docs(okf-v0.2): D4 shipped, and the leaning §14 overruled

Three plan statements the session's work overtook:

- D4 records what shipped, including the part deliberately left undone
  (reading §10's block form) and the invariant that falls out of it.
- V6's "our leaning, for them to accept or overrule" is superseded:
  refuse became import-and-report. The leaning had a problem the prose
  could not see — §14 forbids rejecting a bundle over a broken
  cross-link and does not settle whether `executor.resource` is one,
  while §10.5 asks a consumer to surface. Reporting honours the
  unambiguous rule without testing the ambiguous one.
- What stays with the guard is restated rather than assumed closed:
  whether a non-`.md` code file is within `okf.import_bundle`'s mandate
  is untouched by this, and the execution boundary still has no owner.

Also recorded: the report is key-level because the resource-level value
is the one the parser cannot recover in either canonical form. A
measured limit, not a preference.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01KKKMwi7e7PVHoFW6dJK5XP

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

@@ -390,6 +390,28 @@ value the sanctioned way" sits against the guard's boundary rather than this
 library's plumbing. When upstream specifies the protocol, the standing policy
 brings it back into scope — and the boundary question goes to the operator first.
 
+**Done 2026-07-31** (`deeb248`, `c6d64c3`), in three parts and with one part
+deliberately left undone:
+
+- The five contract fields join `OKF_V0_2`'s emission order as one block, in
+  §10.2's own listing order. Without it they still emitted — in `emit`'s sorted
+  tail, where `attester` precedes `runtime`: alphabetical order standing in for
+  the contract's own.
+- `FrontmatterSchema.required_by_type` carries §10.2's one requirement
+  (`runtime`, for this type and no other). It is the first rule here keyed off a
+  frontmatter *value* rather than a key, and it cannot be `required`, which would
+  demand `runtime` of every document. A type the mapping does not name carries no
+  extra requirement — which is what keeps the field inside §14, since a consumer
+  must not reject on an unknown `type`.
+- Door C reports the §10 pointers it imports (V6, below).
+- **Not done, and not a gap: reading the canonical block form.** §10.2 presents
+  `executor` and `attester` as nested block mappings, both carrying a `resource`.
+  Measured: the line-oriented parser has no indentation model, flattens them into
+  one namespace, and the second `resource` overwrites the first — `executor.resource`
+  is lost with no error raised. Pinned as a characterization test. The invariant
+  that falls out and now sits in `CLAUDE.md`: **we emit flow form, never block**,
+  or we write bundles we cannot read back. Reading block is D1b's.
+
 **D5 — v0.2 golden fixtures.** A byte-exact v0.2 bundle in `examples/`. This is
 what converts "we support v0.2" from a claim into a test, and in phase 4 it
 becomes the cross-runtime conformance oracle for the Node half too.
@@ -1298,10 +1320,31 @@ we declared runtime out of scope on that same deferral. Recorded because "the gu
 covers it" is a conclusion someone could reasonably draw and it would be wrong in a
 way that is hard to detect later.
 
-Our leaning, for them to accept or overrule: Door C should **refuse** a concept
-whose frontmatter references an executor or attester resource that did not come
-with it — failing closed, and half an Attested Computation is not something a
-consumer can use anyway.
+Our leaning was that Door C should **refuse** such a concept, failing closed.
+
+**Superseded by the operator 2026-07-31: import and report.** The leaning had a
+problem measurement surfaced and the prose did not. §14 forbids a consumer to
+reject a bundle over a broken cross-link, and the spec does not settle whether
+`executor.resource` counts as one; §10.5, by contrast, explicitly asks a consumer
+to *surface* rather than silently drop. Reporting honours the rule that is
+unambiguous without testing the rule that is not, and it leaves this door's one
+invariant — the sender's bytes, verbatim — untouched.
+
+`ImportResult.unverified_references` is an advisory over the merged set rather
+than a fifth bucket: every concept it names has already merged, and a refused
+concept is never named, because nothing was written for an operator to inspect.
+
+**The report names the pointer key, not the resource** — and that is a measured
+limit, not a preference. Resolving the resource means reading `executor.resource`,
+the one value the line-oriented parser cannot recover in *either* canonical form:
+the block mapping flattens and collides, the flow mapping stays one opaque string.
+A resource-level report would therefore be empty or wrong on exactly the forms
+upstream writes, while key presence survives both. Precision arrives with D1b.
+
+Still theirs, and still open: whether a non-`.md` code file inside a bundle is
+within `okf.import_bundle`'s mandate. Nothing above answers it — this decision
+covers what *we* do with a pointer, not what the guard owes for the thing pointed
+at, and the execution boundary named two paragraphs up still has no owner.
 
 ## TDD order
 
@@ -1371,6 +1414,9 @@ everything after. **Done 2026-07-26** (`1215f98`, `7bc366b`).
     so it deliberately follows the feedback rather than preceding it.
 11. **D4** — `Attested Computation` round-trip. Nothing in the pilot set uses it,
     so building it earlier would add surface the feedback cannot reach.
+    **Done 2026-07-31** — format only, and taken ahead of steps 9–10 because the
+    pilot's two closed tests left D4 the one piece with no dependency on
+    feedback still outstanding. Details under D4 above.
 12. **GA** — flip `OKF_LATEST`, its own release. **V1 to commons** in parallel
     throughout; **D6** lands with the GA release.