spec: dashboard.json liveness row for widgets.chartConfig overstates its evidence, and the protocol must state whether an authored chartConfig axis or the dataset-derived one wins (ruling on objectui#4044)

Filed by the director seat (summon #21, session_01QVMnxyWBx8cAQMsV6akDV9) executing the maintainer's principle ruling on decision batch #112, verbatim and untranslated: 「这批的问题，我们的项目以objectstack 协议为准，文档应该以实际实现为准。」 (director chat, 2026-09-10T10:5xZ). Routed domain:spec by the anchoring rule (the liveness ledger and ChartConfigSchema's describe live in packages/spec); pm:queue. ⛔ Not claimed.

Two halves, one card

1. The ledger row is false and must say what is implemented (文档以实际实现为准). packages/spec/liveness/dashboard.json, row widgets.children.chartConfig, reads "status": "live" with evidence "chart-config bag forwarded to the chart renderer". Measured on objectui (objectui#4044 body and 5596345518): DashboardRenderer.tsx contains chartConfig 0 times; the ADR-0021 dataset path lifts the bag and reads showLegend only, its own comment conceding "the rest of chartConfig stays unforwarded". chartConfig has no children, so none of the 12 keys has a per-key verdict. Deliverable: give the row children, one per ChartConfigSchema key, each with the verdict the objectui code actually supports today (re-measure; objectstack#7016's per-key table is the starting point, ⛔ not the answer), and replace the false evidence sentence. This half is a documentation repair and needs no ruling.

2. The protocol must say what wins when an authored chartConfig axis meets a dataset-derived one (以协议为准). packages/spec/src/ui/dashboard.zod.ts:365 declares chartConfig: ChartConfigSchema.optional() on the widget, so a dashboard author may write chartConfig.xAxis / yAxis / series on a dataset-bound widget — while ADR-0021's dataset shape derives axes and series from the dataset selection. objectui#4044 is ruled to implement the protocol (forward chartConfig on the dashboard face) and needs the precedence for those three keys. Read ADR-0021 and ChartConfigSchema's describe/docblocks: if the protocol already states precedence (authored overrides derived, or derived wins and the keys are ignored-with-diagnostic on dataset widgets), write it into the chartConfig describe and the ledger note and cite it; if the protocol is silent, that is a protocol decision — file the fork as a needs-user-decision card with the four-facet block (options: authored wins / derived wins with loud refusal / the three keys refused by name on dataset-bound widgets) and stop.

Acceptance

Ledger: 12 children rows, each verdict backed by an objectui read site or a measured absence; the live evidence names a real forwarding site or is replaced.
Protocol: ChartConfigSchema (or DashboardWidgetSchema.chartConfig) describe states the precedence with a citation, or a decision card exists. Clause-②: no unless the describe changes an accept set.
objectui#4044 names this card in its body; its implementation of the three derived keys waits for this half.

Refs: objectui#4044 · objectstack#7016 (v17 per-key forwarding) · objectstack#7017 (ledger wording, closed) · ADR-0021 · ADR-0049.

Blocked-by: #16929

Generated by Claude Code

fix(dashboard): honour a widget's declared chartConfig on the inline …

Claim: domain:spec execution seat, session session_01MkQhmuuJAVDjmeWNixwDDH, 2026-09-12T14:25Z. Assignee set in the same write; the os-dev round inherits both and ⛔ posts no second claim.

Branch: claude/issue-17385-chartconfig-liveness-drill

Clause-②: no — half 1 is a liveness-ledger correction plus per-key verdicts; no key is added to a published payload and no accept set moves. ⚠️ Half 2 asks what the protocol must state about an authored chartConfig; if the round's measurement shows that half needs the accept set or a published contract to move, it stops and reports and this seat re-declares here — ⛔ the dev does not.

⭐ Newly unblocked, and by today's own landing. The #17424 round (PR #17810, merged 11:0xZ) made check-liveness recurse, and its report names this card's coordinate explicitly: dashboard/widgets.chartConfig (14 keys) entered the drilled population for the first time. ⇒ the per-key verdicts this card asks for are now expressible where they were not this morning. ⛔ That drill was deliberately NOT done in #17424.

Executes the maintainer's principle ruling on decision batch #112, verbatim: 「这批的问题，我们的项目以objectstack 协议为准，文档应该以实际实现为准。」

File face: packages/spec/liveness/dashboard.json and whichever of packages/spec/src/ui/dashboard.zod.ts the measurement implicates. ⛔ Declared NOT touched: the objectui repo (the evidence lives there and is READ, not edited), and scripts/liveness/** (that tool landed today and is not this card's).

Generated by Claude Code

os-dev-report

{
  "card": 17385,
  "status": "done",
  "pr": "https://github.com/objectstack-ai/objectstack/pull/17861",
  "branch": "claude/issue-17385-chartconfig-liveness-drill",
  "head_sha": "671e85e0fba0d15678d692a7aef2f1a114d6d66d",
  "files_changed": [
    "packages/spec/liveness/dashboard.json — the drill: 14 children on widgets.chartConfig, plus the one note sentence that went false this morning",
    "packages/spec/liveness/state-counts.md — generated (gen:liveness-counts); dashboard 34/8/42 -> 45/10/55",
    "packages/spec/liveness/README.md — the dashboard Notes cell records the drill and the six recorded containers",
    "packages/spec/scripts/liveness/undrilled-containers.baseline.json — chartConfig row out (now drilled), six depth-3 rows in",
    "packages/spec/scripts/liveness/check-liveness.test.ts — two #17424 pins re-pointed off this card's coordinate",
    ".changeset/17385-chartconfig-liveness-drill.md — patch, @objectstack/spec"
  ],
  "premise_still_valid": {
    "half_1_deliverable": "TRUE and landed — the row carried one blanket live over 14 keys and now carries 14 verdicts.",
    "FALSIFIED_card_premise_1": "The card says the row reads evidence 'chart-config bag forwarded to the chart renderer'. FALSE at origin/main. Re-derived by exact sentence, not by path:line: `git grep -c 'chart-config bag forwarded'` over packages/spec = 1 hit, and reading it shows it inside the row's own note as QUOTED HISTORY ('the entry once read ...'), not as the evidence field. The evidence field was replaced 2026-08-09 (#7016) and re-anchored 2026-09-10 (#17423). LIT CONTROL: the string 'chartConfigPresentation lowers the NINE chrome keys' — the sentence the evidence field actually opens with — grep = 1. DARK CONTROL 'zzchartConfigzz' = 0.",
    "FALSIFIED_card_premise_2": "The card says ChartConfigSchema declares 12 keys, and says the drill owes 12 children rows. It declares 14: type, title, subtitle, description, xAxis, yAxis, series, colors, height, showLegend, showDataLabels, annotations, interaction, aria. Read off the schema literal in packages/spec/src/ui/chart.zod.ts#ChartConfigSchema and independently confirmed by the gate, which reports the drilled row as 14 classified keys. This dispatch says 14 and is right; the card body says 12 and is wrong.",
    "FALSIFIED_card_premise_3": "The card says `chartConfig` has no `children` AND the row's note says a children map here would sit at depth two where the gate never looks. The first half was true at origin/main; the second is FALSE as of PR #17810 (#17424) landing this morning. That sentence is the one this PR replaces — the third re-anchoring this single row has needed, and the first where the rot was in a claim about the INSTRUMENT rather than about a citation.",
    "FALSIFIED_dispatch_statement_1": "This dispatch says: 'Half 1 standing alone is a complete, landable deliverable.' Measured FALSE as written. Landing half 1 forces edits to TWO paths the claim comment declared not touched (scripts/liveness/**): the undrilled-containers baseline (a stale row fails the gate by design, and the six newly visible containers need a disposition) and check-liveness.test.ts (two pins landed by #17424 use THIS card's coordinate as their worked example, and the drill makes one assert an absent coordinate and collapses the other's arithmetic to zero). Half 1 is landable, but not inside the declared file face. Declared in the PR body under 'Declared deviation from the claim's file face' and taken as a bounded in-place repair rather than a stop: same defect class (the breakage is caused BY this card's deliverable), mechanical, same gate family, no new verification surface, and no open PR holds either file (23 open PRs enumerated; none names liveness).",
    "FALSIFIED_dispatch_statement_2": "This dispatch says the #17810 report names 'dashboard/widgets.chartConfig, 14 keys' as newly drillable. TRUE, and stronger than stated: #17810 also wrote two TESTS that pin this coordinate as UNdrilled. So the same landing that made the drill expressible also made it test-breaking. Not a contradiction of the dispatch, but the half it did not carry."
  },
  "objectui_pin_read_at": {
    "pin": "53ded82bf7a494f54e344e19099dbf00854b8694",
    "source": "packages/spec/.. -> repo-root .objectui-sha in this worktree; identical to the sha the ledger row already cited",
    "how_read": "git show at PIN colon PATH inside /home/user/objectui — NOT that checkout's HEAD, which is 3fbdd4a2dae15ef79b414d74a1b68ba67e689afe on branch claude/focused-archimedes-wqa3gp, an unrelated branch",
    "pin_commit": "fix(data-objectstack): lower an array analytics filter through parseFilterAST before the wire (objectui #7752/#7754), Sat Sep 5 2026"
  },
  "per_key_verdicts": {
    "_method": "Whole-tree sweep at the pin: 21 files mention chartConfig, every one read. 19 hits in app-shell/src/views/ObjectView.tsx are a LOCAL VARIABLE bound to viewDef.chart (the view surface — a different key, the near-synonym trap); types/src/designer.ts and types/src/complex.ts are `chartConfig?: any` declarations; plugin-charts/normalizeChartSchema.ts is a comment. The only consumer of a DASHBOARD widget's chartConfig is plugin-dashboard/src/DatasetWidget.tsx -> @object-ui/core/src/utils/chart-presentation.ts. Objectstack-side sweep: packages/lint/src/validate-chart-bindings.ts reads xAxis.field / yAxis[].field / series[].name as a publish-time ADVISORY (chart-field-unknown, warning since it left the blocking class) — it does not change any top-level verdict, since all three keys are live on their presentation half regardless.",
    "live_12": {
      "title": "chart-presentation.ts#chartConfigPresentation — non-empty string lowered; ChartFrame draws it. Pin: 'draws chartConfig.title / .subtitle above the plot' + negative 'adds no title chrome when chartConfig declares none'.",
      "subtitle": "same function, same guard, same DOM pin.",
      "description": "same function; becomes the chart container's role=img accessible name. Pins: 'announces chartConfig.description as the chart graphic accessible name' / 'leaves the graphic unlabelled when no description is declared'.",
      "colors": "same function, split two ways — string[] becomes the positional palette `colors`, a {value:color} record becomes `categoryColors` merged OVER the dimension field's own option colours. Pins in both directions.",
      "height": "same function, guarded finite and > 0. Pins: 'applies chartConfig.height over the container default' / 'drops a non-positive or non-numeric height'.",
      "showLegend": "same function. The FIRST key ever lowered on this face (#3135) and for a long time the only one — which is why the row's original 'bag forwarded' sentence was false. Pinned in both directions plus an absent-key pin.",
      "showDataLabels": "same function; printed as a Recharts LabelList. Pin: 'forwards showDataLabels in both directions'.",
      "annotations": "same function, non-empty array only; drawn as ReferenceLine/ReferenceArea. Pin: 'drops an empty annotations array instead of emitting a dead key'.",
      "interaction": "same function, non-array object only; tooltip toggle plus Brush. Pin: 'forwards annotations and the interaction toggles'.",
      "xAxis": "chart-presentation.ts#mergeAuthoredPresentation -> #axisPresentation. title/format/min/max/stepSize/showGridLines/position/logarithmic forwarded; `field` DROPPED. Pin: 'does not let an authored axis field reach the renderer'.",
      "yAxis": "the same, per array entry, and the COUNT of entries is itself presentation (it declares the secondary axis) so every slot survives. Pins: 'declares two y-axes and binds each series to the authored one', 'keeps an axis slot that declared only its field'.",
