admin/WebinarNotes
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

fix: correct absent-concept grouping claim in script coverage notes

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
meels
2026-07-28 14:02:30 +02:00
parent c88a5d002c
commit 2522c70463
2 changed files with 4 additions and 3 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

4
log.md
View File

@@ -153,5 +153,5 @@ Entry format:
- Input: first run of Workflow D, establishing `wiki/script-coverage.md`. - Input: first run of Workflow D, establishing `wiki/script-coverage.md`.
- Pages created: [[script-coverage]] (coverage) — 19 rows, one per concept page. - Pages created: [[script-coverage]] (coverage) — 19 rows, one per concept page.
- Pages updated: `CLAUDE.md` (folder convention, `#coverage` tag row, Workflow D, new intent), `index.md` (new Coverage section; corrected the not-yet-ingested list — `Ideas for webinar.md` and `my theses.md` were listed under `raw/sources/` but live in `raw/notes/`, and `Agentic Engineering, explained by a 10x developer.md` was missing entirely). - Pages updated: `CLAUDE.md` (folder convention, `#coverage` tag row, Workflow D, new intent), `index.md` (new Coverage section; corrected the not-yet-ingested list — `Ideas for webinar.md` and `my theses.md` were listed under `raw/sources/` but live in `raw/notes/`, and `Agentic Engineering, explained by a 10x developer.md` was missing entirely).
- Notes: Initial assessment is 5 covered, 4 partial, 10 absent. Every absent concept is human-side or strategy-side — the script is entirely machine-side. The `ReAct` station carries no wiki concept. No concept pages were edited. - Notes: Initial assessment is 5 covered, 4 partial, 10 absent. Eight of the ten absent are human-side or strategy-side per this file's own concept grouping; the other two — [[integration-dead-ends]] and [[leave-less-room-for-imagination]] — are machine-side, absent because the script demos the happy path and never reaches connector gating or spec ambiguity. The `ReAct` station carries no wiki concept. No concept pages were edited.
- Next: decide whether the human-side cluster earns a station or is a deliberate cut; pin the rows that are decided so future syncs leave them alone. - Next: decide whether the human-side cluster earns a station or is a deliberate cut; decide separately whether the two absent machine-side failure modes belong in the demo; pin the rows that are decided so future syncs leave them alone.

3
wiki/script-coverage.md
View File

@@ -34,7 +34,8 @@
## Notes ## Notes
- The script is entirely machine-side. Every absent concept is human-side or strategy-side. - Eight of the ten absent concepts are human-side or strategy-side, per the grouping in `index.md`. The script's spine is machine-side and it never reaches that material.
- The remaining two absent concepts are machine-side: [[integration-dead-ends]] and [[leave-less-room-for-imagination]]. The script demonstrates the happy path, so it never reaches connector gating or spec ambiguity — the two ways the machine side fails in practice.
- The `ReAct` station carries no wiki concept at all. - The `ReAct` station carries no wiki concept at all.
- Set `Pinned` to `yes` on any row whose status is a deliberate decision. Sync will not touch it. - Set `Pinned` to `yes` on any row whose status is a deliberate decision. Sync will not touch it.