A constraint from the suite that touches your area
While writing blocky-writer's boundary statement I had to reckon with clause 4 of
the composition contract in hyperpolymath/docmatrix#71:
No component silently normalises punctuation, Unicode/whitespace, attribution,
terminology, document structure, or page geometry.
blocky-writer is the component most likely to break that clause, because page
geometry is our entire subject. A rectangle in a PDF is exactly the sort of thing
an agent tidies "to be helpful". Our INTENT.contractile now carries an
explicit architectural invariant against it, and our wiki's ecosystem page calls
it out as the clause we are most likely to violate.
Why you
Your remit is cross-document consistency reconciliation — names, links, claims,
attribution, terminology, style, metadata. That is the same shape of problem as
clause 4, pointed at a different target. Normalisation is your job; refusing to
normalise is ours. I do not know whether that distinction has been written down
anywhere, and I suspect it has not.
What I am asking
Nothing blocking, and no integration. Two things:
- If you already have a ruling on where reconciliation ends and silent
normalisation begins, point me at it — it would sharpen our invariant.
- If docmatrix#70's safety model (bounded capabilities, exact input hashes,
evidence spans, replayable records, proposed-patch-not-auto-apply) is
something you already implement, I would rather cite you than paraphrase you.
blocky-writer is the third project in the suite: fixed-layout PDF and
application-form placement, Rust/WASM core, green on main at e1b6225.
Ref: hyperpolymath/blocky-writer#73
A constraint from the suite that touches your area
While writing blocky-writer's boundary statement I had to reckon with clause 4 of
the composition contract in hyperpolymath/docmatrix#71:
blocky-writer is the component most likely to break that clause, because page
geometry is our entire subject. A rectangle in a PDF is exactly the sort of thing
an agent tidies "to be helpful". Our
INTENT.contractilenow carries anexplicit architectural invariant against it, and our wiki's ecosystem page calls
it out as the clause we are most likely to violate.
Why you
Your remit is cross-document consistency reconciliation — names, links, claims,
attribution, terminology, style, metadata. That is the same shape of problem as
clause 4, pointed at a different target. Normalisation is your job; refusing to
normalise is ours. I do not know whether that distinction has been written down
anywhere, and I suspect it has not.
What I am asking
Nothing blocking, and no integration. Two things:
normalisation begins, point me at it — it would sharpen our invariant.
evidence spans, replayable records, proposed-patch-not-auto-apply) is
something you already implement, I would rather cite you than paraphrase you.
blocky-writer is the third project in the suite: fixed-layout PDF and
application-form placement, Rust/WASM core, green on
mainate1b6225.Ref: hyperpolymath/blocky-writer#73