Hold layer: Taxonomy as an enumerated §3.1 value through the gate-house ruling.
The custodian's estate sweep of flex-auth's FLEX-WP-0030 boundaries review
records this repository as declaring a value outside the §3 vocabulary, on
the reading that §3 admits only {Staff, Engine, Tooling}. §3 enumerates four
layers, and Taxonomy is the first row of its table with §3.1 to itself, in
every version of the standard from v0.1 through v0.8. §4 assigns the value to
info-tech-canon and net-kingdom, §7 carries it as a fourth plane line, §17 is
titled for it, and gate-house's own INTENT.md uses it.
ADR-0010 records the position with those citations. The declaration is not
changed: it is the evidence of what this repository holds itself to be, and
changing it now would pre-empt the ruling. RMASTER-WP-0027 holds the wait and
says what to do either way.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 63291@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 8bd77868-ca68-4f49-bb1e-d539ecc0d703
This commit is contained in:
codex
parent
3f67fb8dc9
commit
2a7f17e8f8
3 changed files with 263 additions and 2 deletions
12
SCOPE.md
12
SCOPE.md
|
|
@ -29,9 +29,15 @@ NetKingdom security-layer-model v0.7). It is not a row in the NetKingdom
|
|||
§4 catalog. It is not PEP-shaped. Assent to statute §20 is
|
||||
`docs/adr/ADR-0009-netkingdom-security-layer-interaction.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
`Taxonomy` is the value §3.1 of the standard enumerates, not a local
|
||||
coinage. Where a conformance tool admits only `{Staff, Engine, Tooling}`,
|
||||
that tool omits §3.1; the position and its citations are
|
||||
`docs/adr/ADR-0010-taxonomy-is-an-enumerated-layer.md`, held through
|
||||
`gate-house`'s ruling under `RMASTER-WP-0027`.
|
||||
|
||||
The current implementation includes:
|
||||
|
||||
- nine accepted framework ADRs covering repository families, rail composition,
|
||||
- ten accepted framework ADRs covering repository families, rail composition,
|
||||
production admission, the rapp declaration contract, exposure posture, and
|
||||
the NetKingdom security-layer interaction boundary;
|
||||
- framework contracts and migration guidance under `docs/`;
|
||||
|
|
@ -150,7 +156,9 @@ the same publication addressing.
|
|||
accepted ADRs and contracts
|
||||
- Layer declaration: `INTENT.md` frontmatter and `layer.yaml` declare
|
||||
`layer: Taxonomy` against security-layer-model v0.7; no Tooling contacts;
|
||||
State Hub listed as a non-Tooling client; not PEP-shaped
|
||||
State Hub listed as a non-Tooling client; not PEP-shaped. The two files
|
||||
agree and match §3's own casing. Held unchanged through `gate-house`'s
|
||||
ruling on whether §3's vocabulary is closed (ADR-0010, RMASTER-WP-0027)
|
||||
- Security consumption: ADR-0009 and
|
||||
`docs/netkingdom-security-consumption-contract.md` encode the §20.2 rules
|
||||
(one PDP, approvals as claims, credentials after a decision, evidence
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
152
docs/adr/ADR-0010-taxonomy-is-an-enumerated-layer.md
Normal file
152
docs/adr/ADR-0010-taxonomy-is-an-enumerated-layer.md
Normal file
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,152 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
id: RMASTER-ADR-0010
|
||||
title: "Taxonomy Is An Enumerated Layer, Not A Value Outside The Vocabulary"
|
||||
status: accepted
|
||||
revision: "accepted-1"
|
||||
owner: railiance-master
|
||||
last_reviewed: "2026-09-21"
|
||||
review_interval: 6m
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# ADR-0010: Taxonomy Is An Enumerated Layer, Not A Value Outside The Vocabulary
|
||||
|
||||
Date: 2026-09-21
|
||||
Status: Accepted
|
||||
|
||||
## Context
|
||||
|
||||
`flex-auth` published a boundaries review (`FLEX-WP-0030`,
|
||||
`flex-auth/docs/conformance/boundaries-review.md`) on 2026-09-20, corrected
|
||||
2026-09-21, surveying how repositories declare their layer under §11 of the
|
||||
NetKingdom security layer model. It surveyed the twelve counterparts
|
||||
`flex-auth` holds boundaries with; this repository is not one of them and was
|
||||
not surveyed. The custodian then swept the whole estate and recorded the result
|
||||
in `the-custodian/docs/assessments/2026-09-21-layer-declaration-boundaries.md`.