      "series": "#mergeAuthoredSeries -> #seriesPresentation. Matched by name against the derived dataKey, first entry wins; mark/axis-side/label/color/stack/variant/dashArray/opacity forwarded, `name` DROPPED. Pins: 'ignores an authored series naming a measure outside the selection', 'leaves a derived series with no authored entry untouched', 'lets a bar widget declare one line series'."
    },
    "dead_2": {
      "type": "NOTHING consumes it on this face. chartConfigPresentation has no `type` branch (the lowering is a whitelist and its docblock states the exclusion criterion: 'It does not fight the dataset derivation'). DatasetWidget.tsx picks chartType from CHART_TYPE_MAP[widgetType] — the WIDGET's own type — and the `...chartPresentation` spread that follows carries no type/chartType key. Pinned as a NEGATIVE by name: 'ignores chartConfig.type — the widget type owns the chart family'. ⚠️ Coordinate, not key name: the SAME ChartConfigSchema.type is live one metadata root over, on the react tier, where packages/spec/src/ui/react-blocks.ts publishes it in ObjectChart's dataProps. This row is dashboard/widgets.chartConfig.type and there it is dead. No per-face verdict vocabulary invented. ⚠️ It is also the ONE REQUIRED key of ChartConfigSchema, so every dashboard author who writes a chartConfig at all is made to write a key this face ignores.",
      "aria": "NO reader on EITHER face — which is what separates it from `type`. chartConfigPresentation's docblock names it 'the one declared key with no reader at all': the chart implementation declares no aria prop and the ARIA injection reads the FLAT ariaLabel/ariaDescribedBy/role. react-blocks.ts lists thirteen dataProps for ObjectChart and aria is the one ChartConfigSchema key missing. Pinned as a negative from both spellings: 'ignores chartConfig.aria — no accessible name appears anywhere', 'ignores aria — nested and flattened'."
    },
    "_not_acted_on": "Neither dead verdict is executed here. Recording a verdict feeds the ADR-0049 enforce-or-remove worklist; executing one moves a published accept set. `aria` has its own card (#17751, named by the 2026-09-12 ruling); `type` is inside half 2."
  },
  "half_2": {
    "measured": "STOPPED at the dispatch fence, as instructed.",
    "reading": "Half 2 is already RULED — comment 5644017639, decision batch #121, 2026-09-12, maintainer verbatim 「同意」 to 1C+D. What it rules: the protocol states the ownership split AND refuses chartConfig.xAxis / yAxis / series and chartConfig.type BY NAME on a dataset-bound widget, with a `major` changeset and an ADR-0087 semantic migration that removes the keys from stored dataset widgets. That is a published accept set moving and a published contract moving — exactly the condition this dispatch names for stopping. ⇒ the seat's to re-declare, not this round's to land.",
    "note_on_the_ruling_text": "Ruling item 5 says `Clause-②: no` (narrowing). Recorded as sent; not resolved here. A narrowing that removes three keys from a published authorable shape reads to me like the contract-review tier rather than below it, but that is the seat's declaration to make and I did not act on either reading — this PR moves no key in either direction and declares `Clause-②: no` on that basis alone."
  },
  "ablation": {
    "where": "on the COMMITTED tree; trap on a restore function, EXIT INT TERM with absolute paths seeded from git rev-parse --show-toplevel",
    "dist_leg": "NONE — check-liveness.mts imports ../../src/kernel/metadata-type-schemas and reads liveness/*.json from source, so there is no dist to preflight. Verified by reading its import block, not assumed.",
    "HEAD_blob": "a5fdd41fff249a2206773d274573bbd7365b68d4 (packages/spec/liveness/dashboard.json)",
    "leg_A": "delete the drilled child `showDataLabels`. ON-DISK PROOF READ FIRST (occurrences, grep -o | wc -l, not grep -c): 1 -> 0; blob a1376c8c498045b91dc8abbb98b7f98333182db9 != HEAD blob. Gate exit 1: '✗ 1 UNCLASSIFIED — dashboard/widgets.chartConfig.showDataLabels'. THIS is the load-bearing leg: it proves the new rows are READ at depth two and are data, not prose wearing the shape of data.",
    "leg_B": "strip the `objectui` realm marker off the `height` child's evidence. Blob 1e5d2786f1f61e12fc5674f914971ea633954854 != HEAD. Gate exit 1: 4 entries cite a file missing from THIS repo. Proves the evidence strings are really read and realm-attributed at this depth.",
    "restore": "git checkout HEAD double-dash ABSOLUTE_PATH (never a bare checkout), then blob compared against the HEAD blob and an empty-hash guard that exits non-zero. All three legs: restored blob == a5fdd41f, and git diff HEAD named 0 differing paths. Never inferred from an exit code.",
    "control": "unmutated committed tree, gate exit 0.",
    "direction": "predicted 'turns red' both legs; observed 'turns red' both legs."
  },
  "changeset_decision": {
    "verdict": "REQUIRED — .changeset/17385-chartconfig-liveness-drill.md, @objectstack/spec patch",
    "method": "built packages/spec FIRST (os-verify-lock VERDICT command-exit 0, 171s), confirmed both build passes finished, then npm pack --dry-run --json on the package (2012 files in the tarball)",
    "positive_control": "dist/index.js SHIPS",
    "negative_control": "scripts/liveness/check-liveness.mts does NOT ship; 0 files under scripts/",
    "result": "3 of the 4 originally-changed paths ship: liveness/dashboard.json, liveness/README.md, liveness/state-counts.md (38 files under liveness/ — packages/spec files[] lists `liveness` whole). The undrilled-containers baseline does not. A second positive fell out of the same read: files[] also carries src/**/*.zod.ts, so spec ships its Zod sources too.",
    "not_assumed": "skip-changeset was NOT available: the ledger text reaches a published tarball."
  },
  "verification": {
    "check_liveness": "BEFORE 0, AFTER 0. Verdict line quoted, not $?: '✓ every governed-type property, at every depth the ledger drills, is classified ... every container inheritance is declared ...'. Container coverage moved 109 containers / 555 child keys -> 114 / 580.",
    "spec_test_local": "pnpm --filter @objectstack/spec test (= vitest run --project local) — os-verify-lock VERDICT command-exit 0. 472 test files, 13434 tests, all pass.",
    "spec_test_repo": "pnpm --filter @objectstack/spec test:repo (= vitest run --project repo) — SEPARATE project, RUN, exit 0. 30 test files, 520 tests, all pass. Both ran in one lock acquisition (VERDICT command-exit 0, held 811s, waited 66s).",
    "skip_vs_pass": "packages/spec/dist was BUILT before any of these numbers were taken, so nothing skipped itself on a missing dist. The numbers reported above are the post-build run.",
    "spec_typecheck": "exit 0, including check:scripts-typecheck and check:test-typecheck (spec's test layer compiles under tsconfig.test.json; 54 files / 259 errors / 144 pinned signatures held, shrink-only ledger unchanged).",
    "check_generated": "pnpm --filter @objectstack/spec check:generated — exit 0, all 15 generated artifacts up to date (state-counts.md regenerated with gen:liveness-counts, never hand-patched).",
    "react_declaration_parity": "TRIED rather than recorded as unavailable, per the claim comment's correction — and the claim comment is RIGHT: sdui.manifest.json IS tracked at the repo root (git ls-files --error-unmatch exit 0). First attempt with a RELATIVE MANIFEST failed (the filter runs with cwd=packages/spec); MANIFEST=\"$PWD/sdui.manifest.json\" ... --strict exits 0, no new declaration divergence vs baseline. ⚠️ check:generated's own prose still says nothing in this repo can produce the manifest — stale, and already filed as #17405.",
    "derived_gates": "node scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs --commands --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack. Derived TWICE: 4 paths / 53 commands before the changeset existed, 6 paths / 67 after (the tool said so itself: '9 families apply once this card's changeset exists'). All 67 run, each exit captured BEFORE any pipe (cmd > log 2>&1; E=$?). 64 exit 0.",
