General Proposal · Advisory / Non-Authoritative

Direction level · proposal_level=detail reserved, NOT activated

Detail-depth decision desk — five CHECK000 directions

A disposition surface for the five pending general_proposal directions on Detail depth, mixed architecture/governance review, concrete content roles, grounding-analysis pairing, and the bounded treatment of task carrier #326. Four Architecture Decisions and one Governance Decision are dispositioned independently; nothing here is decided until the HDO records it.

Checkpoint: T104-PH001-AC005-CHECK000
Activity · Phase: T104-PH001-AC005 · PH1
Proposal type: general_proposal · direction
Revision: v0.6.0 · 2026-07-13
Status: draft — pending CHECK000 disposition
Decision owner: HDO
Scope: D1–D5 · 4 AD + 1 GD
Live state: 0 / 5 dispositioned

One feed, one surface. A single Consultant-owned grounding Analysis (v2.1.0, frozen) is the sole content source of truth; this HTML is the HDO disposition surface that cites the Analysis rather than duplicating it. Selections, notes, readiness, and the export payload are advisory input — the Analysis wins on any conflict.

Authority boundary. This HTML — its recommendations, selections, notes, readiness signal, and payload — is advisory and non-authoritative. It cannot disposition CHECK000, approve D1–D5, amend issues (including #326), authorize execution, promote content, or encode normative family rules. Formal CHECK000 proof remains the recorded HDO act and the four-leg bundle on PR #493. AC005 is itself a downstream general_proposal dogfood and a candidate future golden example; it does not become normative family authority through this build or its HDO visual acceptance.

Grounding is labelled by provenance — reused as chips throughout the decisions

Established fact

Current authority, durable HDO direction, or live issue state.

Dogfood observation

Empirical behavior in accepted/stabilized family examples — useful but non-normative.

Consultant synthesis

The recommended rule carried to the HDO for disposition. No delegated agent replaces it.

At a glance — recommendation & routing registers

Recommendation register

D1 Richer labelled Detail + rich media; detail stays inactive. Accept

D2 One file, both lanes; consequential-governance threshold; full AD / compact GD. Accept

D3 Distinguish Detail · Example · Proposed carry-forward detail. Accept

D4 Analysis = sole SSOT feed; HTML = HDO disposition surface. Accept

D5 Carrier #326 treatment after conforming disposition. 5A-interim

Routing register — current only

AC007/#500 Owns family research, construction/pipeline mechanics, decision egress, and the permanent design-spec home.

#501 · #502 AC008/#501 and AC009/#502 are pre-minted and gated on AC007 controls.

#449 · #450 Constrain later normative encoding.

T104C spec The T104C implementation file is interim design authority only.

#184·#185·#358 Completed / no-action for AC005.

#98 Remains open until an accepted successor exists.

Architecture lane

4 AD · independent

Full reasoning depth; each may carry a labelled, non-authoritative visualization. Dispositioned on its own — no AD authorizes another lane.

Architecture Decision · recommend accept Richer internal Detail and labelled rich-media guidance, with proposal_level=detail reserved

Pending

Should a general_proposal allow richer internal Detail plus labelled visualization / diagram / architecture guidance, while the reserved proposal_level=detail stays inactive and rich media never acquires implementation authority?

Established fact

T104-STD-005 and the SPS keep proposal_level=detail reserved and inactive and treat Detail as supporting evidence, tradeoff, constraint, or implementation cue beneath an Option; content stays non-authoritative until governing disposition and later promotion.

Dogfood observation

AC008 and both T101 siblings already use labelled Detail/evidence disclosures to make IDs, transitions, fields, paths, consequences, and architecture relationships reviewable while keeping direction/architecture altitude.

Consultant synthesis

A Detail may include labelled diagrams, visualizations, architecture maps, tables, schemas, or code-shaped examples that materially help the HDO understand an architecture decision. Rich media explains an Option; it does not activate detail or acquire authority through visual concreteness.

Recommended · accept the direction

Permit labelled rich Detail/media as an explicitly non-authoritative explanatory unit; keep proposal_level=detail reserved and inactive.

