generated from coulomb/repo-seed
Add repo-scoping comparison assets
This commit is contained in:
@@ -93,3 +93,9 @@ Task, PURPOSES, CARING, and the `small-saas` profile.
|
||||
`railiance-fabric` adds conformance support for graph-oriented entity and edge
|
||||
capture, including mapping expectations and visualization examples that separate
|
||||
canonical relationships from display-only graph edges.
|
||||
|
||||
`repo-scoping` adds a canon comparison and extension pack for repository intent,
|
||||
current scope, future scope, consumer purposes, review decisions, evidence,
|
||||
source observations, utility relationships, scope freshness, and SCOPE.md as an
|
||||
interface profile. The pack is intended to seed the consumer-side repo-scoping
|
||||
workplan while keeping proposed canon extensions reviewable.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: agent-brief/comparison-repo-scoping-canon-benefit-analysis
|
||||
artifact_id: comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis
|
||||
source_path: evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml
|
||||
source_kind: benefit-analysis
|
||||
generated: true
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- GENERATED by info_tech_canon; do not edit by hand. -->
|
||||
|
||||
# Agent Brief: Repo Scoping Canon Benefit Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
- Artifact ID: `comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis`
|
||||
- Kind: `benefit-analysis`
|
||||
- Canonical path: `evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml`
|
||||
- Full source: `evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml`
|
||||
- Summary: Consumer benefit analysis against canon surfaces: Repo Scoping Canon Benefit Analysis.
|
||||
|
||||
## Retrieval Hints
|
||||
|
||||
No imports or anchors recorded.
|
||||
|
||||
## Owned Concepts
|
||||
|
||||
- `Repo Scoping Canon Benefit Analysis`
|
||||
|
||||
## Related Distinctions
|
||||
|
||||
No common distinction is anchored directly on this artifact.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: agent-brief/comparison-repo-scoping-consumer-workplan-brief
|
||||
artifact_id: comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief
|
||||
source_path: evaluations/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief.md
|
||||
source_kind: consumer-workplan-brief
|
||||
generated: true
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- GENERATED by info_tech_canon; do not edit by hand. -->
|
||||
|
||||
# Agent Brief: Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief
|
||||
|
||||
- Artifact ID: `comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief`
|
||||
- Kind: `consumer-workplan-brief`
|
||||
- Canonical path: `evaluations/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief.md`
|
||||
- Full source: `evaluations/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief.md`
|
||||
- Summary: Consumer repo workplan seed brief: Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief.
|
||||
|
||||
## Retrieval Hints
|
||||
|
||||
Imports and anchors:
|
||||
- `model/purpose-demand-extension`
|
||||
|
||||
## Owned Concepts
|
||||
|
||||
- `Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief`
|
||||
|
||||
## Related Distinctions
|
||||
|
||||
No common distinction is anchored directly on this artifact.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: agent-brief/comparison-repo-scoping-extension-candidates
|
||||
artifact_id: comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates
|
||||
source_path: evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml
|
||||
source_kind: extension-candidate-set
|
||||
generated: true
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- GENERATED by info_tech_canon; do not edit by hand. -->
|
||||
|
||||
# Agent Brief: Repo Scoping Canon Extension Candidates
|
||||
|
||||
- Artifact ID: `comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates`
|
||||
- Kind: `extension-candidate-set`
|
||||
- Canonical path: `evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml`
|
||||
- Full source: `evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml`
|
||||
- Summary: Reviewable canon extension candidate set: Repo Scoping Canon Extension Candidates.
|
||||
|
||||
## Retrieval Hints
|
||||
|
||||
No imports or anchors recorded.
|
||||
|
||||
## Owned Concepts
|
||||
|
||||
- `Repo Scoping Canon Extension Candidates`
|
||||
|
||||
## Related Distinctions
|
||||
|
||||
No common distinction is anchored directly on this artifact.
|
||||
32
infospace/agent/briefs/comparison-repo-scoping-frame.md
Normal file
32
infospace/agent/briefs/comparison-repo-scoping-frame.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: agent-brief/comparison-repo-scoping-frame
|
||||
artifact_id: comparison/repo-scoping/frame
|
||||
source_path: evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml
|
||||
source_kind: comparison-frame
|
||||
generated: true
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- GENERATED by info_tech_canon; do not edit by hand. -->
|
||||
|
||||
# Agent Brief: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Frame
|
||||
|
||||
- Artifact ID: `comparison/repo-scoping/frame`
|
||||
- Kind: `comparison-frame`
|
||||
- Canonical path: `evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml`
|
||||
- Full source: `evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml`
|
||||
- Summary: Structured comparison questions and domains: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Frame.
|
||||
|
||||
## Retrieval Hints
|
||||
|
||||
Imports and anchors:
|
||||
- `model/governance`
|
||||
- `model/purpose-demand-extension`
|
||||
- `model/task`
|
||||
|
||||
## Owned Concepts
|
||||
|
||||
- `Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Frame`
|
||||
|
||||
## Related Distinctions
|
||||
|
||||
No common distinction is anchored directly on this artifact.
|
||||
33
infospace/agent/briefs/comparison-repo-scoping-report.md
Normal file
33
infospace/agent/briefs/comparison-repo-scoping-report.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: agent-brief/comparison-repo-scoping-report
|
||||
artifact_id: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
source_path: evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md
|
||||
source_kind: comparison-report
|
||||
generated: true
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- GENERATED by info_tech_canon; do not edit by hand. -->
|
||||
|
||||
# Agent Brief: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report
|
||||
|
||||
- Artifact ID: `comparison/repo-scoping/report`
|
||||
- Kind: `comparison-report`
|
||||
- Canonical path: `evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md`
|
||||
- Full source: `evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md`
|
||||
- Summary: Canon-side comparison report: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report.
|
||||
|
||||
## Retrieval Hints
|
||||
|
||||
Imports and anchors:
|
||||
- `model/governance`
|
||||
- `model/information-space`
|
||||
- `model/task`
|
||||
- `pattern/intent-scope-purposes`
|
||||
|
||||
## Owned Concepts
|
||||
|
||||
- `Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report`
|
||||
|
||||
## Related Distinctions
|
||||
|
||||
No common distinction is anchored directly on this artifact.
|
||||
@@ -20,6 +20,10 @@ Compare repo-scoping concepts with canon INTENT, SCOPE, PURPOSES, and interface-
|
||||
- `patterns/intent-scope-purposes.md`
|
||||
- `examples/consumer-purpose-portfolio.yaml`
|
||||
- `views/by-concept.md`
|
||||
- `evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md`
|
||||
- `evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml`
|
||||
- `evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml`
|
||||
- `evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml`
|
||||
- `models/governance/InfoTechCanonPurposeDemandExtension.md`
|
||||
- `patterns/intent-scope-purposes.md`
|
||||
- `agent/templates/canon-interface-card.template.yaml`
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -5,8 +5,8 @@
|
||||
This brief summarizes the current canon service surface for agents.
|
||||
|
||||
- Infospace slug: `canon`
|
||||
- Artifact count: 44
|
||||
- Retrieval index items: 44
|
||||
- Artifact count: 49
|
||||
- Retrieval index items: 49
|
||||
- Primary confidence command: `make validate`
|
||||
- Refresh generated indexes and views with: `make index`
|
||||
- Refresh agent briefs and interface templates with: `make agent-briefs`
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -43,8 +43,182 @@
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"infospace": "canon",
|
||||
"item_count": 44,
|
||||
"item_count": 49,
|
||||
"items": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"canonical_path": "evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml",
|
||||
"id": "comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis",
|
||||
"imports": [],
|
||||
"kind": "benefit-analysis",
|
||||
"owned_concepts": [
|
||||
"Repo Scoping Canon Benefit Analysis"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"relationships": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "comparison/repo-scoping/report",
|
||||
"type": "part_of"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/purpose-demand-extension",
|
||||
"type": "maps"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/governance",
|
||||
"type": "maps"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/information-space",
|
||||
"type": "maps"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/task",
|
||||
"type": "maps"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "standard/tagging",
|
||||
"type": "maps"
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"source_path": "infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml",
|
||||
"summary": "Consumer benefit analysis against canon surfaces: Repo Scoping Canon Benefit Analysis.",
|
||||
"title": "Repo Scoping Canon Benefit Analysis",
|
||||
"warnings": []
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"canonical_path": "evaluations/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief.md",
|
||||
"id": "comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief",
|
||||
"imports": [
|
||||
"model/purpose-demand-extension"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"kind": "consumer-workplan-brief",
|
||||
"owned_concepts": [
|
||||
"Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"relationships": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "comparison/repo-scoping/report",
|
||||
"type": "part_of"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/purpose-demand-extension",
|
||||
"type": "uses"
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"source_path": "infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief.md",
|
||||
"summary": "Consumer repo workplan seed brief: Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief.",
|
||||
"title": "Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief",
|
||||
"warnings": []
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"canonical_path": "evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml",
|
||||
"id": "comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates",
|
||||
"imports": [],
|
||||
"kind": "extension-candidate-set",
|
||||
"owned_concepts": [
|
||||
"Repo Scoping Canon Extension Candidates"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"relationships": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "comparison/repo-scoping/report",
|
||||
"type": "part_of"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/purpose-demand-extension",
|
||||
"type": "proposes"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/information-space",
|
||||
"type": "proposes"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/governance",
|
||||
"type": "proposes"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/task",
|
||||
"type": "proposes"
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"source_path": "infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml",
|
||||
"summary": "Reviewable canon extension candidate set: Repo Scoping Canon Extension Candidates.",
|
||||
"title": "Repo Scoping Canon Extension Candidates",
|
||||
"warnings": []
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"canonical_path": "evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml",
|
||||
"id": "comparison/repo-scoping/frame",
|
||||
"imports": [
|
||||
"model/governance",
|
||||
"model/purpose-demand-extension",
|
||||
"model/task"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"kind": "comparison-frame",
|
||||
"owned_concepts": [
|
||||
"Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Frame"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"relationships": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "comparison/repo-scoping/report",
|
||||
"type": "part_of"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/purpose-demand-extension",
|
||||
"type": "uses"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/governance",
|
||||
"type": "uses"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/task",
|
||||
"type": "uses"
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"source_path": "infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml",
|
||||
"summary": "Structured comparison questions and domains: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Frame.",
|
||||
"title": "Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Frame",
|
||||
"warnings": []
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"canonical_path": "evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md",
|
||||
"id": "comparison/repo-scoping/report",
|
||||
"imports": [
|
||||
"model/governance",
|
||||
"model/information-space",
|
||||
"model/task",
|
||||
"pattern/intent-scope-purposes"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"kind": "comparison-report",
|
||||
"owned_concepts": [
|
||||
"Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"relationships": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/purpose-demand-extension",
|
||||
"type": "compares"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/governance",
|
||||
"type": "uses"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/information-space",
|
||||
"type": "uses"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "model/task",
|
||||
"type": "uses"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"target": "pattern/intent-scope-purposes",
|
||||
"type": "uses"
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"source_path": "infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md",
|
||||
"summary": "Canon-side comparison report: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report.",
|
||||
"title": "Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report",
|
||||
"warnings": []
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"canonical_path": "concepts/purpose-demand.yaml",
|
||||
"id": "concept-catalog/purpose-demand",
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
|
||||
|
||||
Schema: `info-tech-canon.retrieval-index.v1`
|
||||
Infospace: `canon`
|
||||
Items: **44**
|
||||
Items: **49**
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Distinctions
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -15,6 +15,56 @@ Items: **44**
|
||||
|
||||
## Items
|
||||
|
||||
### Repo Scoping Canon Benefit Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
- ID: `comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis`
|
||||
- Kind: `benefit-analysis`
|
||||
- Canonical path: `evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml`
|
||||
- Source path: `infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml`
|
||||
- Summary: Consumer benefit analysis against canon surfaces: Repo Scoping Canon Benefit Analysis.
