Skip to content

docs(catalog): the provenance gap is closed, so stop describing it as open - #93

Merged
mbeacom merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
mbeacom-supreme-guacamole
Aug 6, 2026
Merged

docs(catalog): the provenance gap is closed, so stop describing it as open#93
mbeacom merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
mbeacom-supreme-guacamole

Conversation

@mbeacom

@mbeacom mbeacom commented Aug 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Phase E flagged that once the data-model.md §10 reconciliation landed, its module notes would be stale rather than wrong — they would describe a gap the contract had since closed. §10 merged as 86ddeb5 (#91), so they are.

provenance.ts's module note now records that the gap was reported while implementing the module and that the contract has since been reconciled to match: §10 states provenance is a declaration about the source, carried onto every derived entity and vacuous for annotation-absent ones, that only the pair (ownershipState, provenance) is unambiguous, and that the declaration is required with no default.

That is the part worth correcting. As written, the note read as though the implementation were compensating for a spec that hadn't caught up. It isn't — the reasoning in that module is now the contract's.

Deliberately not touched

sc-009.test.ts. Its note is about accept-corpus materialization, which was genuinely still open when written, and acceptCorpusIsMaterialized is designed to fail the day someone vendors the corpus. Phase F has now vendored it — so that test tripping is the design working, not a defect to pre-empt here.

Docs only, no behaviour change. bun test 1721 pass / 0 fail at the time of writing, typecheck clean, check:freeze-hashes ok.

… open

Phase E flagged that once the data-model §10 reconciliation landed, its
module notes would be stale rather than wrong - they would describe a gap
the contract had since closed. §10 merged as 86ddeb5 (#91), so they are.

provenance.ts's module note now records that the gap was reported while
implementing the module and that the contract has since been reconciled to
match: §10 states provenance is a declaration about the source, carried
onto every derived entity and vacuous for annotation-absent ones, that only
the pair (ownershipState, provenance) is unambiguous, and that the
declaration is required with no default. The reasoning in that note is
therefore the contract's, not a local workaround - which is the part worth
correcting, since a reader would otherwise think the implementation was
compensating for a spec that had not caught up.

Deliberately NOT touched: sc-009.test.ts. Its note is about accept-corpus
materialization, which is genuinely still open, and acceptCorpusIsMaterialized
is designed to fail the day someone vendors the corpus. Phase F is vendoring
it now, so that test tripping is the design working rather than a defect.

Docs only, no behaviour change. bun test 1721 pass / 0 fail, typecheck clean,
check:freeze-hashes ok.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Copilot AI balanced review requested due to automatic review settings August 6, 2026 01:54

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

Updates provenance documentation to align with the reconciled data-model contract.

Changes:

  • Reframes the former provenance gap as resolved.
  • Clarifies annotation-absent and adoption-claim semantics.

Comment on lines +218 to +219
* This is the predicate `data-model.md` §10 names when it says only the pair is
* unambiguous, and it is exported so a check can assert on the pair rather than on
@mbeacom
mbeacom merged commit 742fef6 into main Aug 6, 2026
10 checks passed
@mbeacom
mbeacom deleted the mbeacom-supreme-guacamole branch August 6, 2026 01:56
@mbeacom mbeacom self-assigned this Aug 6, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants