Go to file
Levi Neuwirth a347a03c16
P13-S26 amendment 4 RATIFIED; one sentence in section 8.4 to be replaced
Section 8.4's M27 entry closes by saying M27 varies which clause is chosen. It
does not. M25 varies which clause is chosen -- it moves \MUST{} into the recap
and the clause moves with it, which is exactly how M25 discriminates the
last-period rule -- and a correct implementation rejects M27 before selecting
any clause at all, on the exactly-one assertion. M27 uniquely varies whether
selection is unambiguous and therefore permitted.

Section 8.6 is NOT affected and must not be touched. It says only that M27 was
the step no mutation had reached, which is true. An earlier draft of this
amendment proposed rewriting it, which would have damaged an accurate historical
statement in frozen text to repair a different sentence's error. That near-miss
is kept in the record because it is the same class as the defect being repaired.

Contract-only: touch row 7 alone. The annex needs no edit -- its record that the
correction was open as of bff7be0 remains true, and an append would add only
redundant lifecycle prose. Rewriting it would be the worse error, but that is
not what is being declined.

A prose-only replacement has no test to sign it, so section 9.6 is the observer,
and both of its slice checks exist because an unscoped form fails in opposite
directions. Scoped to section 8.4's M27 entry, the old sentence must be absent
and the replacement present exactly once -- file-wide that is unsatisfiable by a
correct execution, since section 9.1 quotes the old sentence and 9.3 quotes the
replacement. Scoped to section 9, the landed status literal and a marker naming
amendment 4 must be present -- unscoped that passes on lifecycle text section 9
never wrote, the file already carrying the same literal for the contract, for
section 6 and for section 8. Section 8.6 is verified unchanged with a
zero-context diff, on pin 11's precedent.

No behaviour, test or normative semantics changes. The prose diff is itself
observable, which is what 9.6 observes.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Ps1szk2mSfgp4Cz21eVH9x
2026-08-11 20:48:53 +02:00
.github/workflows Editor T2 W3: the goldens become conformance gate [9/9] 2026-07-23 17:20:14 -04:00
crates P13-S26 amendment 3 EXECUTED: test 3 selects the normative clause 2026-08-11 20:39:41 +02:00
spec P13-S26 amendment 4 RATIFIED; one sentence in section 8.4 to be replaced 2026-08-11 20:48:53 +02:00
spikes/editor-toolkit Packet 2B: both candidates consume the frozen text apparatus 2026-07-30 21:42:05 -04:00
.gitignore Schema major 1 Phase F: ratify engrave I8/I9/I10 + process trail 2026-07-06 17:40:38 -04:00
CLAUDE.md P13-S26 post-acceptance reconciliation: the two documents held back 2026-08-11 19:31:35 +02:00
CONFORMANCE.md Editor T2 W3: the goldens become conformance gate [9/9] 2026-07-23 17:20:14 -04:00
Cargo.lock Editor T4-pre W2: the glyph outlines become a shared typed seam 2026-07-24 18:54:30 -04:00
Cargo.toml T4 round 0: iced is eliminated, and the probe that cleared it proved nothing 2026-07-28 19:01:51 -04:00