coulomb/target-revenue
4
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

WP-0003-T06 review: cross-link polish for full pointer symmetry

Browse source 
Per reviewer request (polish only, item 5): added the same "ultimate
source / day-to-day reference" dual-citation to the PRD header's
Terminology alignment line, matching README/TSD/CONTRIBUTING. Named all
three other normative extracts (PhaseManifestSpecification.md,
TargetLedgerSpecification.md, MonetizationExtensionSpecification.md) in
CONTRIBUTING.md's Terminology section, which previously named only
TargetRevenueFrameworkCore.md - now symmetric with README's full
four-document table.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
tegwick 2026-07-29 20:12:58 +02:00
parent 54bfc726fa
commit 6b34c05e35
3 changed files with 13 additions and 4 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

13
workplans/TREV-WP-0003-normative-core-extraction.md
View file

@ -231,9 +231,18 @@ accept):
the six canonical candidates match concept §12.2's list in the same
order, with the two unfixtured profiles honestly labeled rather than
implied complete.
- [ ] Cross-links (T05) — confirm PRD §6.1/§6.2, TSD §0/§1.1, README, and
- [x] Cross-links (T05) — confirm PRD §6.1/§6.2, TSD §0/§1.1, README, and
CONTRIBUTING.md all point at the new extracts without contradicting
`specs/TargetRevenueLicenseConcept.md` as ultimate authority.
`specs/TargetRevenueLicenseConcept.md` as ultimate authority. **Reviewed
and accepted 2026-07-29 as polish-only, two fixes applied:** added the
same "ultimate source / day-to-day reference" dual-citation to the
PRD header's Terminology alignment line (previously only in
README/TSD/CONTRIBUTING); named all three other extracts
(`PhaseManifestSpecification.md`, `TargetLedgerSpecification.md`,
`MonetizationExtensionSpecification.md`) in CONTRIBUTING.md's
Terminology section, which previously named only
`TargetRevenueFrameworkCore.md` — now symmetric with README's full
four-document table.
- [ ] No open question (concept §24) is answered by omission — each extract
either cites a working default explicitly or states the item remains
open.