Skip to content

docs(spec): add four-layer intro paragraph per PRESERVATION-DESIGN §12.6#261

Open
hyperpolymath wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/spec-four-layers-intro
Open

docs(spec): add four-layer intro paragraph per PRESERVATION-DESIGN §12.6#261
hyperpolymath wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/spec-four-layers-intro

Conversation

@hyperpolymath
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

Executes formal/PRESERVATION-DESIGN.md §12.6 — the canonical-spec rollout.

What changed

One-paragraph intro added to both spec documents:

  • spec/SPEC.md (formal versioned spec) — inserted after §1.1 Overview.
  • spec/ephapax-spec.md (complete-language spec v0.1) — inserted after the Purpose block.

The paragraph:

  1. Names the four orthogonal disciplines (L1 / L2 / L3 / L4).
  2. Explicitly labels the normative scope (L1 + L2) vs forward-looking scope (L3 + L4) — directly from the §12.6 spec.
  3. Cross-references EPHAPAX-VISION.adoc and PRESERVATION-DESIGN.md.

Out of scope (deliberately)

§12.6's bullet list also calls for:

  • Full L1 sibling-safety theorem statement in the spec.
  • Marking L3 (Echo) as "future extension; not normative" in a dedicated subsection.

Those are substantive spec edits that should each be reviewed individually per the per-document rollout pattern §12 establishes. Filing them as separate follow-up PRs.

Companion PRs

Test plan

  • GPG-signed commit.
  • Both spec files get identical intro paragraph (verified by diff).
  • Cross-references point to existing files in this repo.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Executes `formal/PRESERVATION-DESIGN.md` §12.6 — the canonical-spec
rollout.

Adds the prescribed intro paragraph (one paragraph each) to both
spec documents:

- `spec/SPEC.md` (formal versioned spec) — inserted after §1.1
  Overview.
- `spec/ephapax-spec.md` (complete-language spec v0.1) — inserted
  after the Purpose block.

The paragraph names the four orthogonal disciplines (L1 region
capabilities / L2 modality / L3 echo / L4 dyadic mode), explicitly
labels the normative scope (L1 + L2) vs forward-looking scope (L3
+ L4), and cross-references the vision doc and the design doc.

The full L1 sibling-safety theorem statement and the L3 "Echo
Types: future extension, not normative" subsection prescribed by
§12.6's bullet list are out of scope for this PR — they require
substantive spec edits that should each be reviewed individually
per the per-document rollout pattern §12 establishes.

No proof, code, workflow, or schema changes. Pure documentation
rollout. Companion to README #256 / EXPLAINME #257 / vision #258 /
ROADMAP #259 / ephapax-linear #260.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@hyperpolymath hyperpolymath enabled auto-merge (squash) May 30, 2026 23:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant