Proposal (rationale)

Eight extractions across three tracks are not a result until their findings are compared and every catalogue candidate is adjudicated. The danger is larger than in WI-017: memory, evaluation, runtime products, and interoperability protocols can use the same words—session, tool, handoff, state, trace, approval—while assigning them different owners and guarantees.

This item first compares like with like inside each track, then asks which findings genuinely cross tracks. It is the only child authorized to reconcile the follow-on evidence with pattern-catalog.md.

Decision

proposed — 2026-08-15. Last child of WI-018; execution follows all eight extractions.

Plan

Requirements

• Produce one comparison table per track using WI-019’s template, with every cell filled or marked not applicable with a reason.
• Produce a cross-track boundary table for overloaded terms including state, session, memory, handoff, tool, approval, trace/log, result/artifact, identity, and ownership.
• Adjudicate every candidate from WI-020 through WI-027 as confirmed, contradicted, new, track-specific, or not commensurable.
• Trace every synthesis claim through an extraction to a pinned SHA and distinguish normative, implementation, measurement, documentation, and opinion evidence.
• Edit the catalogue only where a reconciliation row supports the change; add dated amendments to existing synthesis documents when they would otherwise contradict the new conclusion.
• Open separate work items for any module or CLI change implied by the research.

Impacts

• Follow-on synthesis document and index/read-order updates.
• Evidence-backed edits to pattern-catalog.md and possibly dated amendments to existing synthesis documents.
• An ADR when a catalogue change alters a rung, module target, or another binding product decision.
• New work items, not implementation, for downstream module or CLI consequences.

Approach

Build the three within-track tables before writing prose. Reconcile by pattern id or explicitly named candidate, not by theme. For cross-track vocabulary, write ownership and guarantee as part of the definition; a shared noun is not convergence when one source means an in-memory callback and another means a remote protocol state machine.

Acceptance criteria / tests

1. Three complete within-track tables and one cross-track boundary table exist.
2. Every candidate in all eight extractions has exactly one adjudication row with pinned provenance.
3. Every catalogue edit traces to an adjudication; every adjudication states evidence type and track.
4. At least one contradiction, track-specific result, or non-commensurability is recorded, or the absence of all three is explicitly argued from the evidence.
5. Existing research documents do not silently disagree; dated amendments identify changed conclusions.
6. Module and CLI consequences appear only as new work items.
7. rungs check and the site build/link check pass.

Out of scope

• Re-reading or expanding WI-009’s six source repositories.
• Adding more follow-on subjects during synthesis.
• Editing modules/ or CLI implementation.
• Framework or product rankings and benchmark comparisons.

Execution

Not started.

Review

Not started.