Declare the layer per GH-DEC-2026-012; close T02

Gate House ruled all three questions within a day, attributing the speed to the
request being filed before the architecture with candidate answers and their
costs.

R1 PEP-shaped, confirmed as proposed. The ruling settles the shape; the layer
stays ours to declare, so layer.yaml is written in this repository's voice
rather than transcribed from the reply.

R2 yes to a presentation claim, no second catalog row, under three limits now
declared in layer.yaml and tested. Limit 2 — the claim must never be an input to
the decision it presents for — is load-bearing: our self-dealing argument was
accepted because it holds, not despite it. Limit 3 drives architecture, since
here the actor being audited and the evidence source are the same component.

R3 (b) with the authority rule: binding digest authoritative for what the
request is, view_hash only for what was shown, neither substitutable, and a
disagreement between them is a finding against the presenting surface rather
than a fact about the request. Linkage is co-reference; nesting was refused
because it reproduces the GH-DEC-2026-008 hash cycle.

Built to v0.8 obligation 3 rather than migrating later: axis enumerated, unknown
resolves to fail_closed, absent distinguishable from unknown in the record, and
published-equals-shipped asserted by test rather than claimed. Every stance is
fail_closed, which is a conclusion not a shortcut — ops-warden can justify
fail_open on a continuity argument that does not exist here.

GH-DEC-2026-010 inherited as a declared gap in four documents: a decision cannot
today be proven to have come from access-engine. The decision path must not be
described as validated while FLEX-WP-0024 is open.

46 tests pass. T05 and T07 unblocked.

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

GOAL.md

@@ -85,6 +85,11 @@ These hold for Stage 1 and for every stage after it.
 - **`approved` is never rendered as permission to act.** It is a state of an
   object. Presenting it as "you may now do the thing" is a policy decision point
   in the browser.
+- **The decision path is not validated, and must not be described as such.**
+  `GH-DEC-2026-010` requires a decision be attributable to `access-engine`, and
+  no consumer can satisfy that today — the envelope is unsigned
+  (`FLEX-WP-0024`). This surface records that a decision was obtained and what
+  it said, and records `decision_attributable: false`.
 - **Entitlement to view is `access-engine`'s.** A `200` from `approval-engine`
   is not permission to see the approval; that engine never answers "may this
   actor do X". This surface obtains a decision before rendering and never
@@ -108,7 +113,9 @@ These hold for Stage 1 and for every stage after it.
 
 > **Who owns the approver UI?**
 
-The answer this repository proposes, to be ratified rather than assumed:
+**Answered 2026-09-09 by `GH-DEC-2026-012`.** The proposal below was confirmed
+in full. Recorded as proposed-then-ratified rather than rewritten as though it
+had always been settled:
 
 - **informed-decision owns it** — the surface, the presentation record, the
   browser client, and the evidence of informedness.
@@ -117,13 +124,20 @@ The answer this repository proposes, to be ratified rather than assumed:
   and statute §6.4.
 - It supplies exactly one PIP-like fact — *what was presented* — as a claim
   carrying `view_hash`, issuer and freshness, and it never evaluates that fact.
-- The catalog row does not exist yet. `INFD-WP-0001-T02` asks `gate-house` and
+- **Ruled:** PEP-shaped, confirmed as proposed. No second catalog row for the
-  writes `layer.yaml` from the ruling. If `gate-house` places this component
+  presentation claim — PEP and PIP are shapes a repository has. The claim is
-  elsewhere, `INTENT.md` and this file change to match — the ruling wins.
+  permitted under three limits (presentation-only; never an input to the
+  decision it presents for; evidence reaches `audit-core` independently), and
+  `view_hash` versus the binding digest is settled as distinct attestations with
+  an authority rule, linked by co-reference and never by nesting.
+  `layer.yaml` and `pep-stance.yaml` declare it; `INTENT.md` carries the
+  reasoning.
 
