tegwick
b8e57e8404
T05 written after the ruling rather than before it, which was the point of gating it. GH-DEC-2026-012 limit 3 did most of the shaping: the evidence copy must reach audit-core independently of this component, because here the actor being audited and the evidence source are the same. Booked as four binding implementation consequences plus O-02, which must be resolved before T08 ships — "we will add the independent path later" is how limit 3 becomes limit-3-in-principle. Other constraints fixed in the blueprint: presentation/ is the only writer of view_hash; the approval-engine client exposes no validity cache; a fail-closed outcome is never recorded as an approver's decline, since the human made none; the assurance shape is cited from key-cape's contract rather than restated so it cannot drift; and no polling loop may synthesise the inbox approval-engine refuses to provide. T06 closed with the SCOPE.md rewrite the ruling unblocked. It carries a "What this repository does not claim" section, because a scope file listing only capabilities overstates them: the decision path is not validated while GH-DEC-2026-010 is open, the residual is not closed, view_hash is not inside the approval entry, and nothing is deployed. Two open items block the remainder. O-01, the human token tenant, blocks T07 and is not ours alone to decide. O-02, the independent evidence path, blocks T08. 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 |
||
|---|---|---|
| docs | ||
| history/20260909-initial-exploration | ||
| informed_decision | ||
| intakes | ||
| schemas | ||
| tests | ||
| workplans | ||
| .custodian-brief.md | ||
| .repo-classification.yaml | ||
| AGENTS.md | ||
| GOAL.md | ||
| INTENT.md | ||
| layer.yaml | ||
| Makefile | ||
| pep-stance.yaml | ||
| pyproject.toml | ||
| README.md | ||
| SCOPE.md | ||
| WORK-RECORDS.md | ||
informed-decision
User interface for executive decisions, modelled as a sign-and-return book — the German Umlaufmappe / Zeichnungsbuch, made cryptographic.
A Decision Memo carries a question, the context needed to answer it, the requested act, and a binding between identity, what was shown, and what was bound. The promise is not "the file was signed" but "this person, in this role, was shown this view, and bound this act."
One object model from a ten-second login (L0) to a multi-party instrument (L5).
Where to start
| File | What it is |
|---|---|
INTENT.md |
Why this repository exists and what it must never become |
GOAL.md |
The current stage, its invariants, and its definition of done |
workplans/ |
Current work |
history/20260909-initial-exploration/ |
Founding exploration — schema, state transitions, canonicalization, vectors |
Stage 1
Own the browser-facing approver UI that approval-engine deliberately does
not contain, and answer in writing who owns it. approval-engine is a
bearer-token resource server with no browser client; key-cape
(KEY-WP-0013-T02) is waiting on a client_id and callback URI that no
component has claimed. This repository claims them.
See GOAL.md.
Boundaries
This repository renders questions and records answers. It does not decide
(access-engine), does not own the approval object (approval-engine), does
not author approval doctrine (gate-house), does not authenticate anyone
(key-cape), and does not archive the trail (audit-core).