Development record
The intent's back-link to its spec is the scalar `spec_id` in invariant 17 and `epic_id` in itd-34.
issuewontfixnitpickiss-2610262032022112
The intent's back-link to its spec is the scalar spec_id in invariant 17 and epic_id in itd-34.
A naming conflict (severity nitpick) found by the cross-document consistency pass.
- End A:
.abcd/development/brief/02-constraints/03-invariants.md:171— "the intent's scalarspec_idnames the spec it was planned with" - End B:
.abcd/development/intents/shipped/itd-34-three-intent-kinds.md:52— "each intent'sepic_id: spc-Nandbundle: <bundle-id>"
Invariant 17 names the intent field that points at the spec it was planned with spec_id. itd-34 writes the same link onto each bundle member as epic_id: spc-N. That is two names for one frontmatter field, and a reader building the plan path cannot tell which key to write.
Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 213.
Grounds
- declined: Closed in the 2026-10-27 triage (dcn-2610271112330536): a later record already settles which end holds. The glossary's spec and bundle entries list epic as a forbidden synonym, and internal/core/intent reads spec_id. A shipped record is not rewritten for vocabulary.
Frontmatter
| id | iss-2610262032022112 |
|---|---|
| type | issue |
| lifecycle | wontfix |
| severity | nitpick |
.abcd/work/issues/wontfix/iss-2610262032022112-the-intent-s-back-link-to-its-spec-is.md
open on GitHub ↗ · commit history ↗
References1
- itd-34Intents Promote In Three Flavours — Standalone, Bundle-Member, Disciplinerelated
mentions1
- dcn-26102711123305362026-10-27 — The product thinker accepted on 2026-10-27 the triage of the 1301 records the 2026-10-26 consistency pass filed. The duplicates, the records a later record already settles, the ones that are no contradiction and the one already fixed are closed with each reader's reason. Every other record gets its fix as its remedy, the rulings' accepted answers included, so a drain can take it. The 45 major records left open are deferred past v0.15.1, because the brief's single-home rewrite rewrites or removes most of the passages they quote. The person ruled the major rulings one at a time; the minor rulings take their recommended answers.