 ## Definition of done
 
-1. `gate-house` has ruled on the layer placement and `layer.yaml` reflects it.
+1. ~~`gate-house` has ruled on the layer placement and `layer.yaml` reflects
+   it.~~ **Done 2026-09-09** — `GH-DEC-2026-012`; `layer.yaml`,
+   `pep-stance.yaml` and `tests/test_layer_conformance.py`.
 2. `key-cape` has the `client_id` and callback URI, and `KEY-WP-0013-T02` is
    unblocked with the answer traceable to this repository.
 3. The four specs exist, are reviewed against the current `approval-engine`,

INTENT.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ date: "2026-09-09"
 domain: infotech
 topic_slug: netkingdom
 layer: surface
-role: pep-shaped          # PROVISIONAL — see "Layer Placement", INFD-WP-0001-T02
+role: pep-shaped          # confirmed by GH-DEC-2026-012; see layer.yaml
 standard: net-kingdom/canon/standards/security-layer-model_v0.7.md
 companion: net-kingdom/SECURITY-COMPANION.md
 ---
@@ -184,21 +184,69 @@ not failure** — a memo sent back for improvement is the surface working.
     presented view plus explicit highlight acknowledgment — never keystroke
     analytics, dwell timers, or attention theater.
 
-## Layer Placement — Provisional
+## Layer Placement — Ruled
 
-Under security layer model v0.7 this repository is **not** an Engine. It is
+**PEP-shaped**, confirmed by `GH-DEC-2026-012` (answering `INFD-IN-0001`).
-browser-facing and it causes a protected side effect on the far side of a
+Not an Engine: this repository holds no state another layer reads at runtime for
-decision, which is the shape statute §6.4 and companion §5 call **PEP-shaped**.
+a verdict, and renders no decision. Companion §5 is owed and statute §6.4
-`approval-engine`'s own INTENT names this expectation: *"Callers that do are
+applies in full. The declaration is `layer.yaml`, in this repository's own voice
-PEP-shaped and owe companion §5 / statute §6.4."*
+— a layer someone else states about you is not a declaration.
 
-This is declared **provisional** because the catalog row does not exist yet and
+The ruling also confirmed that emitting a **presentation claim** does not
-inventing one is the drift §17 exists to prevent. `INFD-WP-0001-T02` takes the
+require a second catalog row: PEP and PIP are shapes a repository has, and §4
-question to `gate-house` and writes `layer.yaml` from the answer, not from this
+records the layers it occupies. That permission carries three limits, and they
-paragraph. The framing this repository will argue: informed-decision is a
+are the substance of it rather than caveats on it:
-**presentation and binding surface** — a PEP for the acts it fronts, and a PIP
+
-for exactly one fact, *what was presented*, which it supplies as a claim and
+1. **The claim carries presentation and nothing else.** It must never carry,
-never evaluates.
+   restate, summarise or imply the decision, the verdict, or whether the act was
+   permitted. A consumer learns from it only what was *shown*, never what was
+   *decided*.
+2. **The claim must not be an input to the decision it presents for.** A policy
+   reading `view_hash` to decide whether an act is permitted would let the
+   presenting surface contribute to its own authorization.
+3. **The evidence copy reaches `audit-core` independently of this repository.**
+   The claim endpoint and the evidence path are different things and neither
+   substitutes for the other.
+
+Limit 2 is load-bearing. `GH-DEC-2026-012` accepted this repository's argument
+that a renderer attesting its own rendering is not the self-dealing that kept
+the approval object out of `access-engine` — *but only because that limit
+holds*. Without it, the two collapse into the same failure.
+
+Limit 3 is the one that most shapes the architecture: audit evidence is
+protected from the actor being audited, and here the actor and the source are
+the same component.
+
+### `view_hash` and the binding digest
+
+Ruled as option (b): they are **distinct attestations with an authority rule**.
+
+- `approval-engine`'s binding digest is authoritative for **what the request
+  is**.
+- `view_hash` is authoritative for **what was shown**, and nothing else.
+- Neither may be substituted for the other.
+- **A disagreement between them is a finding against the presenting surface,
+  never a fact about the request.**
+
+They link by **co-reference**, not nesting: the presentation record carries the
+approval or binding identifier explicitly, and both attestations are read
+against that one reference. This repository must never recompute or restate
+`approval-engine`'s binding digest in its own vocabulary — it references the
+digest that layer computed and recorded.
+
+Nesting was refused for a reason worth carrying: it reproduces the hash cycle
+that made `GH-DEC-2026-008` unimplementable, where a claim had to name the
+digest of a request that would come to contain it, and a fail-closed consumer
+obeying it would deny permanently.
+
+### An inherited gap, stated rather than glossed
+
+`GH-DEC-2026-010` requires a decision be **attributable** to `access-engine`.
+No consumer can satisfy that today: the decision envelope is unsigned, a
+declared §13 gap tracked as `FLEX-WP-0024`. This repository's record can show
+that a decision was obtained and what it said; it cannot yet show that
+`access-engine` said it. The decision path must not be described as validated
+while that is open.
 
 ## What Would Make This Repository Wrong
 

informed_decision/stance.py

@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+"""The shipped unreachable-engine stance map.
+
+This is the map the surface actually applies. ``pep-stance.yaml`` publishes it,
+and ``tests/test_layer_conformance.py`` asserts the two are equal — a published
+map that may drift from the code invites reliance it cannot support.
+
+Built to v0.8 obligation 3 per GH-DEC-2026-012: the axis is enumerated rather
+than defaulted, ``unknown`` resolves to ``fail_closed``, and an absent scope is
+distinguishable in the record from an unknown one.
+"""
+
+from __future__ import annotations
+
+from enum import Enum
+
+AXIS = "binding_level"
+
+#: Total by enumeration, not by catch-all. See ``pep-stance.yaml`` for why every
+#: stance is ``fail_closed`` here where ops-warden can justify ``fail_open``.
+STANCE: dict[str, str] = {
+    "acknowledgment": "fail_closed",
+    "organizational": "fail_closed",
+    "aes": "fail_closed",
+    "qes": "fail_closed",
+    "unknown": "fail_closed",
+    "absent": "fail_closed",
+}
+
+#: Values of the axis proper — the two non-value outcomes are not axis values.
+AXIS_VALUES: tuple[str, ...] = ("acknowledgment", "organizational", "aes", "qes")
+
+
+class BindingLevelState(str, Enum):
+    """How the axis value was obtained. Recorded; never collapsed.
+
+    ``ABSENT`` and ``UNKNOWN`` resolve to the same stance but must never be
+    recorded as the same fact: collapsing them hides a schema-drift incident
+    inside a malformed-input statistic.
+    """
+
+    PRESENT = "present"
+    ABSENT = "absent"
+    UNKNOWN = "unknown"
+
+
+def resolve(binding_level: str | None) -> tuple[str, BindingLevelState]:
+    """Return ``(stance, state)`` for a memo's ``binding_level``.
+
+    There is no per-call discretion and no implicit default: an unlisted value
+    is resolved explicitly to the ``unknown`` stance, never permissively.
+    """
+    if binding_level is None or binding_level == "":
+        return STANCE["absent"], BindingLevelState.ABSENT
+    if binding_level not in AXIS_VALUES:
+        return STANCE["unknown"], BindingLevelState.UNKNOWN
+    return STANCE[binding_level], BindingLevelState.PRESENT

