This is the record of an abcd-managed repository

abcdBetav0.16.2 · 2026-11-06

Development record

the disposition glossary keeps disposition vocabulary apart from the issue ledger's wontfix; the capture surface records a wontfix under the token declined, a disposition state

issuewontfixnitpickiss-2610262034081412

the disposition glossary keeps disposition vocabulary apart from the issue ledger's wontfix; the capture surface records a wontfix under the token declined, a disposition state

A naming conflict (severity nitpick) found by the cross-document consistency pass.

  • End A: .abcd/development/brief/glossary/ledger/disposition.md:25 — "Do not reuse the issue ledger's open, resolved and wontfix."
  • End B: .abcd/development/brief/04-surfaces/06-capture.md:344 — "the token stays declined, because a wontfix is that non-action"

The glossary gives a disposition four states, declined among them, and says not to reuse the issue ledger's open, resolved and wontfix. The capture surface writes every wontfix's grounds under the token declined, because a wontfix is that non-action. So declined names both a reading-item disposition state and an issue wontfix, the crossing of the two vocabularies the glossary rules out.

Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 473.

Grounds

  • declined: Closed in the 2026-10-27 triage (dcn-2610271112330536): the two ends do not conflict when read in full. The glossary's rule forbids reusing the issue ledger's open, resolved and wontfix as disposition states; the capture surface does not do that, it records a wontfix's grounds under the grounds token declined. The two vocabularies share a word and a meaning (deliberate non-action) and sit on different record kinds.

Frontmatter

idiss-2610262034081412
typeissue
lifecyclewontfix
severitynitpick

mentions2