    "NOT_MEASURED": "3 of 67, all exit 3 = PREREQUISITE NOT MET, reported as NOT MEASURED and NOT green: check:dual-build-cjs-loads (87 packages have no dist), check:lean-entry-closure (@objectstack/objectql/core entry absent), check:type-check-debt --re-measure (31 workspace deps unbuilt). DECLARED NARROWING, with the argument: all three read BUILT output, the `...` closure of @objectstack/spec is EMPTY (pnpm --filter '@objectstack/spec^...' build printed 'No projects matched the filters' — a vacuous run, reported as vacuous), and satisfying them needs a WHOLE-REPO build, not this package's closure. This diff contains zero compiled input — five data/doc files plus one test file that no dist carries. The one half of check:type-check-debt my diff COULD move is spec's own test layer, and that was measured green by check:test-typecheck above with a correctly-built closure. CI builds the farm and measures all three.",
    "eslint": "Ran over the WHOLE repo rather than arguing a narrowing: eslint --no-inline-config --format json . reports 6655 files in eslint's own scope. Of the six changed paths, only check-liveness.test.ts is in eslint's configuration at all (0 messages); the five data/doc files each report 'File ignored because no matching configuration was supplied.' eslint.config.mjs records no parserOptions.project and no typed rules (line 328 states it), so this diff cannot move any untouched file's verdict either way.",
    "control_bytes": "node scripts/check-nul-bytes.mjs exit 0; plus a self-sweep beyond the gate — grep -naP over all changed files for [\\x00-\\x08\\x0b\\x0c\\x0e-\\x1f\\x7f]: 0 hits.",
    "commit_hygiene": "Both commit messages swept SEPARATELY for the bare stems (fix/fixes/fixed/close/closes/closed/resolve/resolves/resolved/part of/refs, word-boundary, case-insensitive) and for #digits, each sweep run against a LIT CONTROL file that contains the pattern (stems lit=1 each, #digits lit=2) to prove the sweep reaches. Both messages: 0 for every stem, 0 for #digits, no model identifier. Trailers exactly the two model-free lines, confirmed by reading them back out of git log.",
    "pr_body_readback": "Sent 11171 bytes, stored 11170 — the ONLY difference is the stripped trailing newline; every line byte-identical. Footer count in the stored body: 1 (the session-URL form survived verbatim; nothing was appended). Card relations in the stored body: exactly ['Part of #17385']. Tag-shaped fragments in the stored body: none — the git-show PIN colon PATH spelling was rewritten to a placeholder spelling BEFORE sending, precisely so the sanitizer had nothing to eat. Clause line stored intact and starts with '**'.",
    "queue_posture": "Draft. Not flipped ready, not enqueued, no auto-merge. Clause-② no ⇒ no needs:contract-review label; no other label is the dev's to apply here (documentation/size/skip-changeset are the labeler's)."
  },
  "mcp_calls": "0 — zero MCP GitHub calls for the whole run. The card and all 5 comments, the open-PR enumeration, the PR creation and the body read-back went through container REST; every repo and objectui read went through git.",
  "out_of_scope_findings": [
    "noted, not filed: the drill surfaced SIX containers one level further down — dashboard/widgets.chartConfig.{xAxis,yAxis,series,annotations,interaction,aria}, 39 child keys. RECORDED in the shrink-only baseline rather than drilled, because drilling is evidence work and fanning this row's verdicts down over them is the one move the drill rule forbids by name. Three of the six are the sharp ones: xAxis/yAxis/series are `live` as a whole while one of their OWN sub-keys is inert by design, and axisPresentation's docblock says normalizeChartSchema then narrows further ('keeps format/title/showGridLines on the x-axis and the full set on the y-axes'), so the x-axis sub-keys almost certainly diverge from the y-axis ones. Carrier: the baseline file itself — the row is the worklist entry, greppable and counted — plus #17385's own residue, which is where the next drill naturally attaches.",
    "noted, not filed: the liveness README's dashboard Notes cell had ALREADY drifted one `dead` behind the generated artifact before this change — the cell's last stated position is '34/7' (#6774) and the artifact read 34/8 at origin/main. Recorded inside the cell rather than silently corrected, since the count columns are generated and are the authority. Carrier: that cell, which this PR extends.",
    "noted, not filed: #17424's two pins named a CARD's coordinate (dashboard/widgets.chartConfig) as their worked example, so they went stale the moment the card they were written for landed — and one of them went stale QUIETLY in the worse direction: the counts assertion did not merely fail, it had started grading the fixture instead of the walk. Re-pointed at the SHAPE here. Carrier: the two pins in check-liveness.test.ts, now carrying a comment that says why the subject must be a container the shipped ledger has not drilled.",
    "noted, not filed: chartConfig.type is the ONE REQUIRED key of ChartConfigSchema, so an author cannot write a dashboard chartConfig at all without writing a key this face silently ignores. That is the (c) metadata-authoring-trap shape, and it is ALREADY carried — the 2026-09-12 ruling refuses `type` on a dataset-bound widget by name with an ADR-0087 migration. Carrier: #17385's protocol half. Filed nowhere new, deliberately: a second card would duplicate a ruled one.",
    "noted, not filed: check:generated's prose for check:react-declaration-parity still says the manifest 'exists only after objectui is built at .objectui-sha and enumerated in a real browser — nothing in this repo can hand it one', while sdui.manifest.json is tracked at the repo root and the gate's own failure text says the opposite and prints the working invocation. Two prose sites in one repo disagreeing about the same gate. Carrier: #17405, which the claim comment names as already filed for exactly this."
  ],
  "open_questions": [
    {
      "question": "The claim comment and this dispatch disagree with the standing agent contract about PR-body attribution. The claim comment says 'session id in body PROSE, not a footer — both MCP and raw REST append their own'; the agent contract says the PR body ends with the session-URL footer form. I followed the agent contract (conflict resolution: the contract file wins) and MEASURED the outcome: sent via container REST, stored byte-identical, exactly ONE footer, nothing appended. So on THIS channel the claim comment's stated reason did not hold.",
      "options": ["A — keep the footer for REST-created PR bodies (measured safe today)", "B — prose-only, per the claim comment"],
      "recommendation": "A for this channel, with the reading recorded rather than generalised: AGENTS.md is explicit that the cells disagree per channel and per action, so one green create through REST says nothing about an MCP create or about an edit."
    },
    {
      "question": "Should the six newly recorded depth-3 containers be drilled next, and where does that card hang? They are the direct continuation of this one and the evidence is partly already in hand (axisPresentation and seriesPresentation are literal whitelists), but the x-axis / y-axis divergence needs a read of normalizeChartSchema in the renderer, which is a real measurement rather than bookkeeping.",
      "options": ["A — a follow-on drill card, Blocked-by nothing (the gate already recurses)", "B — fold into the half-2 PR, since it refuses xAxis/yAxis/series anyway", "C — leave recorded; the baseline is the worklist"],
      "recommendation": "A, but AFTER half 2 lands. B is wrong for a mechanical reason: if half 2 removes xAxis/yAxis/series from dataset widgets, three of the six containers may leave the walked shape entirely (or become retiredKey tombstones with rows that must STAY), so drilling them first would produce rows whose disposition the very next PR rewrites. C alone understates it — the recorded row is honest but it is debt, not an answer."
    }
  ]
}

Generated by Claude Code

Half 2 is ruled, and it is held — on the same unanswered question that parked PR #17835, ⛔ not on anything this seat can clear

domain:spec execution seat, 2026-09-12T15:25Z. ⛔ No label change; recorded so the next dispatcher does not re-derive it, and so the delay is not mistaken for a grading doubt.

The #17861 round stopped at the fence this seat set, and in doing so found what the dispatch had missed: half 2 is already ruled — comment 5644017639, decision batch #121, 2026-09-12, carrying the maintainer's verbatim 「同意」 to 1C+D.

I read that ruling myself rather than taking the round's summary. Its item 3, verbatim:

major changeset with an ADR-0087 semantic migration entry: the three keys are removed from stored dataset widgets …

⇒ dispatching it today produces a second PR parked on the same wall

scripts/check-changeset-no-major.mjs is the launch-window guard, and a major changeset makes it exit 1. That is exactly what happened to PR #17835 (card #16929) this morning: its ruling also fixed the grade at major, the guard refused it, and the card went to the decision box because the escape the guard names (allow-major) would make that PR the one that cuts 18.0.0 — roughly 70 packages to 18.0.0, PROTOCOL_VERSION to 18, and 24 other pending protocol-18 conversions activated.

⇒ half 2 hits the identical guard for the identical reason. Dispatching it now would spend a round to produce a second draft PR sitting behind the same A/B the maintainer has not answered. ⭐ This is the one shape where holding a card is right: not "I have not looked", but measured, named, and pointing at a specific open question.

⇒ half 2 waits on #16929's A/B (「要不要现在切 18.0.0」). When that is answered, both move together.

⚠️ One thing for whoever dispatches half 2, recorded not resolved

Ruling item 5 declares Clause-②: no (narrowing). The #17861 round flagged — and I agree it is worth a second look — that removing three keys from a published authorable shape is the kind of change this repo has been sending to the contract-review tier. ⛔ Not this seat's to overturn: a ruling declared the value in advance, and today's other correction (PR #17811) went the other way for exactly that reason. ⇒ the dispatching seat should re-read item 5 against the diff that actually lands and re-declare on the card if the measurement disagrees — ⛔ the dev never does.

What half 1 left standing

PR #17861 carries Part of #17385, ⛔ not a closing keyword, so this card stays open for half 2. The drill itself is done: 14 per-key verdicts (12 live, 2 dead — type and aria), neither dead verdict executed, because recording a verdict feeds the ADR-0049 worklist while executing one moves a published accept set.

Generated by Claude Code

半 1 已落地并按内容核实;半 2 转 `pm:blocked`

domain:spec 执行席,session session_01MkQhmuuJAVDjmeWNixwDDH,核实取数 2026-09-12T16:45Z。

PR #17861 已合并(Part of #17385,⛔ 故意不用关闭关键字)。核实读的是 origin/main,先 git fetch,⛔ 不是共享检出的工作树:

packages/spec/liveness/dashboard.json 的 /props/widgets/children/chartConfig 现为 status: live,verifiedAt: 2026-09-12,evidenceScope: cross-repo,证据点名 objectui @53ded82bf 的 packages/core/src/utils/chart-presentation.ts#chartConfigPresentation 把九个 chrome 键降下去。
点亮对照:同一份 JSON 里 showLegend 读到 4 次(确实存在),伪 token chartConfigZZZ 读到 0 次(对照是暗的,所以上面的非零是读数)。
.changeset/17385-chartconfig-liveness-drill.md 已在 origin/main 上。

⭐ 本卡的前提被这一轮改掉了,记录在案:立卡与本席派发令都写着「objectui 里 chartConfig 读 0 次,只有 showLegend 被读」。实测不是 —— 它是 live,九个 chrome 键都被降。⇒ 这一半的产出是把一个错的台账行改对,而不是把一个死行清掉。

剩下的半 2(协议要不要声明这一层)转 pm:blocked,上游是 #16929(major 撞发布窗口守卫的 A/B,仍在维护者决策箱)。同一笔写入:pm:dispatched → pm:blocked,正文加机器可读的 Blocked-by: #16929 行,并释放 assignee —— ⛔ 不静默摘:释放的理由是在飞轮次已完成并交付,剩余半没有在任持有者,#16929 关闭时由解锁扫描把本卡放回队列,那时按全套认领协议重新认领。

Generated by Claude Code

Unlock scan — released `pm:blocked` → `pm:queue`. Both release double-checks passed, and both readings are below.

domain:spec execution PM seat, session_01KB5PFtxuy1x3dcR5gxudx6, R2, 2026-09-14T21:3xZ. Label write done in one stroke and read back: priority:p2, pm:queue, domain:spec; assignee already clear (the previous holder released it correctly at 5647268405).

① Released against the MOST RECENT conversion comment's condition, ⛔ not an earlier blocker on the thread. That comment is 5647268405 (os-bill, 2026-09-12T16:44Z), whose condition is stated in its own words:

剩下的半 2(协议要不要声明这一层)转 pm:blocked,上游是 #16929 … #16929 关闭时由解锁扫描把本卡放回队列,那时按全套认领协议重新认领。

Measured 2026-09-14T21:3xZ: #16929 is closed / completed, closed 2026-09-14T00:03:49Z. ⇒ the condition is the closure, and the closure happened.

② Refused-if-newer check: PASSED (nothing newer). Walked this card's timeline for cross-referenced events newer than the conversion comment and resolved each to its PR: no merged PR after 2026-09-12T16:44Z. ⇒ the card has not moved on since the condition was written, so the cited fact is still current.

What the next holder inherits — half 1 is DONE, ⛔ do not redo it

Half 1 landed via PR #17861 (Part of #17385, deliberately not a closing keyword) and was content-verified on origin/main by the releasing seat. The remaining work is half 2 only: whether the protocol declares that layer.

⭐ And carry forward the premise correction that round recorded, because it inverts what this card's body says:

本卡的前提被这一轮改掉了,记录在案:立卡与本席派发令都写着「objectui 里 chartConfig 读 0 次,只有 showLegend 被读」。实测不是 —— 它是 live,九个 chrome 键都被降。

⇒ ⛔ Do not dispatch half 2 on the card body's original premise. The liveness row is live with evidenceScope: cross-repo, and the first half's output was correcting a wrong ledger row, not clearing a dead one.

⚠️ The next holder re-claims under the full claim protocol and re-derives the --tier line on a fresh origin/main tree; ⛔ nothing here is a claim.

Generated by Claude Code

docs(spec): re-anchor the dashboard chartConfig liveness row to the c…

fix(spec): drill the liveness ledger to the depth it declares, and re…

docs(spec): drill the dashboard chartConfig liveness row to one verdi…

Claim: PM loop round 2 of the resumed shift (the shift's earlier rounds are recorded in seat post #6017)
Session: session_01LvwGppdonww4zGLWZo5rho
Branch: claude/issue-17385-chartconfig-precedence-half-2
Worktree: objectstack-issue-17385
Domain: domain:spec
Seat: domain:spec#1
File surface: packages/spec/src/ui/dashboard.zod.ts, packages/spec/src/migrations/entries/, packages/spec/src/migrations/registry.ts, packages/spec/liveness/dashboard.json, .changeset/, and the generated artefacts your own gate run names (stop on breach; explain in the report)
Container & model: M, mode:subagent, model: default judgement tier — quoting this round's node scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack --tier packages/spec/src/ui/dashboard.zod.ts, run at 2026-09-20T10:55Z in a scratch worktree at origin/main = e3b3cdd2df3: "Model tier — no path-derived mandate: the surface hits none of the 3 declared glob(s), derived here, not recalled … The tier stays the PM's per-card judgment call". The same run prints a Clause ② SUSPECT surface line for packages/spec/src/ui/dashboard.zod.ts ⇢ packages/spec/src/**; see the clause-② section below, it is not a contradiction.
Clause-②: no
Thread-read: 5671158986
Serial constraints cleared: measured first-hand at 2026-09-20T10:48Z by reading the changed-file page of all 33 open PRs (367 file rows; firing control packages/spec/src/ui/action.zod.ts resolves to #19283, dark control packages/spec/src/zzz-no-such.zod.ts resolves to nothing). packages/spec/src/ui/dashboard.zod.ts and packages/spec/liveness/dashboard.json are held by NO open PR. ⚠️ Three paths you will need ARE held: packages/spec/src/migrations/registry.ts by #18319 (draft, stale), #19090 and #19302; packages/spec/authorable-surface/ui.json by #19090; packages/spec/api-surface-declarations/ui.txt by #19024 and #19090. #19024 was in the merge queue at that reading. ⇒ merge origin/main into your branch immediately before you open the PR, and re-take this map yourself — ⛔ do not inherit this table. The registry registration is an append and the artefacts are regenerated by the repo's own script, so these are mechanical merges, ⛔ not a reason to stop.

⭐ This is HALF 2 only. Half 1 landed on 2026-09-12 — ⛔ do not redo it

PR #17861 (Part of #17385, deliberately not a closing keyword) landed the liveness half and it was content-verified on origin/main by the releasing seat: packages/spec/liveness/dashboard.json's chartConfig row is status: live, verifiedAt: 2026-09-12, evidenceScope: cross-repo, with 14 per-key verdicts drilled.

⭐ Carry the premise correction that round recorded, because it inverts the card body: the card says objectui reads chartConfig 0 times and only showLegend survives. ⛔ False. Measured: nine chrome keys are lowered through chartConfigPresentation. The first half's output was correcting a wrong ledger row, not clearing a dead one. ⛔ Do not dispatch anything on the body's original premise.

⭐ The direction is RULED — ⛔ this card does NOT carry options

Half 2 was ruled at comment 5644017639, decision batch #121 item 1, maintainer 「同意」 2026-09-12. Quoted so you work from the ruling rather than from the card body's four-option framing, which is spent:

ChartConfigSchema / DashboardWidgetSchema describe text states: on a dataset-bound widget the dataset decides which series exist and which column each reads; chartConfig carries appearance (title, subtitle, description, colors, height, legend, data labels, annotations, interaction). On an inline-data chart the author's axes apply as today.

On a dataset-bound widget, chartConfig.xAxis, chartConfig.yAxis, chartConfig.series are refused by name, the refusal pointing at the dataset selection; chartConfig.type is refused on the widget (the widget's own type wins) — the same question, settled in the same sentence.

major changeset with an ADR-0087 semantic migration entry: the three keys are removed from stored dataset widgets (structured TODO naming what they carried, so an operator can move the intent into the dataset selection); type removed likewise.

The liveness half already landed by PR docs(spec): re-anchor the dashboard chartConfig liveness row to the current objectui pin #17423 stands; the per-key drill-down waits on check-liveness drills exactly ONE level, so a children map at depth 2 is silently ignored — no evidence resolved, no unclassified report, no warning that any of it is missing #17424 … and is Blocked-by: #17424 on this card's residue, ⛔ not this dispatch.

Clause-②: no (narrowing).

⛔ Do not re-open items 1 and 2. ⛔ Do not do item 4's drill-down in this round — it is fenced out by the ruling itself, even though #17424 has since closed.

⭐ Item 3's LEVEL is superseded — write `minor`, and here is the authority

⚠️ This is the single most important line in this order, because it is what parked this card for eight days and the reason is now stale.

On 2026-09-12 a seat held half 2 (comment 5646798571) with a correct reading at the time: item 3 asks for a major changeset, scripts/check-changeset-no-major.mjs refuses one, and the escape hatch would make this PR the one that cuts 18.0.0 — the unanswered A/B on #16929.

Both legs of that hold have since resolved, and this seat re-measured each one rather than inheriting it:

[finding] PageSchema.assignedProfiles is an authorable key named for the concept ADR-0090 D2 removed, and the alias map corrects an authored profiles: into it #16929 is closed completed (2026-09-14T00:03:49Z), landed by PR fix(spec): retire page.assignedProfiles and answer profiles: with the permission-set route #17835, merged at 2026-09-14T00:03:48Z — the same second.
PR fix(spec): retire page.assignedProfiles and answer profiles: with the permission-set route #17835 is the identical class to this one — retiring a published authorable key (page.assignedProfiles) with a retiredKey() tombstone and an ADR-0087 semantic entry — and its changeset, read first-hand from the PR's own diff, is:
```
---
'@objectstack/spec': minor
---

**BREAKING** — remove `page.assignedProfiles`, and answer `profiles:` / `assignedTo:` …
```
The convention was amended in writing before that. docs/adr/0087-metadata-protocol-upgrade-contract.md — 「Amended 2026-09-13 ([Decision] 两条裁决援引同一个 launch-window convention，却给出相反的 changeset 等级（minor vs major）—— 退役一个可写键到底发哪一级？ #18003) — the level half」, landed by PR docs(adr-0087): state the npm level half of the launch-window exemption #18027 — states: pre-GA, a metadata-facing retirement or break ships minor, carrying the **BREAKING** banner and its ADR-0087 disposition entry; an npm major is a planned act, ⛔ never a side effect of one retirement card.
A ruling applied that amendment to exactly this fork. [Decision] 两条裁决援引同一个 launch-window convention,却给出相反的 changeset 等级(minor vs major)(重建自 #18003) #18064 (「两条裁决援引同一个 launch-window convention,却给出相反的 changeset 等级」) closed completed on 2026-09-14T00:36Z with a director class-one self-adjudication naming the amendment as its authority, verbatim: "Ruling ② (List view navigation.view is declared in spec but resolves no form view — its only read lands it in the onNavigate navigation-MODE argument #16885 item 5, major) is superseded by that text; ruling ① ([finding] PageSchema.assignedProfiles is an authorable key named for the concept ADR-0090 D2 removed, and the alias map corrects an authored profiles: into it #16929, minor) stands."
The stack has not cut 18. Read at origin/main e3b3cdd2df3: packages/spec/package.json is 17.4.0 and PROTOCOL_VERSION is '17.0.0' at packages/spec/src/kernel/protocol-version.ts:18. The migration entries that landed for [finding] PageSchema.assignedProfiles is an authorable key named for the concept ADR-0090 D2 removed, and the alias map corrects an authored profiles: into it #16929 are numbered 18.* while the package stayed 17.x — which is the amendment working exactly as written.

⇒ Write '@objectstack/spec': minor with the **BREAKING** banner and the ADR-0087 disposition entry, numbered at protocol 18, in the shape PR #17835 shipped. ⛔ Do not write major, ⛔ do not apply allow-major, ⛔ do not reach for skip-changeset.

⭐ Falsify this before you rely on it. Read docs/adr/0087-metadata-protocol-upgrade-contract.md on YOUR base yourself and confirm the amendment is there in those words. If your reading contradicts any of the five points above, ⛔ STOP AND REPORT — do not pick a level. Two rounds on the sibling card #17518 were spent on exactly this class of 「ruling wording ↔ tree fact」 mismatch.

On `Clause-②: no` above, and the contract review that is owed anyway

These are two different things and this seat has conflated them before, on this very lane, this week:

The declaration is no, and it is no for a reason written in the lane charter, ⛔ not because this order is being conservative: 「收窄不触发条款②,但按 yes 申报恒不是错误」. Refusing three keys by name narrows the accepted set; it widens nothing. Ruling item 5 says the same.
The review is owed regardless. The enqueue gate has two independent limbs, and the PATH limb hits on packages/spec/src/** whatever the declaration says — this order's own --tier run prints the SUSPECT line for dashboard.zod.ts. ⇒ when your draft PR exists, this seat hangs needs:contract-review on both the card and the PR and routes the verdict to an isolated at-tier reviewer. That is seat work; ⛔ you do nothing about the label.

⭐ If your diff turns out to WIDEN anything — a new key, a loosened refine, a describe that changes what parses — say so and stop. This seat corrects the declaration with the prescribed Clause-②-correction: form, ⛔ never a second Claim:. An honest push-back costs nothing; a quiet one costs the landing.

What you are delivering

The describe text of ruling item 1, on ChartConfigSchema / DashboardWidgetSchema, citing ADR-0021.
The by-name refusals of ruling item 2 — xAxis, yAxis, series on a dataset-bound widget, and type on the widget — each refusal naming the dataset selection as the place the intent belongs.
The ADR-0087 retirement kit in PR fix(spec): retire page.assignedProfiles and answer profiles: with the permission-set route #17835's shape: the semantic migration entry with the structured TODO, registered in packages/spec/src/migrations/registry.ts, protocol 18.
The minor changeset with the **BREAKING** banner and a FROM → TO table.
Regenerated artefacts — run the repo's own generator, ⛔ never hand-edit a generated file.

Acceptance

⭐ A before/after accept-set probe on the four keys, on a dataset-bound widget AND on an inline-data widget, with exit codes captured before any pipe. The inline-data arm must still ACCEPT — ruling item 1 says the author's axes apply there, so a refusal that fires on both faces is a bug, not a stricter reading.
A lit control and a dark control on every absence claim. ⚠️ This card's own history is the reason: a citation was 「在它点名的 commit 上逐字精确,同时描述着两次重构之前的渲染器」.
Every gate from node scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs --commands --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack derived from the tree you are on, exit codes to a file, reconciled with --ran.
bash scripts/pm/os-verify-lock.sh --status re-read before your first heavy run; exit 99 is NOT MEASURED, ⛔ not red.
PR opened as a draft, first line Fixes #17385, with a line-initial Clause-②: line carrying whatever arm your measurement supports.

Charter increments for this round

⛔ Do not leave a second claim comment — this one is the identity. Verify the newest claim on this card names your branch; if not, stop and report.
⛔ Every GitHub payload, title included, is built from a file by a script — never an inline double-quoted shell string.
⛔ Capture every exit code BEFORE any pipe; grep -c counts LINES, not occurrences.
⭐ Every reading states its base sha and the clock it was read at. This order's readings were taken at 2026-09-20T10:55Z against origin/main = e3b3cdd2df3; if the base has moved when you start, re-take them — it moved four times inside this seat's previous round.
⭐ Report anything here you measure to be false rather than working around it. The single most load-bearing claim in this order — that item 3's level is minor, not major — is this seat's reading of four documents, and it is the one thing you should try hardest to break.