|
||||
That sweep is where this reached us. It was never a finding against this
|
||||
repository, and nobody had raised it here before.
|
||||
|
||||
The sweep records that `flex-auth`'s validator admits only
|
||||
`{Staff, Engine, Tooling}`, and that two repositories declare values outside
|
||||
that set: `informed-decision` declares `surface`, and this repository declares
|
||||
`Taxonomy`. It classes both as a third non-conformance class — "the only one
|
||||
where the declared layer is not a layer the model defines" — and refers the
|
||||
question of whether §3's vocabulary is closed to `gate-house`.
|
||||
|
||||
This ADR is this repository's input to that ruling. It does not rule; §11 and
|
||||
§3 are net-kingdom canon authored by `gate-house`, and ADR-0009 already binds
|
||||
us to that division.
|
||||
|
||||
## Decision
|
||||
|
||||
1. **`Taxonomy` is a layer the model defines.** §3 of the security layer model
|
||||
enumerates four layers, and `Taxonomy` is the first row of its own table.
|
||||
§3.1 is the section that defines it. This is true of every version of the
|
||||
standard from v0.1 through v0.8, the proposed version under assent:
|
||||
|
||||
| Layer | Character | Produces | Deterministic |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| **Taxonomy** | cross-cutting language | terms, semantic contracts, standards | n/a — describes |
|
||||
| **Tooling** | infrastructure and state | data structures, persistence | yes |
|
||||
| **Engines** | interfaces for a modeled concept | APIs, contracts | yes |
|
||||
| **Staff** | management, operations, change, controlling | specifications, decisions, workplans, tasks | **no** |
|
||||
|
||||
The §3 vocabulary is therefore not `{Staff, Engine, Tooling}` and never was.
|
||||
A validator admitting those three omits §3.1.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **We do not change our declared value.** `layer: Taxonomy` stands in both
|
||||
`INTENT.md` frontmatter and `layer.yaml`. The artifact that disagrees with
|
||||
§3 is the validator's admitted set, not our declaration.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **We take no position on `surface`.** `informed-decision`'s value is a
|
||||
genuinely different question: `surface` does not appear in §3 under any
|
||||
version. Grouping it with `Taxonomy` as one finding is the part of the
|
||||
sweep's third class we do not accept. That repository speaks for itself.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **We take no position on the case-sensitivity question (B1/question 2)**
|
||||
beyond the observation in the evidence below, and none on precedence
|
||||
(question 1), which does not bite here: our two files agree.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **If `gate-house` rules otherwise** — that §3's vocabulary is closed at
|
||||
three for §11 declaration purposes and `Taxonomy` is not a declarable value
|
||||
— we will change the declaration in both files in one commit and amend this
|
||||
ADR by revision, not by silent edit. We will not pre-empt that ruling by
|
||||
changing the value now, because the declaration is the evidence of what this
|
||||
repository holds itself to be.
|
||||
|
||||
## Evidence
|
||||
|
||||
The term is load-bearing in canon and in live estate use, not a local coinage:
|
||||
|
||||
- **§3 and §3.1** of `security-layer-model` v0.1 through v0.8 define the
|
||||
Taxonomy layer: "Cross-cutting language. Taxonomy repositories define terms
|
||||
and semantic contracts so the other layers interoperate without integration
|
||||
by interpretation. They own no runtime position and no state any layer
|
||||
depends on."
|
||||
- **§4**, the security-estate catalog, assigns the layer `Taxonomy` to two
|
||||
rows in v0.8: `info-tech-canon` and `net-kingdom`. The model uses the value
|
||||
as a layer assignment in its own catalog.
|
||||
- **§7** maps the layers onto the Active Secrets Management Canon planes and
|
||||
carries `Taxonomy` as a fourth line alongside Staff, Engines and Tooling.
|
||||
- **§17 is titled "Taxonomy artifacts"** and assigns ownership of the claim,
|
||||
decision-record, gap-record and stance-map schemas to "Taxonomy" as a layer
|
||||
with owners.
|
||||
- **`gate-house`'s own `INTENT.md`** (lines 87–88) records `info-tech-canon`
|
||||
and `net-kingdom canon` in the `Taxonomy` layer. The doctrine owner uses the
|
||||
value.
|
||||
- **`info-tech-canon`'s `INTENT.md`** declares itself "part of the **Taxonomy**
|
||||
layer" in prose. It carries no `layer:` key and no `layer.yaml`, so it is a
|
||||
§11 B2 case rather than a vocabulary case — but its intent is the same value.
|
||||
- **Our own casing matches §3's table.** `Taxonomy` is capitalised in §3 as
|
||||
`Tooling`, `Engines` and `Staff` are. The nine repositories whose `layer.yaml`
|
||||
lower-cases `engine` or `staff` are the ones that diverge from the standard's
|
||||
own spelling; we do not. We also note the validator admits `Engine` where §3
|
||||
writes `Engines`, which suggests the admitted set was built from §4's
|
||||
role-typed catalog rows rather than from §3.
|
||||
|
||||
## What `Taxonomy` denotes here, and why not Staff, Engine or Tooling
|
||||
|
||||
This repository produces terms, family contracts and standards for Railiance
|
||||
workload operations — the `railiance-*` / `rail-*` / `rapp-*` / `reef-*` axes,
|
||||
the workload coverage rule, and the composition semantics. That is §3.1's
|
||||
character exactly, and `layer.yaml` states §3.1's own test in §3.1's own words:
|
||||
it owns no runtime position and no state another layer depends on.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Not Engine.** It exposes no deterministic API over a modeled concept, is
|
||||
not PEP-shaped, and ADR-0009 §5 and INTENT principle 13 forbid it becoming a
|
||||
second decision point. `role: null` follows.
|
||||
- **Not Tooling.** It persists nothing and keeps no state.
|
||||
- **Not Staff.** Staff is management, operations, change and controlling. This
|
||||
repository defines vocabulary and boundaries; the rails, rapps and reefs that
|
||||
operate workloads are elsewhere and carry the §6.4 obligations themselves.
|
||||
|
||||
The usage is consistent with `gate-house`'s and `info-tech-canon`'s: the same
|
||||
layer, a different scope. `layer.yaml`'s `catalog_entry.note` has stated that
|
||||
distinction since 2026-08-29 — "This is Railiance operations Taxonomy, not
|
||||
NetKingdom security Taxonomy. info-tech-canon remains ecosystem-wide semantics;
|
||||
net-kingdom remains NetKingdom standards of record" — and states in the same
|
||||
breath that we are **not** a §4 catalog row. Declaring the Taxonomy layer and
|
||||
claiming a §4 row are two different claims, and we make only the first.
|
||||
|
||||
The value was chosen deliberately, under `RMASTER-WP-0026-T01`, which
|
||||
instructed "keep the file and the frontmatter equal". Internal agreement here
|
||||
is a decision that was taken, not an accident of a generator.
|
||||
|
||||
## Consequences
|
||||
|
||||
- `gate-house` has, in this ADR, a citable statement that the value under
|
||||
question is enumerated in the section said to exclude it. The cheapest
|
||||
resolution of question 3 is a correction to the validator, not to two
|
||||
repositories' declarations.
|
||||
- The custodian's third non-conformance class splits. `Taxonomy` is a validator
|
||||
defect; `surface` remains open on its own terms.
|
||||
- Our `standard_version: "0.7"` in both files is a separate question — B4 asks
|
||||
whether a declaration may carry a standard version at all. We hold it
|
||||
unchanged pending that ruling for the same reason as the layer value, and
|
||||
will re-point at the accepted version once v0.8's assent round closes.
|
||||
- ADR-0009 is not amended. This ADR adds the vocabulary position that record
|
||||
did not have to state, because nothing had questioned it.
|
||||
|
||||
## Notes
|
||||
|
||||
Tracked in `RMASTER-WP-0027`. Sent to `gate-house` as input to the §3
|
||||
vocabulary ruling on 2026-09-21.