|
||||
- Imports and anchors: none
|
||||
- Owned concepts: `Repo Scoping Canon Benefit Analysis`
|
||||
|
||||
### Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief
|
||||
|
||||
- ID: `comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief`
|
||||
- Kind: `consumer-workplan-brief`
|
||||
- Canonical path: `evaluations/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief.md`
|
||||
- Source path: `infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief.md`
|
||||
- Summary: Consumer repo workplan seed brief: Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief.
|
||||
- Imports and anchors: `model/purpose-demand-extension`
|
||||
- Owned concepts: `Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief`
|
||||
|
||||
### Repo Scoping Canon Extension Candidates
|
||||
|
||||
- ID: `comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates`
|
||||
- Kind: `extension-candidate-set`
|
||||
- Canonical path: `evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml`
|
||||
- Source path: `infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml`
|
||||
- Summary: Reviewable canon extension candidate set: Repo Scoping Canon Extension Candidates.
|
||||
- Imports and anchors: none
|
||||
- Owned concepts: `Repo Scoping Canon Extension Candidates`
|
||||
|
||||
### Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Frame
|
||||
|
||||
- ID: `comparison/repo-scoping/frame`
|
||||
- Kind: `comparison-frame`
|
||||
- Canonical path: `evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml`
|
||||
- Source path: `infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml`
|
||||
- Summary: Structured comparison questions and domains: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Frame.
|
||||
- Imports and anchors: `model/governance`, `model/purpose-demand-extension`, `model/task`
|
||||
- Owned concepts: `Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Frame`
|
||||
|
||||
### Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report
|
||||
|
||||
- ID: `comparison/repo-scoping/report`
|
||||
- Kind: `comparison-report`
|
||||
- Canonical path: `evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md`
|
||||
- Source path: `infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md`
|
||||
- Summary: Canon-side comparison report: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report.
|
||||
- Imports and anchors: `model/governance`, `model/information-space`, `model/task`, `pattern/intent-scope-purposes`
|
||||
- Owned concepts: `Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report`
|
||||
|
||||
### Purpose And Consumer Demand Concept Catalog
|
||||
|
||||
- ID: `concept-catalog/purpose-demand`
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,7 +1,117 @@
|
||||
schema: info-tech-canon.retrieval-index.v1
|
||||
infospace: canon
|
||||
item_count: 44
|
||||
item_count: 49
|
||||
items:
|
||||
- id: comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis
|
||||
kind: benefit-analysis
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Canon Benefit Analysis
|
||||
canonical_path: evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml
|
||||
source_path: infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml
|
||||
summary: 'Consumer benefit analysis against canon surfaces: Repo Scoping Canon Benefit
|
||||
Analysis.'
|
||||
owned_concepts:
|
||||
- Repo Scoping Canon Benefit Analysis
|
||||
imports: []
|
||||
relationships:
|
||||
- type: part_of
|
||||
target: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
- type: maps
|
||||
target: model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
- type: maps
|
||||
target: model/governance
|
||||
- type: maps
|
||||
target: model/information-space
|
||||
- type: maps
|
||||
target: model/task
|
||||
- type: maps
|
||||
target: standard/tagging
|
||||
warnings: []
|
||||
- id: comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief
|
||||
kind: consumer-workplan-brief
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief
|
||||
canonical_path: evaluations/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief.md
|
||||
source_path: infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief.md
|
||||
summary: 'Consumer repo workplan seed brief: Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief.'
|
||||
owned_concepts:
|
||||
- Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief
|
||||
imports:
|
||||
- model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
relationships:
|
||||
- type: part_of
|
||||
target: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
warnings: []
|
||||
- id: comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates
|
||||
kind: extension-candidate-set
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Canon Extension Candidates
|
||||
canonical_path: evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml
|
||||
source_path: infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml
|
||||
summary: 'Reviewable canon extension candidate set: Repo Scoping Canon Extension
|
||||
Candidates.'
|
||||
owned_concepts:
|
||||
- Repo Scoping Canon Extension Candidates
|
||||
imports: []
|
||||
relationships:
|
||||
- type: part_of
|
||||
target: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
- type: proposes
|
||||
target: model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
- type: proposes
|
||||
target: model/information-space
|
||||
- type: proposes
|
||||
target: model/governance
|
||||
- type: proposes
|
||||
target: model/task
|
||||
warnings: []
|
||||
- id: comparison/repo-scoping/frame
|
||||
kind: comparison-frame
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Frame
|
||||
canonical_path: evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml
|
||||
source_path: infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml
|
||||
summary: 'Structured comparison questions and domains: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison
|
||||
Frame.'
|
||||
owned_concepts:
|
||||
- Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Frame
|
||||
imports:
|
||||
- model/governance
|
||||
- model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
- model/task
|
||||
relationships:
|
||||
- type: part_of
|
||||
target: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: model/governance
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: model/task
|
||||
warnings: []
|
||||
- id: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
kind: comparison-report
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report
|
||||
canonical_path: evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md
|
||||
source_path: infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md
|
||||
summary: 'Canon-side comparison report: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report.'
|
||||
owned_concepts:
|
||||
- Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report
|
||||
imports:
|
||||
- model/governance
|
||||
- model/information-space
|
||||
- model/task
|
||||
- pattern/intent-scope-purposes
|
||||
relationships:
|
||||
- type: compares
|
||||
target: model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: model/governance
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: model/information-space
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: model/task
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: pattern/intent-scope-purposes
|
||||
warnings: []
|
||||
- id: concept-catalog/purpose-demand
|
||||
kind: concept-catalog
|
||||
title: Purpose And Consumer Demand Concept Catalog
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -533,6 +533,90 @@ artifacts:
|
||||
target: conformance/railiance-fabric
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
- id: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
path: evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md
|
||||
kind: comparison-report
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report
|
||||
provenance:
|
||||
source_path: infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md
|
||||
placement_workplan: ITC-WP-0009
|
||||
relationships:
|
||||
- type: compares
|
||||
target: model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: model/governance
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: model/information-space
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: model/task
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: pattern/intent-scope-purposes
|
||||
- id: comparison/repo-scoping/frame
|
||||
path: evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml
|
||||
kind: comparison-frame
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Frame
|
||||
provenance:
|
||||
source_path: infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml
|
||||
placement_workplan: ITC-WP-0009
|
||||
relationships:
|
||||
- type: part_of
|
||||
target: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: model/governance
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: model/task
|
||||
- id: comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis
|
||||
path: evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml
|
||||
kind: benefit-analysis
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Canon Benefit Analysis
|
||||
provenance:
|
||||
source_path: infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml
|
||||
placement_workplan: ITC-WP-0009
|
||||
relationships:
|
||||
- type: part_of
|
||||
target: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
- type: maps
|
||||
target: model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
- type: maps
|
||||
target: model/governance
|
||||
- type: maps
|
||||
target: model/information-space
|
||||
- type: maps
|
||||
target: model/task
|
||||
- type: maps
|
||||
target: standard/tagging
|
||||
- id: comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates
|
||||
path: evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml
|
||||
kind: extension-candidate-set
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Canon Extension Candidates
|
||||
provenance:
|
||||
source_path: infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml
|
||||
placement_workplan: ITC-WP-0009
|
||||
relationships:
|
||||
- type: part_of
|
||||
target: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
- type: proposes
|
||||
target: model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
- type: proposes
|
||||
target: model/information-space
|
||||
- type: proposes
|
||||
target: model/governance
|
||||
- type: proposes
|
||||
target: model/task
|
||||
- id: comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief
|
||||
path: evaluations/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief.md
|
||||
kind: consumer-workplan-brief
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief
|
||||
provenance:
|
||||
source_path: infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief.md
|
||||
placement_workplan: ITC-WP-0009
|
||||
relationships:
|
||||
- type: part_of
|
||||
target: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
- type: uses
|
||||
target: model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
- id: small-saas/service/billing-portal
|
||||
path: profiles/small-saas/artifacts/service.billing-portal.yaml
|
||||
kind: profile-artifact
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,96 @@
|
||||
id: comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Canon Benefit Analysis
|
||||
status: candidate
|
||||
consumer: repo-scoping
|
||||
comparison_report: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
direct_reuse:
|
||||
- canon_surface: model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
benefit: Distinguishes producer intent, current scope, consumer purposes, demand signals, purpose fit, scope pressure, and evolution requests.
|
||||
repo_scoping_surfaces:
|
||||
- INTENT.md
|
||||
- SCOPE.md
|
||||
- expectation gaps
|
||||
- self-scoping comparison outcomes
|
||||
- canon_surface: model/governance
|
||||
benefit: Provides Decision, Review, Evidence, Risk, Issue, Exception, Approval, and review-cycle vocabulary for candidate acceptance.
|
||||
repo_scoping_surfaces:
|
||||
- ReviewDecision
|
||||
- approved characteristics
|
||||
- rejected candidates
|
||||
- quality-gate overrides
|
||||
- regression outcomes
|
||||
- canon_surface: model/information-space
|
||||
benefit: Provides artifact, source reference, provenance, retrieval, citation, index, and interface-card concepts.
|
||||
repo_scoping_surfaces:
|
||||
- SourceReference
|
||||
- ContentChunk
|
||||
- ObservedFact
|
||||
- SCOPE.md sections
|
||||
- scope-generation API outputs
|
||||
- canon_surface: model/task
|
||||
benefit: Provides work semantics for review tasks, remediation, refactors, rebuilds, recalculation, and follow-up work.
|
||||
repo_scoping_surfaces:
|
||||
- expectation gaps
|
||||
- rebuild dry-runs
|
||||
- dependency impact analysis
|
||||
- self-assessment actions
|
||||
- canon_surface: standard/tagging
|
||||
benefit: Provides lightweight classification vocabulary for primary class, attributes, source roles, and utility relationships.
|
||||
repo_scoping_surfaces:
|
||||
- primary_class
|
||||
- attributes
|
||||
- source_role
|
||||
- utility_relationship
|
||||
candidate_mappings:
|
||||
- repo_scoping_concept: Scope
|
||||
canon_mapping: RepositoryScopeProfile
|
||||
fit: extension_needed
|
||||
rationale: Canon has generic Scope, Profile, and Purpose concepts, but repo-scoping needs a source-linked current-state repository utility profile.
|
||||
- repo_scoping_concept: Ability
|
||||
canon_mapping: ProducerCapability
|
||||
fit: partial_fit
|
||||
rationale: Ability is a high-level useful outcome; ProducerCapability is close but should not hide repository-specific abstraction level.
|
||||
- repo_scoping_concept: Capability
|
||||
canon_mapping: CapabilityClaim
|
||||
fit: extension_needed
|
||||
rationale: Repo-scoping capabilities are reviewable utility claims with confidence, evidence, and source references.
|
||||
- repo_scoping_concept: Feature
|
||||
canon_mapping: FeatureClaim
|
||||
fit: extension_needed
|
||||
rationale: Feature is concrete behavior supporting a capability and needs typed evidence links.
|
||||
- repo_scoping_concept: Evidence
|
||||
canon_mapping: EvidenceLink
|
||||
fit: extension_needed
|
||||
rationale: Governance Evidence exists, but repo-scoping needs a link object that can target facts, chunks, files, or lower-level characteristics.
|
||||
- repo_scoping_concept: ObservedFact
|
||||
canon_mapping: SourceObservation
|
||||
fit: extension_needed
|
||||
rationale: Observed facts are deterministic scanner outputs and should not be collapsed into evidence or truth claims.
|
||||
- repo_scoping_concept: ReviewDecision
|
||||
canon_mapping: Decision
|
||||
fit: direct
|
||||
rationale: ReviewDecision is a governance decision over candidate truth, with reviewer, criteria, evidence, and rationale.
|
||||
- repo_scoping_concept: ExpectationGap
|
||||
canon_mapping: Issue / ScopePressure / EvolutionRequest
|
||||
fit: partial_fit
|
||||
rationale: Some gaps are quality issues, some are out-of-scope expectations, and some create purpose-driven evolution requests.
|
||||
- repo_scoping_concept: DependencyImpactAnalysis
|
||||
canon_mapping: ScopeFreshness / PropagationImpact
|
||||
fit: extension_needed
|
||||
rationale: Canon lacks a precise way to express staleness propagation from observed facts to approved utility claims.
|
||||
profile_candidates:
|
||||
- id: profile/repository-scope
|
||||
title: Repository Scope Profile
|
||||
purpose: Define minimal artifacts and relationships needed to represent repository intent, current scope, consumer purposes, approved claims, evidence links, decisions, and freshness.
|
||||
- id: profile/scope-md-interface
|
||||
title: SCOPE.md Interface Profile
|
||||
purpose: Define the SCOPE.md section contract, generation ownership, curator-owned sections, and capability block expectations.
|
||||
- id: profile/self-scoping-assessment
|
||||
title: Self-Scoping Assessment Profile
|
||||
purpose: Define golden profile, challenger assessment, known-bad seed, comparison outcome, and regression evidence structures.
|
||||
repo_scoping_value:
|
||||
- Better separation of INTENT, SCOPE, and PURPOSES.
|
||||
- Cleaner review semantics for generated candidates and approved truth.
|
||||
- Source-linked evidence model that can become reusable across canon consumers.
|
||||
- Explicit extension path for self-scoping, scope freshness, and scope propagation.
|
||||
- Interface Card fields that repo-scoping can produce for other repositories.
|
||||
90
infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml
Normal file
90
infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
|
||||
id: comparison/repo-scoping/frame
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Frame
|
||||
status: candidate
|
||||
consumer: repo-scoping
|
||||
comparison_report: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
created_by_workplan: ITC-WP-0009
|
||||
source_context:
|
||||
repo: repo-scoping
|
||||
inspected_sources:
|
||||
- INTENT.md
|
||||
- SCOPE.md
|
||||
- docs/terminology.md
|
||||
- docs/scope-md-spec.md
|
||||
- docs/characteristic-evidence-model.md
|
||||
- docs/dependency-aware-scope-propagation.md
|
||||
- docs/self-scoping/README.md
|
||||
- docs/self-scoping/golden/repo-scoping-golden-profile.v1.json
|
||||
comparison_domains:
|
||||
- id: repository-intent
|
||||
title: Repository Intent
|
||||
canon_anchors:
|
||||
- kernel/itc-core
|
||||
- model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
- pattern/intent-scope-purposes
|
||||
questions:
|
||||
- How does repo-scoping distinguish design-time INTENT.md from generated or curated SCOPE.md?
|
||||
- Which parts of INTENT.md are allowed to seed candidates, and which require review before becoming current scope?
|
||||
- Does repo-scoping need a canonical RepositoryIntentStatement concept distinct from Purpose and Scope?
|
||||
- id: current-scope
|
||||
title: Current Scope
|
||||
canon_anchors:
|
||||
- model/information-space
|
||||
- model/governance
|
||||
questions:
|
||||
- How does the root Scope characteristic represent current repository utility?
|
||||
- Which SCOPE.md sections are generated, curator-owned, or curator-reviewed?
|
||||
- How are in-scope, out-of-scope, relevant-when, and not-relevant-when statements evidenced?
|
||||
- id: future-scope
|
||||
title: Future Scope
|
||||
canon_anchors:
|
||||
- model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
- model/task
|
||||
- model/governance
|
||||
questions:
|
||||
- Which expectation gaps indicate possible future scope rather than current truth?
|
||||
- Which requested capabilities should become EvolutionRequests?
|
||||
- How should scope pressure be reviewed before repo-scoping changes its model?
|
||||
- id: consumers-and-purposes
|
||||
title: Consumers And Purposes
|
||||
canon_anchors:
|
||||
- model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
- agent/templates/canon-interface-card.template.yaml
|
||||
questions:
|
||||
- Who consumes repo-scoping outputs: humans, agents, State Hub, capability catalog, and managed repos?
|
||||
- Which consumer purposes are served by scope generation, profile comparison, and self-assessment?
|
||||
- Which demand signals should repo-scoping feed back into InfoTechCanon?
|
||||
- id: decisions-and-evidence
|
||||
title: Decisions And Evidence
|
||||
canon_anchors:
|
||||
- model/governance
|
||||
- model/information-space
|
||||
- model/observability
|
||||
questions:
|
||||
- How do ReviewDecision, approved characteristics, rejected candidates, and expectation gaps map to governance decisions?
|
||||
- How do SourceReference, ObservedFact, ContentChunk, and Evidence map to provenance and evidence concepts?
|
||||
- What evidence is required before a generated candidate becomes registry truth?
|
||||
- id: risks-and-regressions
|
||||
title: Risks And Regressions
|
||||
canon_anchors:
|
||||
- model/security
|
||||
- model/governance
|
||||
- model/task
|
||||
questions:
|
||||
- How are known-bad self-scoping outputs represented as regression seeds?
|
||||
- How does repo-scoping prevent provider, dependency, tooling, or mention-only facts from becoming native capability truth?
|
||||
- Which risks should create tasks, quality gates, or governance review?
|
||||
- id: evolution-requests
|
||||
title: Evolution Requests
|
||||
canon_anchors:
|
||||
- model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
- model/task
|
||||
questions:
|
||||
- Which canon extension candidates would make repo-scoping more precise?
|
||||
- Which candidates should remain review proposals instead of immediate standard changes?
|
||||
- Which work belongs in repo-scoping and which work belongs in InfoTechCanon?
|
||||
comparison_outputs:
|
||||
- comparison report
|
||||
- canon benefit analysis
|
||||
- canon extension candidate set
|
||||
- repo-scoping consumer workplan brief
|
||||
124
infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md
Normal file
124
infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,124 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report
|
||||
status: candidate
|
||||
consumer: repo-scoping
|
||||
created_by_workplan: ITC-WP-0009
|
||||
source_context:
|
||||
- repo-scoping/INTENT.md
|
||||
- repo-scoping/SCOPE.md
|
||||
- repo-scoping/docs/terminology.md
|
||||
- repo-scoping/docs/scope-md-spec.md
|
||||
- repo-scoping/docs/characteristic-evidence-model.md
|
||||
- repo-scoping/docs/dependency-aware-scope-propagation.md
|
||||
- repo-scoping/docs/self-scoping/README.md
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report
|
||||
|
||||
## Summary
|
||||
|
||||
Repo-scoping already contains a strong domain model for repository utility:
|
||||
|
||||
```text
|
||||
Scope -> Ability -> Capability -> Feature -> Evidence -> Observed Fact
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
InfoTechCanon can help repo-scoping by giving this model clearer boundaries
|
||||
around INTENT, SCOPE, PURPOSES, governance decisions, evidence, tasks, source
|
||||
roles, and interface cards.
|
||||
|
||||
The comparison also exposes canon gaps. The canon has generic concepts for
|
||||
Scope, Purpose, Evidence, Decision, Task, and Profile, but it does not yet have
|
||||
precise repository-scoping concepts for source-linked current scope, reviewable
|
||||
utility claims, evidence links, source observations, utility relationships,
|
||||
scope freshness, or SCOPE.md as a markdown interface profile.
|
||||
|
||||
## Direct Fit
|
||||
|
||||
| Repo-scoping surface | Canon fit | Notes |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| `INTENT.md` | INTENT / RepositoryIntentStatement candidate | Intent should seed candidate generation but not prove current scope. |
|
||||
| `SCOPE.md` | RepositoryScopeProfile candidate | Current-state utility profile derived from evidence and approved claims. |
|
||||
| Review decisions | Governance Decision / Review | Acceptance, rejection, edits, overrides, and rationale map cleanly to governance. |
|
||||
| Evidence and source references | EvidenceLink candidate / Information Space provenance | Needs typed support links, not just generic evidence. |
|
||||
| Expectation gaps | Issue / ScopePressure / EvolutionRequest | Gaps may be defects, exclusions, or requests for future scope. |
|
||||
| Self-scoping assessments | Profile / Evidence / Review | Golden profiles and challenger assessments are reusable evaluation patterns. |
|
||||
|
||||
## Important Distinctions
|
||||
|
||||
### INTENT vs SCOPE
|
||||
|
||||
Repo-scoping explicitly treats intent as design-time expected utility and scope
|
||||
as derived current-state utility. This is a strong match for the canon
|
||||
INTENT/SCOPE/PURPOSES distinction.
