The board's six-section design reads a recent-logbook section; the build sequence says the logbook location is retired and a detector fails the build on any internal Go source that names it.

The board's six-section design reads a recent-logbook section; the build sequence says the logbook location is retired and a detector fails the build on any internal Go source that names it.

A sequencing impossibility (severity minor) found by the cross-document consistency pass.

• End A: .abcd/development/brief/04-surfaces/08-abcd.md:543 — "Recent logbook: the last five entries by modification time"
• End B: .abcd/development/brief/06-delivery/01-build-sequence.md:176 — ".abcd/logbook/ is a retired location, held retired by an armed detector: TestNoRetiredLogbookLocationInSource fails the build if any non-test Go source under internal/ so much as names it."

08-abcd's design target renders section 4, 'Recent logbook: the last five entries by modification time', from the core renderer internal/core/board, and lists only the last-disembark and dev-sync sections as open questions. 01-build-sequence says .abcd/logbook/ is retired and TestNoRetiredLogbookLocationInSource fails the build if any non-test Go source under internal/ names it. Section 4 cannot be built as designed without tripping that detector, and the design does not record that it has lost its source.

Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 444.

Grounds

• declined: Closed in the 2026-10-27 triage (dcn-2610271112330536): a later record already settles which end holds. The block quote opening that part of 08-abcd.md says the six-section board does not exist on any shipped surface and names the logbook as unread; the retired-location detector in the build sequence is the later fact.