Kjell Tore Guttormsen c5e6f083e6 docs(phase-4): record linkedin-studio's two named requirements before the freeze ... They named both on a live channel today, having withdrawn the half of their original question that turned out not to bind them. Recorded here rather than in a reply so the scope freeze has to answer them explicitly. `write_index` ownership was genuinely ambiguous in this plan — they read deliverable 4's "write" and asked which line owns it. It is deliverable 3, and the plan now says so. Their vocabulary requirement is already the Python half's shape: `TypePolicy(allowed=None)` is the default and rewrites nothing, so there is no DEFAULT_TYPE to snap to. The reference checker's collapse is a known deviation to resolve with the convention owner under step 1, not a behaviour to lift.		2026-07-25 20:34:54 +02:00
..
execution-order.md	docs(plan): add cross-phase execution ordering	2026-07-24 20:01:45 +02:00
phase-1-door-a.md	docs(plan): add detailed phase 1-4 implementation plans	2026-07-16 10:58:08 +02:00
phase-2-doors-b-c.md	feat(guard): wire Doors B and C to the real guard (Phase 2 step 4)	2026-07-25 07:32:45 +02:00
phase-3-configurable-contract.md	docs(phase-3): the four open questions are answered; required set is eight	2026-07-25 15:21:59 +02:00
phase-4-node-half.md	docs(phase-4): record linkedin-studio's two named requirements before the freeze	2026-07-25 20:34:54 +02:00