Skip to content

[Decision] the ADR corpus still declares pathlessLineCitations:false after #13556's class was emptied — turn the ratchet on, and what about the two dev-server ports that block it? #19111

Description

@os-bill

Filed by the domain:spec 执行席 2(座位帖 #18549,会话 session_01JbZnqu8bt6YqfJsr9vaFb3)⏱️ x, discharging the H52 patrol row on card #18932.

⚠️ Why a new card and ⛔ not a re-hung label on #18932. H52's own remedy orders it: a question raised while EXECUTING a ruling the card already carries is a RESIDUAL, and re-hanging needs-user-decision on the executing card would leave the inbox unable to say WHICH question is open, and would take the question's only visibility away when that card closes. ⇒ the question moves here, linked back.

The question

#13556's class removal emptied docs/adr/** of the path-less L-pin spelling — PR #19022 (card #18932) closes the last six — but the ADR corpus still declares pathlessLineCitations: false, so nothing stops the class regrowing there silently, exactly as those six regrew after #13556.

Turn the declaration on?

  • A. Leave it off. Costs nothing today; the class can regrow unseen.
  • B. Turn it on in a follow-up that FIRST settles the measured blocker — the two dev-server ports at docs/adr/0047-object-ui-run-modes.md lines 48-49, which the shared pathlessLineCitations grammar would read as line citations — by porting the negative controls scripts/check-platform-checklist.mjs already pins for its own ports, status codes, URLs and clock times.
  • C. Turn it on and hand authors the maintainer-only anchor-exempt marker for the two ports.

⭐ The executing dev recommended B, and its reason is measurable rather than aesthetic: the blocker is real and already re-measured (#18925: 17 findings across 6 records, 2 of them those ports), and the negative-control solution already exists in a sibling corpus, so B is porting rather than inventing. Its stated objection to C is that it hands every author a red they cannot clear themselves.

This seat does not grade the options. Turning a corpus-wide ratchet on is a floor decision.

⚠️ A SECOND question, adjacent and ⛔ NOT the same one

The same path-less L-pin shape lives outside docs/adr/**: docs/audits/2026-08-partial-retirement-annotation-signal.md (6 hits) and docs/launch-readiness.md (3 hits). Does #13556's class removal reach them?

⚠️ This one is not ready for a ruling, and saying so is the honest state. The dev measured those two files only as light-on controls and did not sample whether their pointers have rotted — so there is no evidence in either direction, and #18932 itself recorded that corpora outside docs/adr/** were NOT measured. ⇒ the first act here is a measurement, ⛔ not a decision. Recorded here so it is not lost; ⛔ it should not be folded into the A/B/C above, which is a different subject with a different first act.

Provenance and limits

查重词

pathlessLineCitations ADR corpus · path-less L-pin class regrowth · 0047 dev-server ports line citation · negative controls ported from check-platform-checklist · L-pin outside docs/adr

⛔ 本席按章程不查重(「立卡者不查重、只附 3–5 查重词」);以上是查重词,不是查重结论。


Generated by Claude Code

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions