ROADMAP opened by saying nothing in it is a promise. Section 7 holds eighteen standing principles cited by number as settled law from commit messages and from other documents - 4 governs what is hashed, 13 defines what a standard is, 17 governs what may write to a record, 18 governs how a contribution is admitted. A reader taking the header at its word would conclude Principle 17 is optional. The disclaimer now says what it always meant: it covers section 4 sequence and section 5 assumptions, not section 7.
Principle 5 gets the same qualification PROCESS section 8 got. A permanent deviation is the specification is right about facts on a host and would be licence to lower a REQ if read without limit.
PRECISION section 10 requires every section 7 entry to say whether it is a limit that work may lift or a boundary that was chosen. The prismatic-only entry said neither, which is the single most consequential ambiguity in the document. It is a limit, and the reason is now recorded: the oracle is a two-dimensional oracle with a scalar length multiplier - every recorded value is a property of the cross-section except LENGTH_MM, VOLUME_MM3 and MASS_G, and volume equals rounded section area times length to within 3.6e-12 across all 113 accepted cases. Lift it carelessly and that relation stops holding; nothing fails, it just stops meaning what it means. Anything keeping each station two-dimensional preserves it.
Also in PRECISION: STL export landed and is no longer planned. An absent export format is a limit; the refusal to emit toolpaths is a boundary.
ROADMAP section 4a corrected to match STAGING-STATE section 3a: nothing here is implemented on Kane Fabric, and SASE was used and never defined. The port is recorded done. The seed commit and test count are removed as derivable.
IDENTITY-CONTRACT: the rewrap owed from a76879f.
Applied by anchored patcher. Suite 643 passed, oracle intact. Documentation only.
CIVICVS ruled on 11 SEP that the absence of an assembly layer is chosen, not unfinished. Positioning is field work. Parts made and shipped by different manufacturers have no knowledge of each other assembly tolerances, and interchangeable manufacture works because of that separation rather than in spite of it. Fit up is resolved on site against conditions no designer had. PRECISION.md section 7 now says so, and closes with read this as a boundary that was chosen, not a gap to be filled.
Section 10 corrected. Its lock is on this document subject, not on the software roadmap, and it was misread that way once. Section 7 holds two kinds of entry: limits that may be lifted by work, and boundaries that were chosen and should not be. Without that distinction section 7 reads as a to do list.
Section 7 also separates geometry interchange from machine instructions. An STL or STEP describes a shape; a toolpath describes what a machine should do. The first is in scope and planned, the second is not. The two sat one line apart with nothing saying they differ in kind.
HANDOFF section 5 corrected: STL export needs no CAD kernel. A member here is prismatic by definition, so an STL is two triangulated caps and a quad strip. Verified in CT 100 that shapely constrained_delaunay_triangles handles a polygon with a hole correctly, area exact and no triangle inside the hole. That second check is the one that matters, because a triangulator that fills bores produces an STL which looks right in a slicer and prints solid where the conduit goes. STEP still needs the kernel.
Priority order recorded with its reasoning so a successor can disagree with the argument rather than only the sequence. STL export first because it is the only item producing physical feedback. Then an authorship field in the design record, one field and a one way door. Then per member stock for the conduit core. Then persistence, which nothing has ever written despite MECHCOMP_DATA_DIR being declared since staging. Then ACL, last, because access control over nothing is machinery without a subject.
A node is not an assembly. It is another artifact with declared interfaces and stays in scope. What is out of scope is positioning artifacts relative to one another. The project obligation is therefore to make each artifact interchangeable, which is what the stock descriptor and the design record already exist for.
Answers, in plain language, what "accurate" means for this project: the
difference between model precision, machine resolution and achieved
accuracy, and why a design file should be far tighter than any machine
that will realise it.
Scoped hard to additive and subtractive manufacturing (section 0).
Formative processes, crystal growth, lithography, joining, metrology and
surface finish are explicitly out. Section 10 asks that additions widening
that scope be refused rather than accommodated -- a borrowed tolerance
figure carries no evidence from this project while looking exactly as
authoritative as a measured one.
Section 7 states what the compiler does NOT do: no assembly layer, no
structural analysis of any kind, prismatic shapes only, no toolpaths,
verified only within its tested range. A part passing every check here may
still be structurally unsound.
Records the facets limit: at facets=48, corner radii up to 4.67 mm stay
within 0.01 mm of a true curve. Above that facets must rise, growing with
the square root of radius.
TheRON