docs(okf-v0.2): record Test B's verdict where criterion 1 says it lives

Catalog ran Test B on 2026-07-31 and confirmed all three expectations, but
the verdict existed only as a coord message. GA exit criterion 1 requires
every P1-P3 finding to be fixed or explicitly accepted "with the reason
recorded in this doc" -- a result readable only in a mailbox cannot be
audited by the consumers this doc is written for, so criterion 1 could have
been closed against a record nobody could check.

Records the reader revision and source hashes (B-E3 is unreadable without
them), the three confirmations, and all three findings with dispositions:
the `timestamp` RECOMMENDED warning (accepted, catalog's own upstream drift,
not ours to fix), `resource`/`description` (accepted as UNMEASURED, not as
clean -- catalog refused to let them read as fine), and the two gates that
were not run (their words: "not run" must not read as "as expected").

Also corrects a measured-false claim in the same file: Test B does not run
on Test A's output. Its procedure says `examples/` at the tag, and that is
what catalog archived. The two signals were never serialized, so Test A's
absence never gated catalog.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TgTrQdexGdLYmt1ZMenPyC

docs/plan/okf-v0.2-alignment.md

@@ -715,7 +715,13 @@ structured reader.**
 - Test A **emits** v0.2. Both `generated` and — after requirement 1's re-sizing —
   `sources` are inline flow constructs, so both are formatted strings the
   existing emitter renders verbatim. Neither requires reading one back.
-- Test B runs catalog's gate on a fixture. That fixture is Test A's output.
+- Test B runs catalog's gate on a fixture from `examples/` at the tag — **not**
+  on Test A's output. Corrected 2026-08-09 against the Test B procedure below and
+  against what catalog actually ran (`git archive` of
+  `examples/ingest-golden-okf-v0-2/expected-bundle` at `v0.5.0a2`). The
+  consequence is not cosmetic: Test B is **not** downstream of Test A, so the two
+  producer- and gate-side signals were never serialized, and Test A's absence
+  never gated catalog.
 - Test C validates the wiki's **v0.1-shaped** documents (scalar frontmatter,
   `timestamp`, no `generated`) against a v0.2 *variant profile*. Their documents
   contain no v0.2 families, so block-list reading is never reached.
@@ -1076,6 +1082,73 @@ read the same file and see the same value. The distinction is kept because
 compare-vs-judge is precisely what B-E3 was written to settle, and recording it
 imprecisely would discard the finding.
 
+**RESULT — run by catalog 2026-07-31, after the tag. All three expectations
+confirmed.** Recorded here 2026-08-09. Until then the verdict existed only as a
+coord message, which is not where GA exit criterion 1 says a finding lives: a
+result readable only in a mailbox cannot be audited by the consumers this doc is
+written for, and criterion 1 could have been closed against a record nobody could
+check.
+
+What catalog ran, in their own identifiers — they gave the revision because we
+asked for it rather than for HEAD, and B-E3 is unreadable without it:
+
+| | |
+|---|---|
+| reader | `okf-check.mjs` @ `1ca27f6`, blob `427af3b` |
+| | `okf-frontmatter.mjs` blob `02209e7` |
+| catalog HEAD | `9992235`, working tree clean for both files |
+| source | tag `v0.5.0a2` (`5095db5`), bundle tree `0dbc16b` |
+| node | v25.8.2 |
+
+Read-only via `git archive` into their own scratchpad — nothing was checked out
+in this repo, no pin was written, no code changed. The control differs from the
+fixture by exactly one line (`okf_version: 0.2` → `0.1`).
+
+- **B-E1 — confirmed.** Both pass, `exit 0`.
+- **B-E2 — confirmed.** No WARNING or ERROR mentions the version. The one
+  version-related line is a neutral echo for human comparison.
+- **B-E3 — confirmed, and verified in the code rather than only observed.**
+  Outputs are identical once the path line and version echo are stripped. Catalog
+  then read the three mechanisms B-E3 names: the shape check is
+  `/^\d+(\.\d+)*$/` — form, not value — and there is no equality comparison, no
+  membership list, no switch on the value. So the answer is not "they matched this
+  time" but "no code exists that *could* separate them", which is what B-E3 asked.
+  Their stated ground: which upstream versions exist is Google's ownership (§12),
+  so the gate refuses to hold an opinion on the value.
+
+**Three findings, none of them blocking, each disposed here so criterion 1 is
+closed against a record rather than against a memory:**
+
+1. **`timestamp` is in catalog's `RECOMMENDED` list** (`okf-check.mjs:35`), and a
+   missing recommended field produces a warning, never a failure (`:114-115`). We
+   had named a gate *requiring* `timestamp` as something that would surprise us;
+   it warns instead, the bundle passes, and the list is version-unconditional —
+   so it breaks neither B-E2 (never mentions the version) nor B-E3 (never
+   separates the runs). **Accepted, not fixed, and it is not ours to fix:** our
+   fixture already carries the superseding field (`generated: { by:, at: }`), and
+   upstream `okf/SPEC.md:802` @ `3fcbb9f` states `timestamp` is superseded by
+   `generated.at`. Catalog recorded this as their own upstream drift and did not
+   ask us to respond. Whether they version-condition `RECOMMENDED` is their call.
+2. **`resource` and `description` also warn, and are recorded UNMEASURED.**
+   Catalog measured only `timestamp`, because that is the one field we named, and
+   they explicitly refused to let the other two read as "fine". `resource` exists
+   in our fixture **nested under `sources:`**, and their `get()` reads top level
+   only. **Accepted as open, not as clean:** we have not verified against upstream
+   where `resource` and `description` belong, so we cannot say whether the warning
+   is their reader's flat lookup or our placement. It touches no expectation and
+   blocks nothing; it is carried as unmeasured rather than silently closed.
+3. **Scope — two of catalog's three gates were not run**, deliberately and at our
+   own request's boundary: `check-okf-parity.mjs` runs over a fixed corpus and
+   `check-nav-golden.mjs` over their own bundle directory, so neither can see our
+   fixture without a corpus change we excluded. **Their verdict for those two is
+   "not run", and this doc must not read it as "as expected"** — catalog said so
+   in those words, and B-E3's scope line already committed us to it. Widening is a
+   separate request with its own price, and it is the operator's call. Not taken.
+
+**What this settles for GA.** Criterion 5 wants one consumer to have *consumed* a
+v0.2 bundle end-to-end and one to have *emitted* one. Catalog's run is the consume
+half, and it is done. Only the emit half — Test A — is outstanding.
+
 #### Test C — expressiveness (`claude-code-llm-wiki`, run by us)
 
 **Procedure (ours).** Construct a v0.2 variant of `STRICT_V1` here, read their