|
||||
101
workplans/RMASTER-WP-0027-layer-vocabulary-ruling.md
Normal file
101
workplans/RMASTER-WP-0027-layer-vocabulary-ruling.md
Normal file
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
id: RMASTER-WP-0027
|
||||
type: workplan
|
||||
title: "Hold the Taxonomy layer declaration through the gate-house vocabulary ruling"
|
||||
domain: financials
|
||||
repo: railiance-master
|
||||
status: active
|
||||
owner: claude
|
||||
topic_slug: layer-vocabulary-ruling
|
||||
flavor: planning
|
||||
created: "2026-09-21"
|
||||
updated: "2026-09-21"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# RMASTER-WP-0027 - Hold the Taxonomy layer declaration through the gate-house vocabulary ruling
|
||||
|
||||
## Goal
|
||||
|
||||
State and hold this repository's position that `layer: Taxonomy` is a value §3
|
||||
of the NetKingdom security layer model enumerates, through `gate-house`'s
|
||||
ruling on whether §3's vocabulary is closed, and act on the ruling once it
|
||||
lands.
|
||||
|
||||
Position: `docs/adr/ADR-0010-taxonomy-is-an-enumerated-layer.md`.
|
||||
Source: `the-custodian/docs/assessments/2026-09-21-layer-declaration-boundaries.md`
|
||||
(custodian estate sweep), derived from `flex-auth` `FLEX-WP-0030`.
|
||||
Statute: `net-kingdom/canon/standards/security-layer-model_v0.8.md` §3, §3.1, §11.
|
||||
|
||||
## Boundaries
|
||||
|
||||
- Do not change the declared value in `INTENT.md` or `layer.yaml` before the
|
||||
ruling. The declaration is the evidence of what this repository holds itself
|
||||
to be.
|
||||
- Do not rule on §3, §11 or the vocabulary. That is `gate-house`'s.
|
||||
- Do not speak for `informed-decision` on `surface`. Different question, other
|
||||
owner.
|
||||
- Do not touch `standard_version` here; B4 is a separate open question.
|
||||
- Do not modify any repository other than this one.
|
||||
|
||||
## T01 - Record the position
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: RMASTER-WP-0027-T01
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Establish from this repository's own documents and history what `Taxonomy`
|
||||
denotes, why it was chosen over Staff, Engine and Tooling, and whether the term
|
||||
is used consistently with `gate-house` and `info-tech-canon`. Record the result
|
||||
as a framework ADR.
|
||||
|
||||
**Done when:** an accepted ADR states the position with the canon and estate
|
||||
citations behind it.
|
||||
|
||||
Completed 2026-09-21 as `ADR-0010`. §3 enumerates four layers with `Taxonomy`
|
||||
as §3.1 in every version v0.1–v0.8; §4 assigns the value to `info-tech-canon`
|
||||
and `net-kingdom`; §7 and §17 both carry it; `gate-house`'s own `INTENT.md`
|
||||
uses it. Our casing matches §3's table.
|
||||
|
||||
## T02 - Send the position to gate-house
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: RMASTER-WP-0027-T02
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Send `ADR-0010` to `gate-house` via the State Hub as input to the §3 vocabulary
|
||||
ruling, noting that the custodian's estate sweep is where this surfaced and
|
||||
that it was not a finding against this repository.
|
||||
|
||||
**Done when:** the message is sent and cites the ADR and the canon sections.
|
||||
|
||||
Completed 2026-09-21.
|
||||
|
||||
## T03 - Act on the ruling
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: RMASTER-WP-0027-T03
|
||||
status: wait
|
||||
priority: medium
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Wait on `gate-house`'s ruling on question 3 of the custodian's table (is §3's
|
||||
vocabulary closed).
|
||||
|
||||
- If the vocabulary is open and `Taxonomy` is declarable — nothing changes
|
||||
here. Record the confirmation in `ADR-0010` notes and close.
|
||||
- If `gate-house` rules the §11 declaration vocabulary closed at three despite
|
||||
§3.1 — change the value in `INTENT.md` and `layer.yaml` in one commit,
|
||||
keeping the two files equal per `RMASTER-WP-0026-T01`, and amend `ADR-0010`
|
||||
by revision rather than by silent edit.
|
||||
|
||||
Also pick up questions 1 (precedence), 2 (case sensitivity) and 6 (may a
|
||||
declaration carry a standard version) if the same ruling settles them; 6 is the
|
||||
only one that changes a file here, since our two files already agree and our
|
||||
casing already matches §3.
|
||||
|
||||
**Done when:** the ruling has landed and this repository's declaration and ADR
|
||||
reflect it.
|
||||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue