Decide Twin observation compatibility - #2
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changed
subactor/twinObservationandEvidenceRefEXTENDverdict, pinned evidence, field-level gaps and consequencesWhy
data2dslneeds an evidence-backed observation/evidence boundary beforedefining comparison contracts or implementation. The current Twin lineage is
useful but does not yet define deterministic scalar/set value semantics or
reproducible evidence resolution.
Impact
Documentation and governance only. No product code, dependency, external
repository or runtime behavior changes.
Checks
project\\governance-check.bat --actor agent: GOV-PASS, 0 errors, 0 warningsgit diff --check