|
||||
|
||||
The comparison suggests the canon should add a repository-specific
|
||||
`RepositoryIntentStatement` candidate so repositories can declare what they are
|
||||
trying to provide without making that declaration current truth.
|
||||
|
||||
### Evidence vs Observed Fact
|
||||
|
||||
Repo-scoping correctly avoids treating deterministic facts as the same thing as
|
||||
evidence. A fact is observed source material. Evidence is support for an
|
||||
interpreted characteristic. This suggests a canon `SourceObservation` and
|
||||
`EvidenceLink` pair.
|
||||
|
||||
### Candidate vs Approved Truth
|
||||
|
||||
Repo-scoping has a review boundary: candidates are proposals; approved
|
||||
characteristics are registry truth. This maps naturally to Governance Decision
|
||||
and Review, but the canon should add `CharacteristicClaim` or a profile-specific
|
||||
claim concept to preserve the abstraction level.
|
||||
|
||||
### Current Scope vs Future Scope
|
||||
|
||||
Expectation gaps and self-scoping outcomes can create scope pressure, but they
|
||||
should not alter current scope directly. They should create reviewable
|
||||
EvolutionRequests or tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
## Benefit To Repo-Scoping
|
||||
|
||||
Repo-scoping can benefit from the canon by:
|
||||
|
||||
- using Canon Interface Cards to declare repo-scoping intent, scope, purposes,
|
||||
produced concepts, consumed concepts, validation expectations, and requested
|
||||
extensions,
|
||||
- mapping Scope, Ability, Capability, Feature, Evidence, and Observed Fact to
|
||||
canon-owned or candidate concepts,
|
||||
- using Governance Decision and Evidence concepts to make review outcomes more
|
||||
portable,
|
||||
- using PURPOSES to capture consumers such as State Hub, agents, managed repos,
|
||||
and humans,
|
||||
- using Task and Governance concepts to separate recalculation, review, rebuild,
|
||||
and adoption work,
|
||||
- feeding SourceRole and UtilityRelationship as candidate extensions back into
|
||||
the canon.
|
||||
|
||||
## Canon Extension Candidates
|
||||
|
||||
The candidate set is recorded in
|
||||
`evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml`.
|
||||
|
||||
Highest-value candidates:
|
||||
|
||||
- `RepositoryIntentStatement`
|
||||
- `RepositoryScopeProfile`
|
||||
- `CharacteristicClaim`
|
||||
- `EvidenceLink`
|
||||
- `SourceObservation`
|
||||
- `SourceRole`
|
||||
- `UtilityRelationship`
|
||||
- `ScopeFreshness`
|
||||
- `PropagationImpact`
|
||||
- `ScopeMdInterface`
|
||||
|
||||
These should remain review candidates for now. They are useful enough to guide
|
||||
repo-scoping adoption, but they should be hardened through a consumer workplan
|
||||
in the repo-scoping repository before changing stable standards.
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommended Next Move
|
||||
|
||||
Create the actual adoption workplan in repo-scoping. It should complete a Canon
|
||||
Interface Card, map repo-scoping concepts to the comparison artifacts, and
|
||||
identify which extension candidates are proven by implementation pressure.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief
|
||||
status: candidate
|
||||
consumer: repo-scoping
|
||||
comparison_report: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief
|
||||
|
||||
## Purpose
|
||||
|
||||
Use this brief as the seed for a repo-scoping workplan. The adoption and
|
||||
implementation workplan belongs in the repo-scoping repository, not in
|
||||
InfoTechCanon.
|
||||
|
||||
## Goal
|
||||
|
||||
Compare repo-scoping with InfoTechCanon and adopt the canon where it improves
|
||||
repository intent, current scope, purposes, governance decisions, evidence, and
|
||||
scope evolution.
|
||||
|
||||
## Canon Inputs
|
||||
|
||||
- `infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md`
|
||||
- `infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml`
|
||||
- `infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml`
|
||||
- `infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml`
|
||||
- `infospace/agent/templates/canon-interface-card.template.yaml`
|
||||
- `infospace/models/governance/InfoTechCanonPurposeDemandExtension.md`
|
||||
- `infospace/patterns/intent-scope-purposes.md`
|
||||
|
||||
## Workplan Tasks For Repo-Scoping
|
||||
|
||||
1. Complete a Canon Interface Card for repo-scoping.
|
||||
2. Map Scope, Ability, Capability, Feature, Evidence, ObservedFact,
|
||||
ReviewDecision, ExpectationGap, and DependencyImpactAnalysis to canon
|
||||
concepts or extension candidates.
|
||||
3. Separate design-time INTENT.md semantics from generated or curated SCOPE.md
|
||||
semantics.
|
||||
4. Identify consumer purposes for humans, agents, State Hub, managed repos, and
|
||||
capability catalog consumers.
|
||||
5. Evaluate extension candidates and mark which are proven, rejected, deferred,
|
||||
or repo-scoping-specific.
|
||||
6. Create repo-scoping tasks for schema, API, UI, and documentation changes.
|
||||
|
||||
## Expected Outputs
|
||||
|
||||
- completed interface card,
|
||||
- mapping table from repo-scoping concepts to canon concepts,
|
||||
- list of accepted canon concepts,
|
||||
- list of extension candidates with evidence,
|
||||
- list of repo-scoping implementation tasks,
|
||||
- list of canon EvolutionRequests.
|
||||
|
||||
## Non-Goals
|
||||
|
||||
- Do not modify InfoTechCanon standards from the repo-scoping workplan without a
|
||||
canon-side EvolutionRequest.
|
||||
- Do not collapse intent, current scope, and consumer purposes into one field.
|
||||
- Do not treat generated candidates as approved truth without governance review.
|
||||
91
infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml
Normal file
91
infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
|
||||
id: comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Canon Extension Candidates
|
||||
status: candidate
|
||||
consumer: repo-scoping
|
||||
comparison_report: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
candidate_set_status: review-required
|
||||
candidates:
|
||||
- id: extension/repository-intent-statement
|
||||
title: RepositoryIntentStatement
|
||||
proposed_owner: model/purpose-demand-extension
|
||||
change_type: new-concept
|
||||
problem: Intent is currently generic; repo-scoping needs a design-time repository utility statement that can seed but not prove current scope.
|
||||
proposed_definition: A design-time statement of expected repository utility, distinct from current scope and consumer purpose.
|
||||
review_question: Should this be a specialization of Intent or a repository-scoping profile concept?
|
||||
- id: extension/repository-scope-profile
|
||||
title: RepositoryScopeProfile
|
||||
proposed_owner: model/information-space
|
||||
change_type: new-profile
|
||||
problem: Generic Scope does not capture source-linked current-state repository utility and SCOPE.md generation ownership.
|
||||
proposed_definition: A current-state, source-linked profile describing what a repository is useful for, when it is relevant, and which approved claims support it.
|
||||
review_question: Should this be a profile of Information Space, Governance, or a cross-model application profile?
|
||||
- id: extension/characteristic-claim
|
||||
title: CharacteristicClaim
|
||||
proposed_owner: model/governance
|
||||
change_type: new-concept
|
||||
problem: Repo-scoping uses Scope, Ability, Capability, and Feature as reviewable claims rather than merely descriptive tags.
|
||||
proposed_definition: An interpreted, reviewable claim about a repository at a declared abstraction level with confidence, evidence, provenance, and review status.
|
||||
review_question: Should Ability, Capability, and Feature be levels of CharacteristicClaim or separate profile concepts?
|
||||
- id: extension/evidence-link
|
||||
title: EvidenceLink
|
||||
proposed_owner: model/information-space
|
||||
change_type: new-concept
|
||||
problem: Governance Evidence is too coarse for support links that target observed facts, content chunks, files, and lower-level characteristics.
|
||||
proposed_definition: A typed support relation from a claim to a source observation, content chunk, artifact, or lower-level claim.
|
||||
review_question: Should EvidenceLink live in Information Space while Evidence remains Governance/Observability owned?
|
||||
- id: extension/source-observation
|
||||
title: SourceObservation
|
||||
proposed_owner: model/information-space
|
||||
change_type: new-concept
|
||||
problem: Observed facts are deterministic scanner outputs and should not become evidence or truth claims without interpretation.
|
||||
proposed_definition: A source-linked observation extracted from repository content, metadata, or execution results, before review or promotion.
|
||||
review_question: How should SourceObservation relate to Observability signals and Information Space chunks?
|
||||
- id: extension/source-role
|
||||
title: SourceRole
|
||||
proposed_owner: standard/tagging
|
||||
change_type: new-taxonomy
|
||||
problem: Repo-scoping needs stable labels such as intent_summary, derived_scope, product_documentation, implementation_source, dependency_declaration, and agent_guidance.
|
||||
proposed_definition: A tag or classification describing the role a source artifact plays in repository utility evaluation.
|
||||
review_question: Should SourceRole be a tagging profile or part of Information Space provenance?
|
||||
- id: extension/utility-relationship
|
||||
title: UtilityRelationship
|
||||
proposed_owner: model/governance
|
||||
change_type: new-taxonomy
|
||||
problem: Provider, dependency, tooling, mention, owned, facade, and adapter relationships decide whether evidence can become a provided capability.
|
||||
proposed_definition: A classification of how source evidence relates to claimed repository utility.
|
||||
review_question: Should these labels become governance decision criteria for approving capability claims?
|
||||
- id: extension/scope-freshness
|
||||
title: ScopeFreshness
|
||||
proposed_owner: model/task
|
||||
change_type: new-concept
|
||||
problem: Repo-scoping tracks stale downstream claims when observed facts change, but the canon lacks freshness semantics for repository scope.
|
||||
proposed_definition: A state describing whether a scope claim is current, stale, needs recalculation, needs review, superseded, or rejected.
|
||||
review_question: Should freshness be task state, governance review state, or a profile-specific quality signal?
|
||||
- id: extension/propagation-impact
|
||||
title: PropagationImpact
|
||||
proposed_owner: model/task
|
||||
change_type: new-concept
|
||||
problem: Repo-scoping measures propagation breadth and depth from changed facts to approved scope claims.
|
||||
proposed_definition: A traceable impact result showing which claims may be stale because upstream evidence changed.
|
||||
review_question: Can this generalize to other evidence-driven canon consumers?
|
||||
- id: extension/scope-md-interface
|
||||
title: ScopeMdInterface
|
||||
proposed_owner: model/information-space
|
||||
change_type: new-interface-profile
|
||||
problem: SCOPE.md has a stable section contract and machine-readable capability blocks that should be reusable.
|
||||
proposed_definition: A markdown interface profile for repository orientation, generated sections, curator-owned sections, and provided capability blocks.
|
||||
review_question: Should this become an interface-card specialization?
|
||||
disposition:
|
||||
recommended_next_step: Create a dedicated Repository Scope Profile workplan after repo-scoping consumer adoption begins.
|
||||
immediate_standard_changes: []
|
||||
hold_for_review:
|
||||
- extension/repository-intent-statement
|
||||
- extension/repository-scope-profile
|
||||
- extension/characteristic-claim
|
||||
- extension/evidence-link
|
||||
- extension/source-observation
|
||||
- extension/source-role
|
||||
- extension/utility-relationship
|
||||
- extension/scope-freshness
|
||||
- extension/propagation-impact
|
||||
- extension/scope-md-interface
|
||||
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
|
||||
root: infospace
|
||||
file_count: 121
|
||||
file_count: 131
|
||||
files:
|
||||
- path: README.md
|
||||
directory: .
|
||||
@@ -7,6 +7,21 @@ files:
|
||||
- path: agent/README.md
|
||||
directory: agent
|
||||
name: README.md
|
||||
- path: agent/briefs/comparison-repo-scoping-canon-benefit-analysis.md
|
||||
directory: agent/briefs
|
||||
name: comparison-repo-scoping-canon-benefit-analysis.md
|
||||
- path: agent/briefs/comparison-repo-scoping-consumer-workplan-brief.md
|
||||
directory: agent/briefs
|
||||
name: comparison-repo-scoping-consumer-workplan-brief.md
|
||||
- path: agent/briefs/comparison-repo-scoping-extension-candidates.md
|
||||
directory: agent/briefs
|
||||
name: comparison-repo-scoping-extension-candidates.md
|
||||
- path: agent/briefs/comparison-repo-scoping-frame.md
|
||||
directory: agent/briefs
|
||||
name: comparison-repo-scoping-frame.md
|
||||
- path: agent/briefs/comparison-repo-scoping-report.md
|
||||
directory: agent/briefs
|
||||
name: comparison-repo-scoping-report.md
|
||||
- path: agent/briefs/concept-catalog-purpose-demand.md
|
||||
directory: agent/briefs
|
||||
name: concept-catalog-purpose-demand.md
|
||||
@@ -151,6 +166,21 @@ files:
|
||||
- path: evaluations/railiance-fabric/visualization-examples.yaml
|
||||
directory: evaluations/railiance-fabric
|
||||
name: visualization-examples.yaml
|
||||
- path: evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml
|
||||
directory: evaluations/repo-scoping
|
||||
name: canon-benefit-analysis.yaml
|
||||
- path: evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml
|
||||
directory: evaluations/repo-scoping
|
||||
name: comparison-frame.yaml
|
||||
- path: evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md
|
||||
directory: evaluations/repo-scoping
|
||||
name: comparison-report.md
|
||||
- path: evaluations/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief.md
|
||||
directory: evaluations/repo-scoping
|
||||
name: consumer-workplan-brief.md
|
||||
- path: evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml
|
||||
directory: evaluations/repo-scoping
|
||||
name: extension-candidates.yaml
|
||||
- path: evaluations/user-engine/consumer-workplan-brief.md
|
||||
directory: evaluations/user-engine
|
||||
name: consumer-workplan-brief.md
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,5 +1,25 @@
|
||||
concept_count: 69
|
||||
concept_count: 74
|
||||
concepts:
|
||||
- concept: Repo Scoping Canon Benefit Analysis
|
||||
owner: comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis
|
||||
path: evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml
|
||||
source: artifact_title
|
||||
- concept: Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief
|
||||
owner: comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief
|
||||
path: evaluations/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief.md
|
||||
source: artifact_title
|
||||
- concept: Repo Scoping Canon Extension Candidates
|
||||
owner: comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates
|
||||
path: evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml
|
||||
source: artifact_title
|
||||
- concept: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Frame
|
||||
owner: comparison/repo-scoping/frame
|
||||
path: evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml
|
||||
source: artifact_title
|
||||
- concept: Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report
|
||||
owner: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
path: evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md
|
||||
source: artifact_title
|
||||
- concept: Purpose And Consumer Demand Concept Catalog
|
||||
owner: concept-catalog/purpose-demand
|
||||
path: concepts/purpose-demand.yaml
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,4 +1,9 @@
|
||||
artifacts:
|
||||
- comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis
|
||||
- comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief
|
||||
- comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates
|
||||
- comparison/repo-scoping/frame
|
||||
- comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
- concept-catalog/purpose-demand
|
||||
- conformance/railiance-fabric
|
||||
- conformance/railiance-fabric/consumer-workplan-brief
|
||||
@@ -44,6 +49,60 @@ artifacts:
|
||||
- standard/caring
|
||||
- standard/tagging
|
||||
rows:
|
||||
- artifact: comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis
|
||||
targets:
|
||||
comparison/repo-scoping/report:
|
||||
- part_of
|
||||
model/governance:
|
||||
- maps
|
||||
model/information-space:
|
||||
- maps
|
||||
model/purpose-demand-extension:
|
||||
- maps
|
||||
model/task:
|
||||
- maps
|
||||
standard/tagging:
|
||||
- maps
|
||||
- artifact: comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief
|
||||
targets:
|
||||
comparison/repo-scoping/report:
|
||||
- part_of
|
||||
model/purpose-demand-extension:
|
||||
- uses
|
||||
- artifact: comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates
|
||||
targets:
|
||||
comparison/repo-scoping/report:
|
||||
- part_of
|
||||
model/governance:
|
||||
- proposes
|
||||
model/information-space:
|
||||
- proposes
|
||||
model/purpose-demand-extension:
|
||||
- proposes
|
||||
model/task:
|
||||
- proposes
|
||||
- artifact: comparison/repo-scoping/frame
|
||||
targets:
|
||||
comparison/repo-scoping/report:
|
||||
- part_of
|
||||
model/governance:
|
||||
- uses
|
||||
model/purpose-demand-extension:
|
||||
- uses
|
||||
model/task:
|
||||
- uses
|
||||
- artifact: comparison/repo-scoping/report
|
||||
targets:
|
||||
model/governance:
|
||||
- uses
|
||||
model/information-space:
|
||||
- uses
|
||||
model/purpose-demand-extension:
|
||||
- compares
|
||||
model/task:
|
||||
- uses
|
||||
pattern/intent-scope-purposes:
|
||||
- uses
|
||||
- artifact: concept-catalog/purpose-demand
|
||||
targets:
|
||||
kernel/itc-core:
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,14 +1,14 @@
|
||||
{
|
||||
"details": {
|
||||
"artifact_count": 44,
|
||||
"relationship_count": 190
|
||||
"artifact_count": 49,
|
||||
"relationship_count": 212
|
||||
},
|
||||
"errors": [],
|
||||
"metrics": {
|
||||
"coherence_components": 1.0,
|
||||
"consistency_cycles": 0.0,
|
||||
"coverage_ratio": 1.0,
|
||||
"granularity_entropy": 3.3648983427090142,
|
||||
"granularity_entropy": 3.6776822595640257,
|
||||
"redundancy_ratio": 0.0
|
||||
},
|
||||
"ok": true,
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -2,10 +2,15 @@
|
||||
|
||||
# By Concept
|
||||
|
||||
Concept count: **69**
|
||||
Concept count: **74**
|
||||
|
||||
| Concept | Owner | Source |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| Repo Scoping Canon Benefit Analysis | `comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis` | `artifact_title` |
|
||||
| Repo Scoping Consumer Workplan Brief | `comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief` | `artifact_title` |
|
||||
| Repo Scoping Canon Extension Candidates | `comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates` | `artifact_title` |
|
||||
| Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Frame | `comparison/repo-scoping/frame` | `artifact_title` |
|
||||
| Repo Scoping Canon Comparison Report | `comparison/repo-scoping/report` | `artifact_title` |
|
||||
| Purpose And Consumer Demand Concept Catalog | `concept-catalog/purpose-demand` | `artifact_title` |
|
||||
| Railiance Fabric Canon Conformance Pack | `conformance/railiance-fabric` | `artifact_title` |
|
||||
| Railiance Fabric Consumer Workplan Brief | `conformance/railiance-fabric/consumer-workplan-brief` | `artifact_title` |
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -2,6 +2,13 @@
|
||||
|
||||
# By Mapping Target
|
||||
|
||||
## `comparison/repo-scoping/report`
|
||||
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis` via `part_of`
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief` via `part_of`
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates` via `part_of`
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/frame` via `part_of`
|
||||
|
||||
## `concept-catalog/purpose-demand`
|
||||
|
||||
- `model/purpose-demand-extension` via `introduces`
|
||||
@@ -83,6 +90,10 @@
|
||||
|
||||
## `model/governance`
|
||||
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis` via `maps`
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates` via `proposes`
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/frame` via `uses`
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/report` via `uses`
|
||||
- `concept-catalog/purpose-demand` via `uses`
|
||||
- `conformance/railiance-fabric` via `uses`
|
||||
- `conformance/railiance-fabric/entity-edge-capture-criteria` via `uses`
|
||||
@@ -102,6 +113,9 @@
|
||||
|
||||
## `model/information-space`
|
||||
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis` via `maps`
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates` via `proposes`
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/report` via `uses`
|
||||
- `kernel/itc-kernel-map` via `maps`
|
||||
- `model/purpose-demand-extension` via `uses`
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -151,6 +165,11 @@
|
||||
|
||||
## `model/purpose-demand-extension`
|
||||
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis` via `maps`
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief` via `uses`
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates` via `proposes`
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/frame` via `uses`
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/report` via `compares`
|
||||
- `conformance/railiance-fabric` via `uses`
|
||||
- `conformance/railiance-fabric/consumer-workplan-brief` via `uses`
|
||||
- `conformance/railiance-fabric/entity-edge-capture-criteria` via `uses`
|
||||
@@ -180,6 +199,10 @@
|
||||
|
||||
## `model/task`
|
||||
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis` via `maps`
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates` via `proposes`
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/frame` via `uses`
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/report` via `uses`
|
||||
- `conformance/railiance-fabric` via `uses`
|
||||
- `conformance/railiance-fabric/entity-edge-capture-criteria` via `uses`
|
||||
- `evaluation/user-engine` via `uses`
|
||||
@@ -196,6 +219,7 @@
|
||||
|
||||
## `pattern/intent-scope-purposes`
|
||||
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/report` via `uses`
|
||||
- `example/consumer-purpose-portfolio` via `illustrates`
|
||||
|
||||
## `profile/small-saas`
|
||||
@@ -280,6 +304,7 @@
|
||||
|
||||
## `standard/tagging`
|
||||
|
||||
- `comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis` via `maps`
|
||||
- `conformance/railiance-fabric` via `uses`
|
||||
- `kernel/itc-kernel-map` via `maps`
|
||||
- `profile/small-saas` via `requires`
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -2,49 +2,54 @@
|
||||
|
||||
# Import Matrix
|
||||
|
||||
| Artifact | `concept-catalog/purpose-demand` | `conformance/railiance-fabric` | `conformance/railiance-fabric/consumer-workplan-brief` | `conformance/railiance-fabric/entity-edge-capture-criteria` | `conformance/railiance-fabric/mapping-expectations` | `conformance/railiance-fabric/visualization-examples` | `evaluation/user-engine` | `evaluation/user-engine/consumer-workplan-brief` | `evaluation/user-engine/interface-card-expectations` | `evaluation/user-engine/questions` | `evaluation/user-engine/small-saas-alignment` | `example/consumer-purpose-portfolio` | `kernel/itc-core` | `kernel/itc-kernel-map` | `mapping/purpose-demand-governance-candidates` | `model/access-control` | `model/data` | `model/devsecops` | `model/governance` | `model/information-space` | `model/landscape` | `model/network` | `model/observability` | `model/organization` | `model/purpose-demand-extension` | `model/security` | `model/task` | `pattern/intent-scope-purposes` | `profile/small-saas` | `small-saas/control/namespace-per-tenant` | `small-saas/dataset/subscription-ledger` | `small-saas/deployment/production` | `small-saas/evidence/access-review-2026-05` | `small-saas/incident/cross-tenant-access-attempt` | `small-saas/policy/tenant-isolation` | `small-saas/service/billing-portal` | `small-saas/system/billing-system` | `small-saas/task/onboard-tenant` | `small-saas/team/platform` | `small-saas/tenant/acme` | `small-saas/tenant/globex` | `small-saas/user/ada-admin` | `standard/caring` | `standard/tagging` |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| `concept-catalog/purpose-demand` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `conformance/railiance-fabric` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` |
|
||||
| `conformance/railiance-fabric/consumer-workplan-brief` | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `conformance/railiance-fabric/entity-edge-capture-criteria` | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `conformance/railiance-fabric/mapping-expectations` | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | | `maps` | `maps` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `conformance/railiance-fabric/visualization-examples` | | `part_of` | | `illustrates` | `illustrates` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `evaluation/user-engine` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | `uses` | | `uses` | | | | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | `evaluates` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | |
|
||||
| `evaluation/user-engine/consumer-workplan-brief` | | | | | | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `evaluation/user-engine/interface-card-expectations` | | | | | | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | |
|
||||
| `evaluation/user-engine/questions` | | | | | | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | `uses` | `uses` | | `uses` | | | | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `evaluation/user-engine/small-saas-alignment` | | | | | | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | `uses` | | | | | `uses` | | | | | `evaluates` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `example/consumer-purpose-portfolio` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `illustrates` | | | `illustrates` | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `kernel/itc-core` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `kernel/itc-kernel-map` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `maps` | | | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | | `maps` | `maps` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `maps` | `maps` |
|
||||
| `mapping/purpose-demand-governance-candidates` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `maps` | | | | | | `maps` | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/access-control` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/data` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/devsecops` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/governance` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/information-space` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/landscape` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/network` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/observability` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/organization` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/purpose-demand-extension` | `introduces` | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | `extends` | `uses` | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/security` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/task` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `pattern/intent-scope-purposes` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | `implements` | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `profile/small-saas` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | `requires` | `requires` | `requires` | `requires` | | `requires` | `requires` | `requires` | `requires` | | `requires` | `requires` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `requires` | `requires` |
|
||||
| `small-saas/control/namespace-per-tenant` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | `instantiates` | | | | `evidenced_by` | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/dataset/subscription-ledger` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | `instantiates` | | | | | | `governed_by` | `owned_by` | | | | `partitioned_for` | `partitioned_for` | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/deployment/production` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | `instantiates` | `implements` | | | | | | `deploys` | | | | `separates` | `separates` | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/evidence/access-review-2026-05` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | `instantiates` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/incident/cross-tenant-access-attempt` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | `instantiates` | `constrained_by` | | | `evidenced_by` | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/policy/tenant-isolation` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | `instantiates` | `requires` | | | `evidenced_by` | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/service/billing-portal` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | `instantiates` | | | | | | | | `part_of` | | `owned_by` | | | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/system/billing-system` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | `instantiates` | | | | | | | | | | | `serves` | `serves` | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/task/onboard-tenant` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | `instantiates` | | | | | | `governed_by` | | | | `owned_by` | `changes` | | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/team/platform` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | `instantiates` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/tenant/acme` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | `instantiates` | `isolated_by` | | | | | | | | | | | | `represented_by` | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/tenant/globex` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | `instantiates` | `isolated_by` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/user/ada-admin` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | `instantiates` | | | | `access_evidenced_by` | | `has_access_under` | | | | `member_of` | | | | | |
|
||||
| `standard/caring` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | `imports` | `imports` | `imports` | `imports` | | | `imports` | `imports` | `imports` | | `imports` | `imports` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `imports` |
|
||||
| `standard/tagging` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `imports` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| Artifact | `comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis` | `comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief` | `comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates` | `comparison/repo-scoping/frame` | `comparison/repo-scoping/report` | `concept-catalog/purpose-demand` | `conformance/railiance-fabric` | `conformance/railiance-fabric/consumer-workplan-brief` | `conformance/railiance-fabric/entity-edge-capture-criteria` | `conformance/railiance-fabric/mapping-expectations` | `conformance/railiance-fabric/visualization-examples` | `evaluation/user-engine` | `evaluation/user-engine/consumer-workplan-brief` | `evaluation/user-engine/interface-card-expectations` | `evaluation/user-engine/questions` | `evaluation/user-engine/small-saas-alignment` | `example/consumer-purpose-portfolio` | `kernel/itc-core` | `kernel/itc-kernel-map` | `mapping/purpose-demand-governance-candidates` | `model/access-control` | `model/data` | `model/devsecops` | `model/governance` | `model/information-space` | `model/landscape` | `model/network` | `model/observability` | `model/organization` | `model/purpose-demand-extension` | `model/security` | `model/task` | `pattern/intent-scope-purposes` | `profile/small-saas` | `small-saas/control/namespace-per-tenant` | `small-saas/dataset/subscription-ledger` | `small-saas/deployment/production` | `small-saas/evidence/access-review-2026-05` | `small-saas/incident/cross-tenant-access-attempt` | `small-saas/policy/tenant-isolation` | `small-saas/service/billing-portal` | `small-saas/system/billing-system` | `small-saas/task/onboard-tenant` | `small-saas/team/platform` | `small-saas/tenant/acme` | `small-saas/tenant/globex` | `small-saas/user/ada-admin` | `standard/caring` | `standard/tagging` |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| `comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis` | | | | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `maps` | `maps` | | | | | `maps` | | `maps` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `maps` |
|
||||
| `comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief` | | | | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates` | | | | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `proposes` | `proposes` | | | | | `proposes` | | `proposes` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `comparison/repo-scoping/frame` | | | | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | `uses` | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `comparison/repo-scoping/report` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | `uses` | | | | | `compares` | | `uses` | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `concept-catalog/purpose-demand` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `conformance/railiance-fabric` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` |
|
||||
| `conformance/railiance-fabric/consumer-workplan-brief` | | | | | | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `conformance/railiance-fabric/entity-edge-capture-criteria` | | | | | | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `conformance/railiance-fabric/mapping-expectations` | | | | | | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | | `maps` | `maps` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `conformance/railiance-fabric/visualization-examples` | | | | | | | `part_of` | | `illustrates` | `illustrates` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `evaluation/user-engine` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | `uses` | | `uses` | | | | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | `evaluates` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | |
|
||||
| `evaluation/user-engine/consumer-workplan-brief` | | | | | | | | | | | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `evaluation/user-engine/interface-card-expectations` | | | | | | | | | | | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | |
|
||||
| `evaluation/user-engine/questions` | | | | | | | | | | | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | `uses` | `uses` | | `uses` | | | | | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `evaluation/user-engine/small-saas-alignment` | | | | | | | | | | | | `part_of` | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | `uses` | | | | | `uses` | | | | | `evaluates` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `example/consumer-purpose-portfolio` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `illustrates` | | | `illustrates` | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `kernel/itc-core` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `kernel/itc-kernel-map` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `maps` | | | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | `maps` | | `maps` | `maps` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `maps` | `maps` |
|
||||
| `mapping/purpose-demand-governance-candidates` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `maps` | | | | | | `maps` | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/access-control` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/data` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/devsecops` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/governance` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/information-space` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/landscape` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/network` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/observability` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/organization` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/purpose-demand-extension` | | | | | | `introduces` | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | `extends` | `uses` | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/security` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `model/task` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `pattern/intent-scope-purposes` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | `implements` | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `profile/small-saas` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | `requires` | `requires` | `requires` | `requires` | | `requires` | `requires` | `requires` | `requires` | | `requires` | `requires` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `requires` | `requires` |
|
||||
| `small-saas/control/namespace-per-tenant` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | `instantiates` | | | | `evidenced_by` | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/dataset/subscription-ledger` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | | | `instantiates` | | | | | | `governed_by` | `owned_by` | | | | `partitioned_for` | `partitioned_for` | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/deployment/production` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | `instantiates` | `implements` | | | | | | `deploys` | | | | `separates` | `separates` | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/evidence/access-review-2026-05` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | `instantiates` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/incident/cross-tenant-access-attempt` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | `instantiates` | `constrained_by` | | | `evidenced_by` | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/policy/tenant-isolation` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | | | `instantiates` | `requires` | | | `evidenced_by` | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/service/billing-portal` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | `instantiates` | | | | | | | | `part_of` | | `owned_by` | | | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/system/billing-system` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | `instantiates` | | | | | | | | | | | `serves` | `serves` | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/task/onboard-tenant` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | `instantiates` | | | | | | `governed_by` | | | | `owned_by` | `changes` | | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/team/platform` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | `instantiates` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/tenant/acme` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | `instantiates` | `isolated_by` | | | | | | | | | | | | `represented_by` | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/tenant/globex` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | `instantiates` | `isolated_by` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| `small-saas/user/ada-admin` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | | | | `uses` | | | | | `instantiates` | | | | `access_evidenced_by` | | `has_access_under` | | | | `member_of` | | | | | |
|
||||
| `standard/caring` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | `imports` | `imports` | `imports` | `imports` | | | `imports` | `imports` | `imports` | | `imports` | `imports` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `imports` |
|
||||
| `standard/tagging` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `conforms_to` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | `imports` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -3,17 +3,21 @@
|
||||
# Kernel Overview
|
||||
|
||||
- Infospace: `canon`
|
||||
- Artifacts: 44
|
||||
- Artifacts: 49
|
||||
|
||||
## Artifact Kinds
|
||||
|
||||
- `benefit-analysis`: 1
|
||||
- `capture-criteria`: 1
|
||||
- `comparison-frame`: 1
|
||||
- `comparison-report`: 1
|
||||
- `concept-catalog`: 1
|
||||
- `conformance-pack`: 1
|
||||
- `consumer-workplan-brief`: 2
|
||||
- `consumer-workplan-brief`: 3
|
||||
- `evaluation-pack`: 1
|
||||
- `evaluation-question-set`: 1
|
||||
- `example`: 1
|
||||
- `extension-candidate-set`: 1
|
||||
- `interface-card-expectation`: 1
|
||||
- `kernel`: 2
|
||||
- `mapping`: 1
|
||||
@@ -31,6 +35,7 @@
|
||||
|
||||
- `access_evidenced_by`: 1
|
||||
- `changes`: 1
|
||||
- `compares`: 1
|
||||
- `conforms_to`: 16
|
||||
- `constrained_by`: 1
|
||||
- `deploys`: 1
|
||||
@@ -45,13 +50,14 @@
|
||||
- `instantiates`: 13
|
||||
- `introduces`: 1
|
||||
- `isolated_by`: 2
|
||||
- `maps`: 24
|
||||
- `maps`: 29
|
||||
- `member_of`: 1
|
||||
- `owned_by`: 3
|
||||
- `part_of`: 9
|
||||
- `part_of`: 13
|
||||
- `partitioned_for`: 2
|
||||
- `proposes`: 4
|
||||
- `represented_by`: 1
|
||||
- `requires`: 13
|
||||
- `separates`: 2
|
||||
- `serves`: 2
|
||||
- `uses`: 71
|
||||
- `uses`: 79
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -2,10 +2,15 @@
|
||||
|
||||
# Repository Tree
|
||||
|
||||
File count: **121**
|
||||
File count: **131**
|
||||
|
||||
- `README.md`
|
||||
- `agent/README.md`
|
||||
- `agent/briefs/comparison-repo-scoping-canon-benefit-analysis.md`
|
||||
- `agent/briefs/comparison-repo-scoping-consumer-workplan-brief.md`
|
||||
- `agent/briefs/comparison-repo-scoping-extension-candidates.md`
|
||||
- `agent/briefs/comparison-repo-scoping-frame.md`
|
||||
- `agent/briefs/comparison-repo-scoping-report.md`
|
||||
- `agent/briefs/concept-catalog-purpose-demand.md`
|
||||
- `agent/briefs/conformance-railiance-fabric-consumer-workplan-brief.md`
|
||||
- `agent/briefs/conformance-railiance-fabric-entity-edge-capture-criteria.md`
|
||||
@@ -54,6 +59,11 @@ File count: **121**
|
||||
- `evaluations/railiance-fabric/entity-edge-capture-criteria.yaml`
|
||||
- `evaluations/railiance-fabric/mapping-expectations.yaml`
|
||||
- `evaluations/railiance-fabric/visualization-examples.yaml`
|
||||
- `evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml`
|
||||
- `evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml`
|
||||
- `evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md`
|
||||
- `evaluations/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief.md`
|
||||
- `evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml`
|
||||
- `evaluations/user-engine/consumer-workplan-brief.md`
|
||||
- `evaluations/user-engine/evaluation-pack.yaml`
|
||||
- `evaluations/user-engine/interface-card-expectations.yaml`
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -10,13 +10,17 @@ import yaml
|
||||
|
||||
GENERATED_NOTICE = "<!-- GENERATED by info_tech_canon; do not edit by hand. -->"
|
||||
RETRIEVAL_ARTIFACT_KINDS = {
|
||||
"benefit-analysis",
|
||||
"capture-criteria",
|
||||
"comparison-frame",
|
||||
"comparison-report",
|
||||
"concept-catalog",
|
||||
"conformance-pack",
|
||||
"consumer-workplan-brief",
|
||||
"evaluation-pack",
|
||||
"evaluation-question-set",
|
||||
"example",
|
||||
"extension-candidate-set",
|
||||
"interface-card-expectation",
|
||||
"kernel",
|
||||
"mapping",
|
||||
@@ -761,6 +765,10 @@ def _render_consumer_brief(consumer_id: str) -> str:
|
||||
"models/network/InfoTechCanonNetworkModel.md",
|
||||
],
|
||||
"repo-scoping": [
|
||||
"evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-report.md",
|
||||
"evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml",
|
||||
"evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml",
|
||||
"evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml",
|
||||
"models/governance/InfoTechCanonPurposeDemandExtension.md",
|
||||
"patterns/intent-scope-purposes.md",
|
||||
"agent/templates/canon-interface-card.template.yaml",
|
||||
@@ -861,8 +869,14 @@ def _safe_id(value: str) -> str:
|
||||
def _summary_for_artifact(artifact: Any) -> str:
|
||||
if artifact.kind == "profile-artifact":
|
||||
return f"Example artifact for the {artifact.provenance.get('profile', 'unknown')} profile: {artifact.title}."
|
||||
if artifact.kind == "benefit-analysis":
|
||||
return f"Consumer benefit analysis against canon surfaces: {artifact.title}."
|
||||
if artifact.kind == "capture-criteria":
|
||||
return f"Criteria for canonical entity and edge capture: {artifact.title}."
|
||||
if artifact.kind == "comparison-frame":
|
||||
return f"Structured comparison questions and domains: {artifact.title}."
|
||||
if artifact.kind == "comparison-report":
|
||||
return f"Canon-side comparison report: {artifact.title}."
|
||||
if artifact.kind == "concept-catalog":
|
||||
return f"Structured candidate concept catalog: {artifact.title}."
|
||||
if artifact.kind == "conformance-pack":
|
||||
@@ -875,6 +889,8 @@ def _summary_for_artifact(artifact: Any) -> str:
|
||||
return f"Structured canon evaluation question set: {artifact.title}."
|
||||
if artifact.kind == "example":
|
||||
return f"Canon-side example artifact: {artifact.title}."
|
||||
if artifact.kind == "extension-candidate-set":
|
||||
return f"Reviewable canon extension candidate set: {artifact.title}."
|
||||
if artifact.kind == "interface-card-expectation":
|
||||
return f"Expected Canon Interface Card fields and mappings: {artifact.title}."
|
||||
if artifact.kind == "mapping":
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -53,7 +53,10 @@ REQUIRED_SCHEMAS = (
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
RETRIEVAL_BRIEF_KINDS = {
|
||||
"benefit-analysis",
|
||||
"capture-criteria",
|
||||
"comparison-frame",
|
||||
"comparison-report",
|
||||
"concept-catalog",
|
||||
"conformance-pack",
|
||||
"consumer-workplan-brief",
|
||||
@@ -70,6 +73,7 @@ RETRIEVAL_BRIEF_KINDS = {
|
||||
"profile-alignment",
|
||||
"profile",
|
||||
"standard",
|
||||
"extension-candidate-set",
|
||||
"visualization-example-set",
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -196,6 +200,49 @@ RAILIANCE_FABRIC_REQUIRED_MODELS = {
|
||||
"model/security",
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
REPO_SCOPING_COMPARISON_ARTIFACT_IDS = {
|
||||
"comparison/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis",
|
||||
"comparison/repo-scoping/consumer-workplan-brief",
|
||||
"comparison/repo-scoping/extension-candidates",
|
||||
"comparison/repo-scoping/frame",
|
||||
"comparison/repo-scoping/report",
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
REPO_SCOPING_REQUIRED_DOMAINS = {
|
||||
"repository-intent",
|
||||
"current-scope",
|
||||
"future-scope",
|
||||
"consumers-and-purposes",
|
||||
"decisions-and-evidence",
|
||||
"risks-and-regressions",
|
||||
"evolution-requests",
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
REPO_SCOPING_REQUIRED_MAPPINGS = {
|
||||
"Scope",
|
||||
"Ability",
|
||||
"Capability",
|
||||
"Feature",
|
||||
"Evidence",
|
||||
"ObservedFact",
|
||||
"ReviewDecision",
|
||||
"ExpectationGap",
|
||||
"DependencyImpactAnalysis",
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
REPO_SCOPING_REQUIRED_EXTENSION_CANDIDATES = {
|
||||
"extension/repository-intent-statement",
|
||||
"extension/repository-scope-profile",
|
||||
"extension/characteristic-claim",
|
||||
"extension/evidence-link",
|
||||
"extension/source-observation",
|
||||
"extension/source-role",
|
||||
"extension/utility-relationship",
|
||||
"extension/scope-freshness",
|
||||
"extension/propagation-impact",
|
||||
"extension/scope-md-interface",
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
def structural_checks(context: Any) -> dict[str, list[dict[str, Any]]]:
|
||||
errors: list[dict[str, Any]] = []
|
||||
@@ -218,6 +265,11 @@ def structural_checks(context: Any) -> dict[str, list[dict[str, Any]]]:
|
||||
context.infospace.artifacts,
|
||||
errors,
|
||||
)
|
||||
_check_repo_scoping_comparison_assets(
|
||||
context.infospace_root,
|
||||
context.infospace.artifacts,
|
||||
errors,
|
||||
)
|
||||
_check_optional_assets(context.infospace_root, warnings)
|
||||
|
||||
return {"errors": errors, "warnings": warnings}
|
||||
@@ -948,6 +1000,173 @@ def _check_railiance_fabric_conformance_assets(
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
def _check_repo_scoping_comparison_assets(
|
||||
infospace_root: Path,
|
||||
artifacts: list[Any],
|
||||
errors: list[dict[str, Any]],
|
||||
) -> None:
|
||||
artifact_ids = {artifact.id for artifact in artifacts}
|
||||
for artifact_id in sorted(REPO_SCOPING_COMPARISON_ARTIFACT_IDS - artifact_ids):
|
||||
errors.append(
|
||||
{
|
||||
"code": "missing_repo_scoping_comparison_artifact",
|
||||
"artifact_id": artifact_id,
|
||||
}
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
frame = _read_yaml(
|
||||
infospace_root / "evaluations" / "repo-scoping" / "comparison-frame.yaml",
|
||||
errors,
|
||||
)
|
||||
if isinstance(frame, dict):
|
||||
domains = frame.get("comparison_domains") or []
|
||||
if not isinstance(domains, list):
|
||||
errors.append(
|
||||
{
|
||||
"code": "invalid_repo_scoping_comparison_domains",
|
||||
"path": "infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/comparison-frame.yaml",
|
||||
}
|
||||
)
|
||||
else:
|
||||
domain_ids = {
|
||||
str(domain.get("id"))
|
||||
for domain in domains
|
||||
if isinstance(domain, dict) and domain.get("id")
|
||||
}
|
||||
for domain_id in sorted(REPO_SCOPING_REQUIRED_DOMAINS - domain_ids):
|
||||
errors.append(
|
||||
{
|
||||
"code": "missing_repo_scoping_comparison_domain",
|
||||
"domain": domain_id,
|
||||
}
|
||||
)
|
||||
for domain in domains:
|
||||
if not isinstance(domain, dict):
|
||||
continue
|
||||
if not domain.get("questions"):
|
||||
errors.append(
|
||||
{
|
||||
"code": "empty_repo_scoping_comparison_domain",
|
||||
"domain": domain.get("id"),
|
||||
}
|
||||
)
|
||||
if not domain.get("canon_anchors"):
|
||||
errors.append(
|
||||
{
|
||||
"code": "missing_repo_scoping_domain_canon_anchors",
|
||||
"domain": domain.get("id"),
|
||||
}
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
analysis = _read_yaml(
|
||||
infospace_root
|
||||
/ "evaluations"
|
||||
/ "repo-scoping"
|
||||
/ "canon-benefit-analysis.yaml",
|
||||
errors,
|
||||
)
|
||||
if isinstance(analysis, dict):
|
||||
mappings = analysis.get("candidate_mappings") or []
|
||||
if not isinstance(mappings, list):
|
||||
errors.append(
|
||||
{
|
||||
"code": "invalid_repo_scoping_candidate_mappings",
|
||||
"path": "infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml",
|
||||
}
|
||||
)
|
||||
else:
|
||||
mapped_concepts = {
|
||||
str(mapping.get("repo_scoping_concept"))
|
||||
for mapping in mappings
|
||||
if isinstance(mapping, dict) and mapping.get("repo_scoping_concept")
|
||||
}
|
||||
for concept in sorted(REPO_SCOPING_REQUIRED_MAPPINGS - mapped_concepts):
|
||||
errors.append(
|
||||
{
|
||||
"code": "missing_repo_scoping_candidate_mapping",
|
||||
"concept": concept,
|
||||
}
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
direct_reuse = analysis.get("direct_reuse") or []
|
||||
if not isinstance(direct_reuse, list) or not direct_reuse:
|
||||
errors.append(
|
||||
{
|
||||
"code": "missing_repo_scoping_direct_reuse",
|
||||
"path": "infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml",
|
||||
}
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
profile_candidates = analysis.get("profile_candidates") or []
|
||||
if not isinstance(profile_candidates, list) or not profile_candidates:
|
||||
errors.append(
|
||||
{
|
||||
"code": "missing_repo_scoping_profile_candidates",
|
||||
"path": "infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/canon-benefit-analysis.yaml",
|
||||
}
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
extensions = _read_yaml(
|
||||
infospace_root
|
||||
/ "evaluations"
|
||||
/ "repo-scoping"
|
||||
/ "extension-candidates.yaml",
|
||||
errors,
|
||||
)
|
||||
if isinstance(extensions, dict):
|
||||
if not extensions.get("candidate_set_status"):
|
||||
errors.append(
|
||||
{
|
||||
"code": "missing_repo_scoping_candidate_set_status",
|
||||
"path": "infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml",
|
||||
}
|
||||
)
|
||||
candidates = extensions.get("candidates") or []
|
||||
if not isinstance(candidates, list):
|
||||
errors.append(
|
||||
{
|
||||
"code": "invalid_repo_scoping_extension_candidates",
|
||||
"path": "infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/extension-candidates.yaml",
|
||||
}
|
||||
)
|
||||
else:
|
||||
candidate_ids = {
|
||||
str(candidate.get("id"))
|
||||
for candidate in candidates
|
||||
if isinstance(candidate, dict) and candidate.get("id")
|
||||
}
|
||||
for candidate_id in sorted(
|
||||
REPO_SCOPING_REQUIRED_EXTENSION_CANDIDATES - candidate_ids
|
||||
):
|
||||
errors.append(
|
||||
{
|
||||
"code": "missing_repo_scoping_extension_candidate",
|
||||
"candidate": candidate_id,
|
||||
}
|
||||
)
|
||||
for candidate in candidates:
|
||||
if isinstance(candidate, dict) and not candidate.get("review_question"):
|
||||
errors.append(
|
||||
{
|
||||
"code": "missing_repo_scoping_extension_review_question",
|
||||
"candidate": candidate.get("id"),
|
||||
}
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
for filename, code in (
|
||||
("comparison-report.md", "missing_repo_scoping_comparison_report"),
|
||||
("consumer-workplan-brief.md", "missing_repo_scoping_consumer_workplan_brief"),
|
||||
):
|
||||
path = infospace_root / "evaluations" / "repo-scoping" / filename
|
||||
if not path.is_file():
|
||||
errors.append(
|
||||
{
|
||||
"code": code,
|
||||
"path": str(Path("infospace") / "evaluations" / "repo-scoping" / filename),
|
||||
}
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
def _artifact_paths_by_path(
|
||||
infospace_root: Path,
|
||||
errors: list[dict[str, Any]],
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ def test_cli_inspect_emits_json(capsys) -> None:
|
||||
assert exit_code == 0
|
||||
payload = json.loads(capsys.readouterr().out)
|
||||
assert payload["ok"] is True
|
||||
assert payload["infospace"]["artifact_count"] == 44
|
||||
assert payload["infospace"]["artifact_count"] == 49
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
def test_cli_missing_profile_uses_structured_error(capsys) -> None:
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -19,15 +19,19 @@ def test_inspect_canon_counts_artifact_kinds() -> None:
|
||||
|
||||
assert payload["ok"] is True
|
||||
assert payload["infospace"]["slug"] == "canon"
|
||||
assert payload["infospace"]["artifact_count"] == 44
|
||||
assert payload["infospace"]["artifact_count"] == 49
|
||||
assert payload["infospace"]["kinds"] == {
|
||||
"benefit-analysis": 1,
|
||||
"capture-criteria": 1,
|
||||
"comparison-frame": 1,
|
||||
"comparison-report": 1,
|
||||
"concept-catalog": 1,
|
||||
"conformance-pack": 1,
|
||||
"consumer-workplan-brief": 2,
|
||||
"consumer-workplan-brief": 3,
|
||||
"evaluation-pack": 1,
|
||||
"evaluation-question-set": 1,
|
||||
"example": 1,
|
||||
"extension-candidate-set": 1,
|
||||
"interface-card-expectation": 1,
|
||||
"kernel": 2,
|
||||
"mapping": 1,
|
||||
@@ -54,14 +58,14 @@ def test_validate_canon_passes_scaffold() -> None:
|
||||
assert payload["ok"] is True
|
||||
assert payload["errors"] == []
|
||||
assert "warnings" in payload
|
||||
assert payload["details"]["artifact_count"] == 44
|
||||
assert payload["details"]["artifact_count"] == 49
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
def test_graph_exports_relationship_summary() -> None:
|
||||
payload = artifact_graph()
|
||||
|
||||
assert payload["ok"] is True
|
||||
assert payload["graph"]["node_count"] == 44
|
||||
assert payload["graph"]["node_count"] == 49
|
||||
assert payload["graph"]["edge_count"] > 15
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -108,6 +112,9 @@ def test_generators_write_expected_assets(tmp_path) -> None:
|
||||
assert (
|
||||
root / "agent" / "briefs" / "conformance-railiance-fabric.md"
|
||||
).is_file()
|
||||
assert (
|
||||
root / "agent" / "briefs" / "comparison-repo-scoping-report.md"
|
||||
).is_file()
|
||||
assert (root / "agent" / "briefs" / "pattern-intent-scope-purposes.md").is_file()
|
||||
assert (
|
||||
root / "agent" / "templates" / "canon-interface-card.template.yaml"
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ type: workplan
|
||||
title: "Repo Scoping Comparison And Extension"
|
||||
domain: canon
|
||||
repo: info-tech-canon
|
||||
status: proposed
|
||||
status: finished
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
created: "2026-05-23"
|
||||
updated: "2026-05-23"
|
||||
@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ produce extension candidates rather than silently blending models.
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: ITC-WP-0009-T01
|
||||
status: todo
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
state_hub_task_id: "7f5b0093-29b8-453f-ab73-c44db71cde52"
|
||||
```
|
||||
@@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ state_hub_task_id: "7f5b0093-29b8-453f-ab73-c44db71cde52"
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: ITC-WP-0009-T02
|
||||
status: todo
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
state_hub_task_id: "d026d36b-e89d-4498-9c07-0f2e7f0c3c4c"
|
||||
```
|
||||
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ state_hub_task_id: "d026d36b-e89d-4498-9c07-0f2e7f0c3c4c"
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: ITC-WP-0009-T03
|
||||
status: todo
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
state_hub_task_id: "98888f6a-774f-4e6b-93f4-335fb3001e9c"
|
||||
```
|
||||
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ state_hub_task_id: "98888f6a-774f-4e6b-93f4-335fb3001e9c"
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: ITC-WP-0009-T04
|
||||
status: todo
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: medium
|
||||
state_hub_task_id: "5b8ac21c-e0e4-4e45-817c-a91111712c82"
|
||||
```
|
||||
@@ -85,3 +85,14 @@ state_hub_task_id: "5b8ac21c-e0e4-4e45-817c-a91111712c82"
|
||||
- There is a clear comparison report.
|
||||
- Canon extension candidates are explicit.
|
||||
- Repo-scoping can plan adoption from its own repository.
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes
|
||||
|
||||
- Added a repo-scoping comparison frame, canon benefit analysis, extension
|
||||
candidate set, comparison report, and consumer workplan brief under
|
||||
`infospace/evaluations/repo-scoping/`.
|
||||
- Registered all repo-scoping comparison assets in the artifact index and
|
||||
retrieval generation flow.
|
||||
- Added structural validation for the comparison domains, candidate mappings,
|
||||
extension candidates, and markdown deliverables.
|
||||
- Regenerated agent briefs, indexes, tree views, and validation output.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ workplans:
|
||||
|
||||
- id: ITC-WP-0009
|
||||
title: Repo Scoping Comparison And Extension
|
||||
status: proposed
|
||||
status: finished
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
path: workplans/ITC-WP-0009-repo-scoping-comparison-and-extension.md
|
||||
depends_on:
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user