Alternative A · bounded change

Allow richer text Detail now, but defer rich-media / diagram guidance to AC007 normalization.

Alternative B · bounded change

Adopt the rich-media allowance, but bind a stricter non-authoritative labelling contract immediately.

Other · free-form

Capture a different direction in the note below.

Illustrative Detail — depth ladder

Example · illustrative, non-prescriptive

Non-authoritative Rich media raises comprehension along the vertical axis while the horizontal proposal_level stays fixed at an active value. It explains this Option and confers no implementation authority. Text equivalent: proposal_level values direction and architecture are active; decision, option and detail are reserved and locked; internal Detail and rich-media richness can increase within an active level without activating proposal_level=detail.

Your disposition — D1

Disposition for D1

Accept Change Other

Notes — D1 (optional)

Architecture Decision · recommend accept One CHECK000 file, independent AD/GD lanes, a governance-inclusion threshold, and asymmetric depth

Pending

May one coherent CHECK000 file carry independent Architecture and Governance lanes, admit a GD card only for a non-routine, consequential governance question needing an explicit HDO choice with material downstream implications, and make depth asymmetric — full-depth AD, compact GD?

Established fact

One proposal file carries one coherent subject; DRC controls operate per Decision and are not a process ledger. Governance context needing no HDO choice can stay evidence, conversation, or recorded payload.

Dogfood observation

AC008 and both T101 siblings show one file hosting independently dispositionable AD and GD lanes without one lane authorizing another. They establish coexistence and lane independence — not the new threshold or compact-GD rule; several existing GD cards still carry rich Detail.

Consultant synthesis

Adopt the threshold and asymmetric depth: AD cards carry full reasoning depth and may include labelled visual exhibits; GD cards stay compact — question, options, consequence/impact delta, controls, notes, and no illustrative Detail expander. Full mechanics route to AC007/#500.

Recommended · accept the direction

One file, both lanes; consequential-governance threshold; full-depth AD and compact GD.

Alternative A · bounded change

Keep one-file AD/GD coexistence, but drop the compact-GD asymmetry (permit GD Detail).

Alternative B · bounded change

Adopt the threshold, but require separate files per lane rather than one CHECK000 file.

Other · free-form

Capture a different direction in the note below.

Illustrative Detail — inclusion gate & depth asymmetry

Detail · architecture cue beneath the Option

Governance question arrivesInside the shared CHECK000 proposal subject.

Test 1Non-routine?

Test 2Consequential?

Test 3Needs an explicit HDO choice with material downstream implications?

All three yes → open a GD cardCompact: question · options · impact/consequence delta · controls · notes.

Any no → no cardStays evidence, conversation, or recorded payload — never a ledger row.

AD card — full depth

Full reasoning: fact / observation / synthesis
May carry a labelled visualization
Options with Detail / Example / carry-forward

GD card — compact

Question + options
Impact / consequence delta
Controls + notes · no Detail expander

Non-authoritative Illustrates the inclusion threshold and the AD/GD depth asymmetry; the mechanics themselves route to AC007/#500.

Your disposition — D2

Disposition for D2

Accept Change Other

Notes — D2 (optional)

Architecture Decision · recommend accept Three explicit content roles: Detail, Example, and Proposed carry-forward detail

Pending

Should the proposal clearly distinguish Detail, Example, and Proposed carry-forward detail — and require rich media to visibly declare which role it serves, because visual concreteness never changes authority?

Established fact

Detail explains an Option; illustrative material stays non-authoritative; candidate downstream language becomes authoritative only after explicit promotion into its owning surface. The #358 decision-egress scope was imported into AC007/#500.

Dogfood observation

Existing instruments label illustrative Detail and evidence boundaries so concrete examples survive review without impersonating approved implementation. Dogfood does not complete the later promotion workflow.

Consultant synthesis

Use three visible roles and route the promotion mechanics to decision-egress work. Rich media must declare which role it serves.

Recommended · accept the direction

Three explicit, authority-labelled roles; rich media declares its role.

Alternative A · bounded change

Adopt the roles, but collapse Example into Detail (two roles, not three).

Alternative B · bounded change

Adopt the three roles, but defer the rich-media role-declaration requirement to AC007.

