This is the record of an abcd-managed repository

abcdBetav0.16.2 · 2026-11-06

Development record

itd-192 decides a verdict by whether this phase wires a criterion, while the scope chapter makes phases history

issuewontfixminoriss-2610262031376440

itd-192 decides a verdict by whether this phase wires a criterion, while the scope chapter makes phases history

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

  • End A: .abcd/development/intents/disciplines/itd-192-an-acceptance-criterion-whose-producer.md:16 — "is judged by whether this phase wires it, not by whether the narrowing was disclosed"
  • End B: .abcd/development/brief/01-product/04-scope.md:3 — "The phase documents under roadmap/phases/ are history."

itd-192's one test is whether this phase wires the criterion: wired in this phase is MET_WITH_CONCERNS, not wired is NOT_MET. The scope chapter says no stored unit sits above the intent for sequence and the phase documents are history. The rule's deciding unit is retired vocabulary, so an auditor cannot tell which delivery the question is asked of.

Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 154.

Grounds

  • declined: Closed in the 2026-10-27 triage (dcn-2610271112330536) as a duplicate of iss-2610262042302710. Same unit problem in itd-192 as iss-2610262042302710, cited against the scope chapter.

Frontmatter

idiss-2610262031376440
typeissue
lifecyclewontfix
severityminor

References1

mentions2