The naming register refers to lint rules by numbered codes (GL002, SD001, VR001), but the lint contract says rules are named, not numbered

The naming register refers to lint rules by numbered codes (GL002, SD001, VR001), but the lint contract says rules are named, not numbered

A terminology drift (severity minor) found by the cross-document consistency pass.

• End A: .abcd/development/brief/02-constraints/04-naming.md:147 — "and it is what the GL002 forbidden-synonym rule reads"
• End B: .abcd/development/brief/05-internals/06-lint.md:14 — "rules are named, not numbered, and their definitions live in the two JSON configs above"

The naming register names a live rule by number, saying the glossary is what the GL002 forbidden-synonym rule reads. It also reserves SD001 and VR001 for unbuilt checks. The lint contract says rules are named, not numbered, are defined only in the record-lint and docs-lint JSON configs, and that the record should not carry a hand-kept enumeration of rules. The two pages identify the same rules by different schemes, so a numbered code in the register maps to nothing in the engine's own vocabulary.

Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 92.