,
503 fail-closed, approval:consume refused before a token is requested.
87 tests pass, including every negative case in the Use Case Catalog and that a
fail-closed outcome is recorded as a stance application with no verb field —
never as a decline, because the human did not make one.
T08 stays progress: the live proof is the remainder.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-10 20:38:20 +02:00
|
|
|
approval_id: str | None = None
|
Activate nesting per GH-DEC-2026-015: view_hash carries binding.digest
approval-engine met the condition. Verified here rather than taken on report:
their docs/approval-claim.md carries "Presentation exclusion — GH-DEC-2026-015
§4" in normative language, and I ran
tests/test_claim_contract.py::test_presentation_changes_cannot_change_the_approved_act
myself — 1 passed. That test pins the digest input set from BOTH sides, and the
narrowing half is what makes it real: without it a digest over four fields, or
over a constant, would pass the widening half perfectly.
view_hash now carries binding.digest and the act-scope is no longer
independently canonicalized here, so the act has exactly one canonicalization
computed by the layer that owns it. approval_binding_digest is validated for
shape and refused without its approval id — it is carried, never computed.
The three published vectors are unchanged: they do not carry the new key, so
pick omits it. Asserted, not assumed.
The cycle condition did not disappear, its protection moved — from refusing
nesting to approval-engine's normative exclusion. layer.yaml carries it as
cycle_condition with a test, so a future widening meets a rule rather than
silence.
One thing not assumed. Both gate-house and approval-engine said our binding
slice canonicalizes principal and target, two of their five fields. target
plainly is act material and is now dropped. But their principal is the party ON
WHOSE BEHALF the approval was issued, while ours is the person being BOUND — the
approver. Different roles, and dropping ours would remove who was shown this
from view_hash and gut the promise. Kept it, declared principal_role_overlap
open in layer.yaml, tested that changing the approver still moves view_hash, and
raised it rather than silently resolving it either way.
L0/L2 are unaffected: with no approval there is no digest to defer to, and
test_act_scope_still_binds_when_there_is_no_carried_digest pins that.
100 tests pass.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-10 20:58:22 +02:00
|
|
|
#: approval-engine's binding.digest over the five act fields, CARRIED here
|
|
|
|
|
#: under GH-DEC-2026-015 (activated 2026-09-10 once approval-engine stated
|
|
|
|
|
#: the presentation exclusion as normative and tested).
|
|
|
|
|
#:
|
|
|
|
|
#: It is referenced, never recomputed: this repository must not restate that
|
|
|
|
|
#: digest from its own vocabulary. When present, the act-scope stops being
|
|
|
|
|
#: independently canonicalized here, so the act has exactly ONE
|
|
|
|
|
#: canonicalization — computed by the layer that owns it.
|
|
|
|
|
approval_binding_digest: str | None = None
|
Build the T08 domain core with the engine behind a seam
approval-engine APPROVAL-WP-0002-T01 is still progress and its namespace has no
pods, so the live end-to-end proof cannot run. Built everything that does not
depend on it, with the engine behind a Protocol plus a fake carrying its real
refusal semantics, so its arrival is a wiring change rather than a build.
- memo.py: the Decision Memo, versions, binding document. Principal, Scope,
Awareness and Hat are dataclasses rather than dicts because the canonicalizer
requires a shape and a missing key should fail at construction rather than
deep inside hashing — which is exactly how it failed twice while building
this. Field names follow the governed canonicalizer (item_id, severity,
locator): the published vectors are the contract, so the object was aligned to
them rather than the reverse.
- presentation.py: the sole writer of view_hash. One writer, one canonicalizer,
one place to audit. Acknowledgment is an explicit method call and nothing
infers it from scroll, dwell or focus.
- disposition.py: verbs and guards G_NOAGENT, G_STEP, G_PRES, G_ACK, G_REASONS,
G_SEALED. accept is ABSENT from weak steps rather than present-and-disabled,
because a greyed-out accept still teaches the wrong model. Only accept reaches
the engine; a memo return is not represented there at all.
- provenance.py: claim routes per A-16. assert_human_control_dischargeable
refuses a registration-supplied human, so PR-11's limitation fires at the
point of use instead of sitting in a document.
