Development record
itd-102 calls the positioning check part of every audit; the identity chapter runs it as a rule of abcd lint
issuewontfixnitpickiss-2610262036330589
itd-102 calls the positioning check part of every audit; the identity chapter runs it as a rule of abcd lint
A terminology drift (severity nitpick) found by the cross-document consistency pass.
- End A:
.abcd/development/intents/shipped/itd-102-your-repo-says-the-same-thing-about.md:17— "a deterministic positioning check compares each surface against it on every audit" - End B:
.abcd/development/brief/04-surfaces/19-identity.md:122— "The drift check runs as theidentity-positioningrule on everyabcd lint"
itd-102 says the positioning check compares each surface on every audit. 19-identity runs the same drift check as the identity-positioning rule on every abcd lint, and the lint chapter keeps the word audit for the hash-chain fidelity surface. The same check is named by two verbs whose vocabulary the record keeps apart.
Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 656.
Grounds
- declined: Closed in the 2026-10-27 triage (dcn-2610271112330536): a later record already settles which end holds. itd-124's press release makes lint the form check and audit the promise check, with a clean break and dated records keeping the old name.
Frontmatter
| id | iss-2610262036330589 |
|---|---|
| type | issue |
| lifecycle | wontfix |
| severity | nitpick |
.abcd/work/issues/wontfix/iss-2610262036330589-itd-102-calls-the-positioning-check-part.md
open on GitHub ↗ · commit history ↗
References1
- itd-102**Your repo says the same thing about itself everywhere — because abcd asked you once and holds every surface to it.** A project's positioning fragments silently: the README strapline, the package or plugin manifest description, and the agent conventions file are each edited at different moments, and soon three surfaces tell three stories about what the project is. When abcd prepares a repo it interviews the user for the project's identity — title, tagline, and a short elevator pitch — and records the answers in one canonical home in the development record. Every surface rendering derives from that home, and a deterministic positioning check compares the surfaces against it on every audit: a mismatch is highlighted with the exact drifted line, and the fix is either re-render from the record or a deliberate, recorded identity change — never a silent extra variant, and never a silent rewrite by abcd. "I changed my tagline once, in one place, and abcd chased it everywhere else," said Alice, a solo founder. "When a stray edit crept into the README, the next audit pointed at the exact line instead of letting the drift settle in."related
mentions2
- 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.
- itd-124The Conformance Check Calls Itself Lint