layer.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,184 @@
+# informed-decision — NetKingdom security layer declaration
+#
+# Framework: net-kingdom/canon/standards/security-layer-model_v0.7.md
+# Companion: net-kingdom/SECURITY-COMPANION.md v0.2
+# Voice:     INTENT.md (this repository's own, per §11 "who must declare")
+# Ruling:    GH-DEC-2026-012 (gate-house@0a1d1d9) answered INFD-IN-0001
+#
+# Reference form: ops-warden's, adopted by audit-core and kings-guard, with
+# kings-guard's adaptation for a repository with no Tooling contacts.
+#
+# GH-DEC-2026-012 R1 confirmed the SHAPE. The layer is declared here, in this
+# repository's own voice, because a layer someone else states about you is not
+# a declaration.
+
+schema_version: "0.1"
+framework: netkingdom-security-layer-model
+standard_version: "0.7"
+companion_version: "0.2"
+repository: informed-decision
+layer: surface
+role: pep-shaped
+declared_by: INTENT.md
+declared_at: "2026-09-09"
+ruling: GH-DEC-2026-012
+
+# §6.4 — informed-decision is PEP-shaped: it causes a protected side effect on
+# the far side of a decision (recording an approver entry against an approval
+# object). Companion §5 is owed and §6.4 applies in full.
+#
+# Built to v0.8 obligation 3, not v0.7, per GH-DEC-2026-011 — see pep-stance.yaml.
+pep_stance: pep-stance.yaml
+
+protected_action: "Approver entry recorded against an approval object (POST /v1/approvals/{id}/entries)"
+decision_engine: access-engine
+
+# §6 — no repository other than access-engine exposes an authorization decision.
+# This surface renders a question and records a human's answer. A disposition is
+# evidence of an act, never a verdict.
+decision_surfaces_exposed: none
+
+# §3.3 / GH-DEC-2026-012 R2 — YES to a presentation claim, and NO second catalog
+# row: PEP and PIP are shapes a repository has; §4 records the layers it
+# occupies. The permission carries three limits, and they are the substance of
+# it rather than caveats on it.
+presentation_claim:
+  emitted: true
+  carries: presentation-only
+  limits:
+    - id: L1-presentation-only
+      rule: >-
+        The claim carries presentation and nothing else. It MUST NOT carry,
+        restate, summarise or imply the decision, the verdict, or whether the
+        act was permitted. A consumer learns from it only what was SHOWN, never
+        what was DECIDED.
+    - id: L2-not-an-input
+      rule: >-
+        The claim MUST NOT be an input to the decision it presents for. A policy
+        reading view_hash to decide whether an act is permitted would let the
+        presenting surface contribute to its own authorization.
+      note: >-
+        Load-bearing, not a formality. GH-DEC-2026-012 accepted this
+        repository's argument that a renderer attesting its own rendering is not
+        the self-dealing that kept the approval object out of access-engine —
+        but only because this limit holds. Without it the two collapse into the
+        same failure.
+    - id: L3-independent-evidence-path
+      rule: >-
+        The evidence copy reaches audit-core INDEPENDENTLY of this repository.
+        The claim endpoint and the evidence path are different things and
+        neither substitutes for the other. The copy that is evidence MUST NOT be
+        reachable only through the party it is evidence about.
+      note: >-
+        The limit that matters most here: audit evidence is protected from the
+        actor being audited, and in this component the actor and the source are
+        the same. Architecture consequence, tracked in
+        docs/specs/ArchitectureBlueprint.md.
+
+# §17 — the shared request-claim schema is still unowned. This repository
+# publishes at its own boundary and yields to that schema when it exists.
+# Position accepted by GH-DEC-2026-012 and matching approval-engine's in
+# APPROVAL-IN-0001.
+request_claim_schema:
+  status: unowned-upstream
+  local_shape: published-at-own-boundary
+  yields_to: taxonomy-request-claim-schema
+
+# GH-DEC-2026-012 R3 — (b), with the authority rule written down.
+binding_digest_relationship:
+  ruling: GH-DEC-2026-012
+  view_hash_authoritative_for: what-was-shown
+  binding_digest_authoritative_for: what-the-request-is
+  binding_digest_owner: approval-engine
+  substitutable: false
+  disagreement_is: >-
+    A finding against the presenting surface, never a fact about the request.
+  linkage: co-reference
+  linkage_rule: >-
+    The presentation record carries the approval or binding identifier
+    explicitly, and both attestations are read against that one reference. This
+    repository MUST NOT recompute or restate approval-engine's binding digest
+    from its own vocabulary — it references the digest that layer computed and
+    recorded.
+  nesting_forbidden: >-
+    view_hash MUST NOT contain the binding digest, and MUST NOT travel inside
+    hashed request material while containing it. Option (c) was refused because
+    nesting reproduces the hash cycle that made GH-DEC-2026-008 unimplementable:
+    a claim required to name the digest of a request that would come to contain
+    it, where a fail-closed consumer denies permanently.
+
+# §5 applies to Staff. This is a browser-facing surface with no Tooling contact.
+tooling_contacts: []
+
+# §11 — record non-Tooling clients so the check is total.
+non_tooling_clients: []
+
+intended_non_tooling_clients:
+  - target: approval-engine
+    layer: engine
+    rationale: >-
+      GET /v1/approvals/{id} and /claim (approval:read) to render; POST
+      /v1/approvals/{id}/entries (approval:approve) to record a binding. Never
+      /consume. Requirements: approval-engine/docs/approver-surface-requirements.md.
+  - target: access-engine
+    layer: engine
+    rationale: >-
+      Decision consumed before rendering an approval to a person. A 200 from
+      approval-engine is not entitlement. This surface consumes a decision and
+      never renders one.
+  - target: key-cape
+    layer: engine
+    rationale: >-
+      Identity. Authorization-code + PKCE browser client. Identity is imported,
+      never invented here.
+  - target: audit-core
+    layer: engine
+    rationale: >-
+      Evidence destination for presentation records and dispositions. Must be an
+      independent path per limit L3-independent-evidence-path.
+  - target: state-hub
+    layer: not-catalogued
+    rationale: >-
+      Progress events. Outside §5 by the v0.5 scope rule. Recorded, not policed.
+
+# §9.6 — presentation evidence is load-bearing: it is the only record of what a
+# human was shown before binding. Atomicity and attestation cover accident and
+# later tampering, never a compromised source.
+evidence:
+  kind: load-bearing
+  residual: compromised-surface-presents-x-attests-y
+  residual_closed: false
+  custody: same-bound-as-every-other-source   # §16 decided: no stronger archive
+  note: >-
+    GH-DEC-2026-012 states the residual is not closed in those words, and this
+    repository is not credited with closing it. Same disposition as
+    approval-engine's equivalent residual for adversarial omission at a
+    compromised source.
+
+# INHERITED DECLARED GAP — GH-DEC-2026-010.
+#
+# Obligation 1 now requires a decision be ATTRIBUTABLE to access-engine. No
+# consumer can satisfy that today: flex-auth's decision envelope is unsigned.
+# This is a declared §13 gap tracked as FLEX-WP-0024, not a clean path this
+# repository can walk.
+#
+# Stated here, and in SCOPE.md and ArchitectureBlueprint.md, because
+# GH-DEC-2026-012 requires it be said in this repository's own documents rather
+# than describing validation as complete.
+inherited_gaps:
+  - id: GH-DEC-2026-010-attributability
+    obligation: 1
+    gap: >-
+      A decision consumed from access-engine cannot today be proven to have come
+      from access-engine — the envelope is unsigned.
+    tracked_by: FLEX-WP-0024
+    consequence_here: >-
+      This surface's record can show that a decision was obtained and what it
+      said. It cannot yet show it was access-engine that said it. Validation of
+      the decision path MUST NOT be described as complete while this is open.
+    status: open
+
+declared_shapes:
+  "5.1": []
+  "5.2": []
+  "5.3": []

pep-stance.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,110 @@
+# informed-decision — PEP unreachable-engine stance map
+#
+# Framework: net-kingdom/canon/standards/security-layer-model_v0.7.md §6.4, §9.3, §9.7
+# Built to:  v0.8 obligation 3 (GH-DEC-2026-011), not v0.7 — per GH-DEC-2026-012,
+#            so this is built to rather than migrated to.
+# Ruling:    GH-DEC-2026-012
+# Validate:  pytest tests/test_layer_conformance.py
+#
+# §6.4 obligation 3 requires a declared unreachable-engine stance that is total,
+# scoped per zone, carries no implicit default and no per-call discretion, and is
+# published rather than held in code comments. A map that lives only in a module
+# default is not published — it is merely written down.
+#
+# The property that makes this worth reading: it is asserted equal to the shipped
+# map in informed_decision/stance.py by tests/test_layer_conformance.py. A
+# published map that may drift from the code is worse than none, because it
+# invites reliance it cannot support.
+
+schema_version: "0.1"
+framework: netkingdom-security-layer-model
+standard_version: "0.7"
+built_to_obligation_3_of: "0.8"
+repository: informed-decision
+pep_shape: true
+declared_by: layer.yaml
+ruling: GH-DEC-2026-012
+
+protected_action: "Approver entry recorded against an approval object"
+decision_engine: access-engine
+
+# v0.8 obligation 3: the map MUST enumerate its axis rather than lean on a
+# catch-all. The axis here is the memo's binding_level — this repository's own
+# graded property, and the one that determines how costly a wrong bind is.
+axis: binding_level
+axis_source: decision-memo.schema.json#/properties/binding_level
+
+# Total by enumeration, not by catch-all. Every value of the axis appears
+# explicitly, plus the two non-value outcomes required to be distinguishable.
+#
+# Every stance is fail_closed, and that is a conclusion rather than a shortcut.
+# ops-warden can justify fail_open on some zones because refusing removes
+# production host access to close a documentation gap — a continuity argument.
+# No such argument exists here. Refusing to render or to bind delays a decision;
+# it does not remove a capability anyone depends on to keep a system running.
+# Binding a human's identity to an act without an authorization decision is the
+# precise failure this repository exists to prevent, so there is no level at
+# which proceeding-without-a-decision is the safer error.
+stance:
+  acknowledgment: fail_closed
+  organizational: fail_closed
+  aes:            fail_closed
+  qes:            fail_closed
+  unknown:        fail_closed   # v0.8 obligation 3: unknown MUST resolve to fail_closed
+  absent:         fail_closed   # distinct from unknown in the record — see below
+
+# v0.8 obligation 3 requires an absent scope to be DISTINGUISHABLE in the record
+# from an unknown one. They resolve to the same stance here but must never be
+# recorded as the same fact:
+#   absent  — the memo carried no binding_level at all (a defect in the memo)
+#   unknown — a binding_level was present but is not a value this map enumerates
+#             (a version skew between memo and this map)
+# Collapsing them would hide a schema-drift incident inside a malformed-input
+# statistic.
+scope_absence:
+  distinguishable: true
+  recorded_as:
+    absent: "binding_level.absent"
+    unknown: "binding_level.unknown"
+
+# §6.4 obligation 1 requires a decision record for a protected side effect.
+# Where the engine is unreachable there is no decision to hold, so this surface
+# records the APPLICATION OF THE STANCE instead.
+on_apply:
+  recorded_fields:
+    - memo_id
+    - memo_version
+    - binding_level
+    - binding_level_state      # present | absent | unknown
+    - stance_applied
+    - decision_id              # only where a decision was actually rendered
+    - decision_attributable    # see inherited gap below
+    - presentation_id
+  user_visible: >-
+    The approver is told the act could not be authorized and that nothing was
+    bound. The surface never presents a fail_closed outcome as a decline by the
+    approver: no disposition is recorded, because the human did not make one.
+
+# GH-DEC-2026-010, inherited. Obligation 1 requires a decision be ATTRIBUTABLE to
+# access-engine, and no consumer can satisfy that today — flex-auth's envelope is
+# unsigned (declared §13 gap, FLEX-WP-0024). `decision_attributable` is therefore
+# recorded as false and MUST NOT be reported as satisfied while that is open.
+inherited_gap:
+  id: GH-DEC-2026-010-attributability
+  decision_attributable_today: false
+  tracked_by: FLEX-WP-0024
+
+# §13.1 / GH-DEC-2026-011 — a dated classification-coverage figure beside the
+# stance. Honest figure for a repository at spec stage: the axis is fully
+# enumerated against the schema, and no protected action has shipped yet.
+classification_coverage:
+  as_of: "2026-09-09"
+  axis_values_enumerated: 4
+  axis_values_in_schema: 4
+  coverage: "4/4 (100%) of binding_level values enumerated"
+  protected_actions_shipped: 0
+  note: >-
+    Coverage is complete against the schema, not against production behaviour:
+    nothing is deployed. Re-date this figure when the walking skeleton
+    (INFD-WP-0001-T08) ships, and treat a coverage figure that predates a schema
+    change as stale.

tests/test_layer_conformance.py

@@ -0,0 +1,182 @@
+"""Layer and stance conformance.
+
+GH-DEC-2026-012 confirmed this repository is PEP-shaped and told it to build to
+v0.8 obligation 3 rather than migrate to it later. These tests pin the parts of
+that obligation a test can actually hold:
+
+- the published map equals the shipped map (obligation 3, a MUST);
+- the axis is enumerated, not defaulted;
+- ``unknown`` resolves to ``fail_closed``;
+- an absent scope is distinguishable in the record from an unknown one;
+- the inherited GH-DEC-2026-010 attributability gap is declared open rather
+  than described as satisfied.
+"""
+
+from __future__ import annotations
+
+import pathlib
+
+import pytest
+
+yaml = pytest.importorskip("yaml")
+
+from informed_decision.stance import AXIS, AXIS_VALUES, STANCE, BindingLevelState, resolve
+
+ROOT = pathlib.Path(__file__).resolve().parents[1]
+
+
+def load(name: str) -> dict:
+    return yaml.safe_load((ROOT / name).read_text(encoding="utf-8"))
+
+
+@pytest.fixture(scope="module")
+def stance_doc() -> dict:
+    return load("pep-stance.yaml")
+
+
+@pytest.fixture(scope="module")
+def layer_doc() -> dict:
+    return load("layer.yaml")
+
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Obligation 3 — published equals shipped. This is the MUST.
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+def test_published_stance_equals_shipped_stance(stance_doc):
+    assert stance_doc["stance"] == STANCE, (
+        "pep-stance.yaml has drifted from informed_decision/stance.py. "
+        "A published map that may differ from the code is worse than none."
+    )
+
+
+def test_published_axis_equals_shipped_axis(stance_doc):
+    assert stance_doc["axis"] == AXIS
+
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Obligation 3 — totality by enumeration, no catch-all, no implicit default.
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+def test_every_axis_value_has_an_explicit_stance():
+    for value in AXIS_VALUES:
+        assert value in STANCE, f"{value} has no declared stance"
+
+
+def test_stance_map_has_no_entries_beyond_the_axis_and_the_two_outcomes():
+    allowed = set(AXIS_VALUES) | {"unknown", "absent"}
+    assert set(STANCE) == allowed
+
+
+def test_unknown_resolves_to_fail_closed(stance_doc):
+    """v0.8 obligation 3 makes this a MUST; v0.7 permitted fail_open."""
+    assert STANCE["unknown"] == "fail_closed"
+    assert stance_doc["stance"]["unknown"] == "fail_closed"
+
+
+@pytest.mark.parametrize("value", sorted(STANCE))
+def test_no_stance_is_permissive(value):
+    """Not required by the standard — required by this repository.
+
+    Binding an identity without an authorization decision is the failure this
+    surface exists to prevent, so there is no level at which proceeding is the
+    safer error. If this test is ever relaxed, the reasoning in pep-stance.yaml
+    must be rewritten first.
+    """
+    assert STANCE[value] == "fail_closed"
+
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Obligation 3 — absent must be distinguishable from unknown IN THE RECORD,
+# even though both resolve to the same stance.
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+def test_absent_and_unknown_resolve_the_same_but_record_differently():
+    absent_stance, absent_state = resolve(None)
+    unknown_stance, unknown_state = resolve("notalevel")
+    assert absent_stance == unknown_stance == "fail_closed"
+    assert absent_state is BindingLevelState.ABSENT
+    assert unknown_state is BindingLevelState.UNKNOWN
+    assert absent_state != unknown_state
+
+
+def test_empty_string_is_absent_not_unknown():
+    assert resolve("")[1] is BindingLevelState.ABSENT
+
+
+@pytest.mark.parametrize("value", AXIS_VALUES)
+def test_known_axis_values_record_as_present(value):
+    stance, state = resolve(value)
+    assert state is BindingLevelState.PRESENT
+    assert stance == "fail_closed"
+
+
+def test_published_map_declares_the_two_states_distinguishable(stance_doc):
+    absence = stance_doc["scope_absence"]
+    assert absence["distinguishable"] is True
+    assert absence["recorded_as"]["absent"] != absence["recorded_as"]["unknown"]
+
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Inherited gap — GH-DEC-2026-010. Must be declared open, not glossed.
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+def test_attributability_gap_is_declared_open_in_the_stance(stance_doc):
+    gap = stance_doc["inherited_gap"]
+    assert gap["decision_attributable_today"] is False
+    assert gap["tracked_by"] == "FLEX-WP-0024"
+
+
+def test_attributability_gap_is_declared_open_in_the_layer(layer_doc):
+    gaps = {g["id"]: g for g in layer_doc["inherited_gaps"]}
+    gap = gaps["GH-DEC-2026-010-attributability"]
+    assert gap["status"] == "open"
+
+
+def test_stance_records_whether_the_decision_was_attributable(stance_doc):
+    assert "decision_attributable" in stance_doc["on_apply"]["recorded_fields"]
+
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
+# R1 / R2 / R3 — the ruling's limits are declared, not merely remembered.
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+def test_layer_declares_pep_shaped_and_no_decision_surface(layer_doc):
+    assert layer_doc["role"] == "pep-shaped"
+    assert layer_doc["decision_surfaces_exposed"] == "none"
+
+
+def test_presentation_claim_carries_all_three_limits(layer_doc):
+    limits = {limit["id"] for limit in layer_doc["presentation_claim"]["limits"]}
+    assert limits == {
+        "L1-presentation-only",
+        "L2-not-an-input",
+        "L3-independent-evidence-path",
+    }
+
+
+def test_binding_digest_relationship_is_co_reference_not_nesting(layer_doc):
+    rel = layer_doc["binding_digest_relationship"]
+    assert rel["linkage"] == "co-reference"
+    assert rel["substitutable"] is False
+    assert "nesting_forbidden" in rel
+
+
+def test_residual_is_declared_not_closed(layer_doc):
+    assert layer_doc["evidence"]["residual_closed"] is False
+
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
+# §13.1 / GH-DEC-2026-011 — a dated coverage figure beside the stance.
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+def test_classification_coverage_is_dated_and_complete_against_the_axis(stance_doc):
+    cov = stance_doc["classification_coverage"]
+    assert cov["as_of"]
+    assert cov["axis_values_enumerated"] == cov["axis_values_in_schema"] == len(AXIS_VALUES)

workplans/INFD-WP-0001-founding-specs-and-approver-ui-ownership.md

@@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ Two corrections made during the same task, recorded rather than silently fixed:
 
 ```task
 id: INFD-WP-0001-T02
-status: progress
+status: done
 priority: high
 state_hub_task_id: "4f94134b-2260-5404-84e0-12f2b08ef565"
 ```