- evidence.py: local outbox, commitment-only records carrying the
GH-DEC-2026-014 §4 existence assertion, per-class reconciliation counts, and a
custody-locator guard that rejects credentialed URLs (PR-12).
- approval_client.py: 409 duplicate_approver is success, 409 conflict terminal,
503 fail-closed, approval:consume refused before a token is requested.
87 tests pass, including every negative case in the Use Case Catalog and that a
fail-closed outcome is recorded as a stance application with no verb field —
never as a decline, because the human did not make one.
T08 stays progress: the live proof is the remainder.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-10 20:38:20 +02:00
|
|
|
sealed: bool = False
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
def __post_init__(self) -> None:
|
|
|
|
|
if not self.question:
|
|
|
|
|
raise ValueError("a memo without a question does not render")
|
Activate nesting per GH-DEC-2026-015: view_hash carries binding.digest
approval-engine met the condition. Verified here rather than taken on report:
their docs/approval-claim.md carries "Presentation exclusion — GH-DEC-2026-015
§4" in normative language, and I ran
tests/test_claim_contract.py::test_presentation_changes_cannot_change_the_approved_act
myself — 1 passed. That test pins the digest input set from BOTH sides, and the
narrowing half is what makes it real: without it a digest over four fields, or
over a constant, would pass the widening half perfectly.
view_hash now carries binding.digest and the act-scope is no longer
independently canonicalized here, so the act has exactly one canonicalization
computed by the layer that owns it. approval_binding_digest is validated for
shape and refused without its approval id — it is carried, never computed.
The three published vectors are unchanged: they do not carry the new key, so
pick omits it. Asserted, not assumed.
The cycle condition did not disappear, its protection moved — from refusing
nesting to approval-engine's normative exclusion. layer.yaml carries it as
cycle_condition with a test, so a future widening meets a rule rather than
silence.
One thing not assumed. Both gate-house and approval-engine said our binding
slice canonicalizes principal and target, two of their five fields. target
plainly is act material and is now dropped. But their principal is the party ON
WHOSE BEHALF the approval was issued, while ours is the person being BOUND — the
approver. Different roles, and dropping ours would remove who was shown this
from view_hash and gut the promise. Kept it, declared principal_role_overlap
open in layer.yaml, tested that changing the approver still moves view_hash, and
raised it rather than silently resolving it either way.
L0/L2 are unaffected: with no approval there is no digest to defer to, and
test_act_scope_still_binds_when_there_is_no_carried_digest pins that.
100 tests pass.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-10 20:58:22 +02:00
|
|
|
if self.approval_binding_digest is not None:
|
|
|
|
|
if not APPROVAL_DIGEST_RE.match(self.approval_binding_digest):
|
|
|
|
|
raise ValueError(
|
|
|
|
|
"approval_binding_digest must be approval-engine's "
|
|
|
|
|
"sha256:<64 hex> form; it is carried, never computed here"
|
|
|
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
if self.approval_id is None:
|
|
|
|
|
raise ValueError(
|
|
|
|
|
"a carried binding digest needs the approval it belongs to"
|
|
|
|
|
)
|
Build the T08 domain core with the engine behind a seam
approval-engine APPROVAL-WP-0002-T01 is still progress and its namespace has no
pods, so the live end-to-end proof cannot run. Built everything that does not
depend on it, with the engine behind a Protocol plus a fake carrying its real
refusal semantics, so its arrival is a wiring change rather than a build.
- memo.py: the Decision Memo, versions, binding document. Principal, Scope,
Awareness and Hat are dataclasses rather than dicts because the canonicalizer
requires a shape and a missing key should fail at construction rather than
deep inside hashing — which is exactly how it failed twice while building
this. Field names follow the governed canonicalizer (item_id, severity,
locator): the published vectors are the contract, so the object was aligned to
them rather than the reverse.
- presentation.py: the sole writer of view_hash. One writer, one canonicalizer,
one place to audit. Acknowledgment is an explicit method call and nothing
infers it from scroll, dwell or focus.
- disposition.py: verbs and guards G_NOAGENT, G_STEP, G_PRES, G_ACK, G_REASONS,
G_SEALED. accept is ABSENT from weak steps rather than present-and-disabled,
because a greyed-out accept still teaches the wrong model. Only accept reaches
the engine; a memo return is not represented there at all.
- provenance.py: claim routes per A-16. assert_human_control_dischargeable
refuses a registration-supplied human, so PR-11's limitation fires at the
point of use instead of sitting in a document.
- evidence.py: local outbox, commitment-only records carrying the
GH-DEC-2026-014 §4 existence assertion, per-class reconciliation counts, and a
custody-locator guard that rejects credentialed URLs (PR-12).
- approval_client.py: 409 duplicate_approver is success, 409 conflict terminal,
503 fail-closed, approval:consume refused before a token is requested.
87 tests pass, including every negative case in the Use Case Catalog and that a
fail-closed outcome is recorded as a stance application with no verb field —
never as a decline, because the human did not make one.
T08 stays progress: the live proof is the remainder.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-10 20:38:20 +02:00
|
|
|
packet_ids = {p.item_id for p in self.packet}
|
|
|
|
|
for h in self.highlights:
|
|
|
|
|
if h.item_id not in packet_ids:
|
|
|
|
|
raise ValueError(f"highlight {h.id} points outside the packet")
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@property
|
|
|
|
|
def required_ack_ids(self) -> frozenset[str]:
|
|
|
|
|
return frozenset(h.id for h in self.highlights if h.required_ack)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
def next_version(self, **changes) -> "Memo":
|
|
|
|
|
"""A change creates version n+1. Outstanding presentations die with it."""
|
|
|
|
|
return replace(self, version=self.version + 1, **changes)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
def binding_document(self) -> dict:
|
|
|
|
|
"""The document ``view_hash`` is computed over.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note what is here and what is not: the packet and highlights are here
|
|
|
|
|
because they were shown; the token's ``tenant`` claim is not, because it
|
|
|
|
|
is not the act-scope.
|
|
|
|
|
"""
|
|
|
|
|
return {
|
|
|
|
|
"memo_id": self.id,
|
|
|
|
|
"memo_version": self.version,
|
|
|
|
|
"question": self.question,
|
|
|
|
|
"requested_act": self.requested_act,
|
|
|
|
|
"binding_level": self.binding_level.value,
|
|
|
|
|
"brief": self.brief,
|
|
|
|
|
"locale": self.locale,
|
|
|
|
|
"ui_release": self.ui_release,
|
Activate nesting per GH-DEC-2026-015: view_hash carries binding.digest
approval-engine met the condition. Verified here rather than taken on report:
their docs/approval-claim.md carries "Presentation exclusion — GH-DEC-2026-015
§4" in normative language, and I ran
tests/test_claim_contract.py::test_presentation_changes_cannot_change_the_approved_act
myself — 1 passed. That test pins the digest input set from BOTH sides, and the
narrowing half is what makes it real: without it a digest over four fields, or
over a constant, would pass the widening half perfectly.
view_hash now carries binding.digest and the act-scope is no longer
independently canonicalized here, so the act has exactly one canonicalization
computed by the layer that owns it. approval_binding_digest is validated for
shape and refused without its approval id — it is carried, never computed.
The three published vectors are unchanged: they do not carry the new key, so
pick omits it. Asserted, not assumed.
The cycle condition did not disappear, its protection moved — from refusing
nesting to approval-engine's normative exclusion. layer.yaml carries it as
cycle_condition with a test, so a future widening meets a rule rather than
silence.
One thing not assumed. Both gate-house and approval-engine said our binding
slice canonicalizes principal and target, two of their five fields. target
plainly is act material and is now dropped. But their principal is the party ON
WHOSE BEHALF the approval was issued, while ours is the person being BOUND — the
approver. Different roles, and dropping ours would remove who was shown this
from view_hash and gut the promise. Kept it, declared principal_role_overlap
open in layer.yaml, tested that changing the approver still moves view_hash, and
raised it rather than silently resolving it either way.
L0/L2 are unaffected: with no approval there is no digest to defer to, and
test_act_scope_still_binds_when_there_is_no_carried_digest pins that.
100 tests pass.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-10 20:58:22 +02:00
|
|
|
**(
|
|
|
|
|
{"approval_binding_digest": self.approval_binding_digest}
|
|
|
|
|
if self.approval_binding_digest is not None
|
|
|
|
|
else {}
|
|
|
|
|
),
|
Build the T08 domain core with the engine behind a seam
approval-engine APPROVAL-WP-0002-T01 is still progress and its namespace has no
pods, so the live end-to-end proof cannot run. Built everything that does not
depend on it, with the engine behind a Protocol plus a fake carrying its real
refusal semantics, so its arrival is a wiring change rather than a build.
- memo.py: the Decision Memo, versions, binding document. Principal, Scope,
Awareness and Hat are dataclasses rather than dicts because the canonicalizer
requires a shape and a missing key should fail at construction rather than
deep inside hashing — which is exactly how it failed twice while building
this. Field names follow the governed canonicalizer (item_id, severity,
locator): the published vectors are the contract, so the object was aligned to
them rather than the reverse.
- presentation.py: the sole writer of view_hash. One writer, one canonicalizer,
one place to audit. Acknowledgment is an explicit method call and nothing
infers it from scroll, dwell or focus.
- disposition.py: verbs and guards G_NOAGENT, G_STEP, G_PRES, G_ACK, G_REASONS,
G_SEALED. accept is ABSENT from weak steps rather than present-and-disabled,
because a greyed-out accept still teaches the wrong model. Only accept reaches
the engine; a memo return is not represented there at all.
- provenance.py: claim routes per A-16. assert_human_control_dischargeable
refuses a registration-supplied human, so PR-11's limitation fires at the
point of use instead of sitting in a document.
- evidence.py: local outbox, commitment-only records carrying the
GH-DEC-2026-014 §4 existence assertion, per-class reconciliation counts, and a
custody-locator guard that rejects credentialed URLs (PR-12).
- approval_client.py: 409 duplicate_approver is success, 409 conflict terminal,
503 fail-closed, approval:consume refused before a token is requested.
87 tests pass, including every negative case in the Use Case Catalog and that a
fail-closed outcome is recorded as a stance application with no verb field —
never as a decline, because the human did not make one.
T08 stays progress: the live proof is the remainder.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-10 20:38:20 +02:00
|
|
|
"packet": [{"item_id": p.item_id, "hash": p.hash} for p in self.packet],
|
|
|
|
|
"highlights": [
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
"id": h.id,
|
|
|
|
|
"item_id": h.item_id,
|
|
|
|
|
"required_ack": h.required_ack,
|
|
|
|
|
"severity": h.severity,
|
|
|
|
|
"locator": h.locator,
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
for h in self.highlights
|
|
|
|
|
],
|
|
|
|
|
"binding": self._binding_document(),
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
def _binding_document(self) -> dict:
|
Activate nesting per GH-DEC-2026-015: view_hash carries binding.digest
approval-engine met the condition. Verified here rather than taken on report:
their docs/approval-claim.md carries "Presentation exclusion — GH-DEC-2026-015
§4" in normative language, and I ran
tests/test_claim_contract.py::test_presentation_changes_cannot_change_the_approved_act
myself — 1 passed. That test pins the digest input set from BOTH sides, and the
narrowing half is what makes it real: without it a digest over four fields, or
over a constant, would pass the widening half perfectly.
view_hash now carries binding.digest and the act-scope is no longer
independently canonicalized here, so the act has exactly one canonicalization
computed by the layer that owns it. approval_binding_digest is validated for
shape and refused without its approval id — it is carried, never computed.
The three published vectors are unchanged: they do not carry the new key, so
pick omits it. Asserted, not assumed.
The cycle condition did not disappear, its protection moved — from refusing
nesting to approval-engine's normative exclusion. layer.yaml carries it as
cycle_condition with a test, so a future widening meets a rule rather than
silence.
One thing not assumed. Both gate-house and approval-engine said our binding
slice canonicalizes principal and target, two of their five fields. target
plainly is act material and is now dropped. But their principal is the party ON
WHOSE BEHALF the approval was issued, while ours is the person being BOUND — the
approver. Different roles, and dropping ours would remove who was shown this
from view_hash and gut the promise. Kept it, declared principal_role_overlap
open in layer.yaml, tested that changing the approver still moves view_hash, and
raised it rather than silently resolving it either way.
L0/L2 are unaffected: with no approval there is no digest to defer to, and
test_act_scope_still_binds_when_there_is_no_carried_digest pins that.
100 tests pass.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-10 20:58:22 +02:00
|
|
|
"""The binding slice, minus whatever the carried digest already covers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Where ``approval_binding_digest`` is present, the **act-scope** is
|
|
|
|
|
omitted: `target` is act material and is covered by that digest, so
|
|
|
|
|
canonicalizing it again here would be the partial recomputation in a
|
|
|
|
|
second vocabulary that GH-DEC-2026-015 exists to remove.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
``principal`` is **kept**. approval-engine's `principal` is the party
|
|
|
|
|
*on whose behalf* the approval was issued; ours is the person being
|
|
|
|
|
bound — the approver. Different roles, so dropping ours would remove
|
|
|
|
|
*who was shown this* from `view_hash` and gut the promise this
|
|
|
|
|
repository exists to make. Raised with approval-engine rather than
|
|
|
|
|
assumed; if the two are the same field, this drops too.
|
|
|
|
|
"""
|
|
|
|
|
out: dict = {"principal": self.binding.principal.as_document()}
|
|
|
|
|
if self.approval_binding_digest is None:
|
|
|
|
|
target: dict = {
|
|
|
|
|
"kind": self.binding.target.kind,
|
|
|
|
|
"id": self.binding.target.id,
|
|
|
|
|
"label": self.binding.target.label,
|
|
|
|
|
"requires_new_bind": self.binding.target.requires_new_bind,
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
if self.binding.target.environment is not None:
|
|
|
|
|
target["environment"] = self.binding.target.environment
|
|
|
|
|
out["target"] = target
|
Build the T08 domain core with the engine behind a seam
approval-engine APPROVAL-WP-0002-T01 is still progress and its namespace has no
pods, so the live end-to-end proof cannot run. Built everything that does not
depend on it, with the engine behind a Protocol plus a fake carrying its real
refusal semantics, so its arrival is a wiring change rather than a build.
- memo.py: the Decision Memo, versions, binding document. Principal, Scope,
Awareness and Hat are dataclasses rather than dicts because the canonicalizer
requires a shape and a missing key should fail at construction rather than
deep inside hashing — which is exactly how it failed twice while building
this. Field names follow the governed canonicalizer (item_id, severity,
locator): the published vectors are the contract, so the object was aligned to
them rather than the reverse.
- presentation.py: the sole writer of view_hash. One writer, one canonicalizer,
one place to audit. Acknowledgment is an explicit method call and nothing
infers it from scroll, dwell or focus.
- disposition.py: verbs and guards G_NOAGENT, G_STEP, G_PRES, G_ACK, G_REASONS,
G_SEALED. accept is ABSENT from weak steps rather than present-and-disabled,
because a greyed-out accept still teaches the wrong model. Only accept reaches
the engine; a memo return is not represented there at all.
- provenance.py: claim routes per A-16. assert_human_control_dischargeable
refuses a registration-supplied human, so PR-11's limitation fires at the
point of use instead of sitting in a document.
- evidence.py: local outbox, commitment-only records carrying the
GH-DEC-2026-014 §4 existence assertion, per-class reconciliation counts, and a
custody-locator guard that rejects credentialed URLs (PR-12).
- approval_client.py: 409 duplicate_approver is success, 409 conflict terminal,
503 fail-closed, approval:consume refused before a token is requested.
87 tests pass, including every negative case in the Use Case Catalog and that a
fail-closed outcome is recorded as a stance application with no verb field —
never as a decline, because the human did not make one.
T08 stays progress: the live proof is the remainder.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-10 20:38:20 +02:00
|
|
|
if self.binding.terms is not None:
|
|
|
|
|
out["terms"] = self.binding.terms
|
|
|
|
|
if self.binding.justification is not None:
|
|
|
|
|
out["justification"] = self.binding.justification
|
|
|
|
|
return out
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
def awareness_document(self, awareness: "Awareness | None" = None) -> dict:
|
|
|
|
|
"""Shown on the same surface, hashed separately, never signed."""
|
|
|
|
|
doc = {"memo_id": self.id, "memo_version": self.version, "locale": self.locale}
|
|
|
|
|
if awareness is not None:
|
|
|
|
|
doc.update(awareness.as_document())
|
|
|
|
|
return doc
|