First doc in the engineering-layer planning sprint. The premise of
this document is the inverse of the existing ontology doc: instead of
listing objects and seeing what they could do, we list the questions
we need to answer and let those drive what objects and relationships
must exist.
The rule established here:
> If a typed object or relationship does not serve at least one query
> in this catalog, it is not in V1.
Contents:
- 20 v1-required queries grouped into 5 tiers:
- structure (Q-001..Q-004)
- intent (Q-005..Q-009)
- validation (Q-010..Q-012)
- change/time (Q-013..Q-014)
- cross-cutting (Q-016..Q-020)
- 3 v1-stretch queries (Q-021..Q-023)
- 4 v2 deferred queries (Q-024..Q-027) so V1 does not paint us into
a corner
Each entry has: id, question, invocation, expected result shape,
required objects, required relationships, provenance requirement,
and tier.
Three queries are flagged as the "killer correctness" queries:
- Q-006 orphan requirements (engineering equivalent of untested code)
- Q-009 decisions based on flagged assumptions (catches fragile design)
- Q-011 validation claims with no supporting result (catches
unevidenced claims)
The catalog ends with the implied implementation order for V1, the
list of object families intentionally deferred (BOM, manufacturing,
software, electrical, test correlation), and the open questions this
catalog raises for the next planning docs:
- when do orphan/unsupported queries flag (insert time vs query time)?
- when an Assumption flips, are dependent Decisions auto-flagged?
- does AtoCore block conflicts or always save-and-flag?
- is EVIDENCED_BY mandatory at insert?
- when does the Human Mirror regenerate?
These are the questions the next planning docs (memory-vs-entities,
conflict-model, promotion-rules) should answer before any engineering
layer code is written.
This is doc work only. No code, no schema, no behavior change.
Per the working rule in master-plan-status.md: the architecture docs
shape decisions, they do not force premature schema work.