Other · free-form

Capture a different direction in the note below.

Illustrative Detail — the three roles and their authority

Proposed carry-forward detail · candidate until promoted

The three-role strip below is itself a candidate structure — non-authoritative until explicitly promoted and accepted in its owning surface (AC007/#500 decision-egress scope).

Detail

Explains · beneath an Option

Evidence, tradeoff, constraint, consequence, or architecture cue. Never a disposition target.

Example

Illustrates · never prescriptive

A possible form or behavior shown to aid understanding — carries no obligation.

Proposed carry-forward

Candidate · until promoted

Downstream text/structure that stays non-authoritative until explicitly promoted and accepted in its owning PRD, spec, plan, task, guideline, or template.

Declares its role Each role names its own authority; this figure declares itself as Proposed carry-forward detail to model the rule it describes.

Your disposition — D3

Disposition for D3

Accept Change Other

Notes — D3 (optional)

Architecture Decision · recommend accept Grounding Analysis as sole SSOT feed; single-file HTML as the HDO disposition surface

Pending

At CHECK000, should a direction/architecture general_proposal default to a grounding Analysis as its sole SSOT content feed and a single-file HTML as the HDO disposition surface — with the HTML citing rather than becoming a second semantic authority?

Established fact

The Analysis guideline registers proposal_analysis: Analysis feeds, but never replaces, a Proposal. AC007/#500 owns the analysis-to-proposal pipeline leg and planned pipeline formalization; P retains the plan-guideline leg of #457.

Dogfood observation

The stabilized family dogfoods pair Consultant-owned grounding with a single-file HTML instrument — Analysis carries evidence and synthesis; HTML carries scannable decisions and transient HDO input. AC005 directly dogfoods this division.

Consultant synthesis

Adopt this default at CHECK000; HTML cites rather than duplicates the Analysis, and controls export advisory input only. AC007/#500 owns the pipeline skill and full cross-guideline encoding; AC005 implements only a bounded interim note.

Recommended · accept the direction

Analysis is the sole feed; HTML is the disposition surface and cites, not duplicates.

Alternative A · bounded change

Adopt Analysis-as-feed, but let the HTML also carry independent content (dual authority) pending AC007.

Alternative B · bounded change

Adopt the default, but route the whole pipeline definition to AC007 with no interim note here.

Other · free-form

Capture a different direction in the note below.

Illustrative Detail — the feed → surface → record pipeline

Detail · relationship & boundary cue

Non-authoritative Feed → surface → advisory egress → governed record. The HTML cites the Analysis and authorizes nothing; the boundary is where authority lives. Text equivalent: Analysis (sole SSOT feed, frozen) feeds the Proposal HTML (disposition surface that cites, not duplicates), which exports an advisory payload (only egress) that informs the governed record (recorded HDO act and four-leg bundle on PR #493).

Your disposition — D4

Disposition for D4

Accept Change Other

Notes — D4 (optional)

Governance lane

1 GD · independent

Deliberately compact: question, options, impact/consequence delta, controls, notes — no illustrative Detail expander. Dispositioned independently of the Architecture lane.

Governance Decision · recommend 5A-interim Treatment of existing carrier #326 after a conforming CHECK000 disposition

Pending

How should existing carrier #326 be treated after a conforming CHECK000 disposition?

Recommended · 5A-interim

After conforming CHECK000 approval, amend #326 in place to carry the bounded interim guideline/template slice, with the required durable changelog trail.

Alternative · retire-absorbed

Close #326 as absorbed-unexecuted, with a pointer to AC007/#500.

Other · free-form

Capture a different treatment in the note below.

Impact / consequence delta

5A-interim is the lowest-churn treatment — it reuses the carrier and preserves a changelog trail under P-STD-008-CLAUSE-008D. Retire-absorbed is a clean closure that leaves normalization to AC007/#500.

Controls

No #326 action is authorized while CHECK000 remains pending. This card states only the choice and its consequence — not #326's future contract. Detailed activity and any conditional task contract live in #325 and, if selected, an amended #326.

Your disposition — D5

Disposition for D5

Accept 5A Change Other

Notes — D5 (optional)