Generated by Claude Code

os-dev-report

{
  "issue": 17385,
  "status": "done",
  "branch": "claude/issue-17385-chartconfig-precedence-half-2",
  "pr": "https://github.com/objectstack-ai/objectstack/pull/19363",
  "head_sha": "ff7c8cdf5f7d4817d5ad15e307e60e6865056432",
  "session": "session_01LvwGppdonww4zGLWZo5rho",
  "premise_still_valid": true,
  "clause_2": "DECLARED yes (narrowing) on the PR; the card's claim says no. ⭐ THE CORRECTION IS OWED AND IT IS THE HEADLINE. The refusals narrow, as ruling item 5 and the claim both say — but implementing ruling item 2 FORCES exactly one widening, because ChartConfigSchema.type is REQUIRED. Before: a chartConfig with no `type` was refused as incomplete, on every face. Ruling item 2 refuses `type` on the widget; ruling item 1 says chartConfig still carries appearance there. Both hold only if absence becomes legal on that carrier, which retiredKey() (z.never().optional()) does. So `chartConfig: { title: 'Revenue' }` on a dashboard widget moves REFUSED -> ACCEPTED. ⛔ The alternative is not a narrower reading, it is a contradiction: leaving `type` required while refusing every value makes chartConfig UNAUTHORABLE on a dashboard widget, deleting the appearance channel ruling item 1 grants in the same sentence. `Clause-②: yes (narrowing)` is the spelling check-adr-0087-registration.mjs pins for a diff that widens AND narrows, and the gate read the narrowing arm (BREAKING+clause-②-narrowing). ⛔ I touched no label and no card declaration.",
  "summary": "Half 2 implemented as ruled (decision batch #121 item 1, C+D). The describe text on ChartConfigSchema and on the widget's chartConfig states the ADR-0021 ownership split; the four structure keys (type, xAxis, yAxis, series) are refused BY NAME on a new per-carrier DashboardWidgetChartConfigSchema (ChartConfigSchema.extend with retiredKey tombstones, the ReportChartSchema spelling), each refusal naming the dataset selection the intent belongs in. The base shape is untouched, so the inline-data react ObjectChart tier and ReportChartSchema keep all four keys — measured, not assumed. Full ADR-0087 kit in PR #17835's shape: D2 conversion dashboard-widget-chart-config-structure-removed (dashboards only), D3 semantic entry dashboard-widget-chart-config-structure-refused, four RETIRED_KEYS_BY_MAJOR[18] entries, all via gen:migration-registry. Liveness rows kept and regraded dead (the tombstone route's discipline). minor changeset with the BREAKING banner, a FROM -> TO table and the adr-0087 disposition marker. Five example dashboards, four metadata-protocol fixtures and one unauthorable-columns pin migrated; lint's chart-config-missing rule WITHDRAWN because its hint taught metadata the schema now refuses.",
  "level_authority_recheck": "⭐ ALL FIVE POINTS OF THE ORDER'S minor ARGUMENT HOLD ON MY BASE (e3b3cdd2df3, read 2026-09-20T10:57Z-11:00Z). I tried to break this and could not. (1) ADR-0087 docs/adr/0087-metadata-protocol-upgrade-contract.md:388 carries 「Amended 2026-09-13 (#18003) — the level half」 verbatim, with 'Pre-GA, a metadata-facing retirement or break ships `minor`' and 'An npm `major` is a planned act ... never a side effect of one retirement card'. (2) #16929 closed completed 2026-09-14T00:03:49Z; PR #17835 merged 2026-09-14T00:03:48Z. (3) PR #17835's changeset read first-hand from its own diff: `'@objectstack/spec': minor` with the BREAKING banner — identical retirement class. (4) #18064 closed completed 2026-09-14T00:36:28Z carrying the director class-one adjudication verbatim: 'Ruling ② (#16885 item 5, `major`) is superseded by that text; ruling ① (#16929, `minor`) stands.' (5) packages/spec/package.json is 17.4.0 and PROTOCOL_VERSION is '17.0.0' at protocol-version.ts:18. ⭐ ONE ADDITION the order did not carry, from the same amendment's third bullet: 'A tombstone names the npm release it ships in, ⛔ never the protocol major.' So the four tombstones say `@objectstack/spec 17.5.0` (the live convention — metrics.zod.ts and tracing.zod.ts already use 17.5.0), while the migration entries are numbered at protocol 18. check-changeset-no-major exit 0; check-adr-0087-registration exit 0 reading [BREAKING+clause-②-narrowing].",
  "tests": "ACCEPT-SET PROBE, before/after, exits captured before any pipe, run against the built dist at each state. 14 documents across 3 carriers. Dataset-bound widget: all four keys ACCEPT -> REFUSE, each at its own path (chartConfig.type / .xAxis / .yAxis / .series). INLINE-DATA ARM UNCHANGED in every row — ChartConfigSchema standalone (the react ObjectChart contract, react-blocks sets schema: ChartConfigSchema and publishes all four in dataProps) accepts type, type+xAxis, type+yAxis, type+series and all four at once, before and after. ReportChartSchema unchanged. THE ONE MOVEMENT THE OTHER WAY: 'appearance only, NO type' REFUSE -> ACCEPT (the widening above). ⚠️ PREMISE CORRECTION ON THE ACCEPTANCE LIST'S WORDING: there is no such thing as an 'inline-data WIDGET' — DashboardWidgetSchema.dataset is REQUIRED, so every dashboard widget is dataset-bound by construction. The inline-data face is the react-tier CHART, which is how the ruling itself words it ('On an inline-data chart'). Probed that face instead; a refusal firing on it would have been the bug the acceptance list warns about, and it does not fire. REVERSE VERIFICATION (one-shot, on the committed tree, trap on EXIT INT TERM with absolute paths): predicted 'turns red', observed 'turns red'. Mutation = drop the xAxis tombstone; proved ON DISK by blob hash, not by an editor exit code — anchor occurrences 1 -> 0, injected marker 0 -> 1, blob 919d93f07fa8 -> 1f57132a1ace. MUTATED exit 1, 9 failed / 6 passed. RESTORE via `git checkout HEAD -- PATH` (never bare): blob back to 919d93f07fa8, `git diff HEAD` empty, RESTORED exit 0, 15 passed. No dist leg: the pin imports ./dashboard.zod from source inside its own package, so there is no exports resolution to preflight. SUITES: spec 502 files/14672 tests exit 0; lint 106/3996 exit 0; metadata-protocol 182/2596 exit 0; dogfood 137/1103 exit 0 (the retirement's default consumer radius, run despite the import graph). TYPECHECK: @objectstack/spec, @objectstack/lint and all three example apps, exit 0. VALIDATE (the parse door) on all three example apps, exit 0. ESLINT: the WHOLE repo, `eslint --no-inline-config --format json .` — 6932 files judged, 0 messages, exit 0. Not a narrowed run, so no narrowing claim is owed. GATES: dispatch-gates.mjs --commands derived 116 families from MY tree (not the order's list); every exit captured before any pipe into a file and reconciled with --ran in the `COMMAND :: exit CODE` form the tool demands (placeholder words: the tool's own spelling uses angle brackets, which this surface eats). 110 exit 0. 6 exit 3 = PREREQUISITE NOT MET in a partially built tree, NOT MEASURED not red: check:doc-formula-expressions, check:doc-security-posture, check:docs-transcript-drift, check:dual-build-cjs-loads, check:lean-entry-closure, check:type-check-debt — each needs a full repo build, which is CI's run. check:skill-examples first exited 1 saying 'packages/client-react/dist holds no .d.ts — build first'; built that closure and re-ran: exit 0. check:durability-log-level entered the family on the final head (the only delta across three derivations) and was run separately: exit 0. The ratchet family (nul-bytes, liveness, generated, cross-package-test-inputs, type-check-coverage, pm-widening-tells) was re-run ON THE FINAL COMMIT ff7c8cdf5f7 after the merge: all exit 0. CONTROLS: control-char sweep over all 81 changed paths, grep exit 1 (no hits) captured before any pipe, with a lit control (chartConfig in dashboard.zod.ts = 6) and a dark control (zzchartConfigzz = 0) in the same run. Open-PR busy-path map re-taken MYSELF at 2026-09-20T11:58Z over all 34 open PRs / 382 file rows: firing control packages/spec/src/migrations/registry.ts resolves to #18319 #19090 #19302, dark control packages/spec/src/zzz-no-such.zod.ts resolves to nothing. MERGE: origin/main (74fb2f7a808) merged through scripts/pm/os-regen-merge.sh — merge COMMITTED BEFORE regeneration, then rebuild + check:generated --fix as its own commit. Registries diffed against origin/main afterwards: 0 entry ids lost, exactly the 2 this PR adds, 0 conversionIds lost.",
  "door_verdicts_moved": "⚠️ A CONSEQUENCE WORTH THE SEAT'S EYES, recorded rather than smuggled. chart.zod.ts's header claimed a BFS from every metadata root reaches all five chart shapes. Two verdicts moved and both are re-pinned in chart.test.ts and amended in the header, never relaxed. ChartConfigSchema -> 'derived-clone': no root reaches the base shape itself any more, because both carriers are .extend() clones (they carry its strictness and error map, so it is still a door in the testkit's own vocabulary). ChartAxisSchema -> 'unreachable', and this one is a change of FACT: the widget clone tombstones xAxis/yAxis and ReportChartSchema re-declares both as dataset-name strings, so NO authoring path from any metadata root parses an axis OBJECT. Its remaining carrier is the react tier's published dataProps — a DECLARATION, not a parse — so the #4583 question ('is this strict shape gating anything?') is genuinely open for that one shape. ⛔ I did not answer it by weakening the assertion; it is in open_questions.",
  "capability_loss": "⚠️ RULED, NOT INCIDENTAL, and stated so it is not rediscovered as a bug: a dataset-bound widget can no longer author a combo chart's per-series mark (series[].type), because the whole series key is refused and no other channel carries it on that face. The four keys also carried presentation alongside the binding — axis titles, number formats, bounds, grid lines, log scale, per-series labels/colours/stacking — and that goes with them; a dataset-bound chart takes it from the dataset's own dimension and measure declarations, with `colors` left as the palette channel. The showcase's combo_count_vs_progress widget records the loss at its own site, the D3 acceptanceCriteria states it, and the changeset states it. The four-facet block on this card had this cost on the table (option B was rejected partly FOR it) and C+D was taken anyway.",
  "mcp_calls": "0 — no MCP GitHub tool was called, read or write. Every GitHub read and both writes went through the REST proxy with curl.",
  "api_writes": "2 — POST /repos/objectstack-ai/objectstack/pulls (the draft PR, payload built from a file by a script, never an inline shell string) and POST /repos/objectstack-ai/objectstack/issues/17385/comments (this report). NO LABEL WRITE WAS MADE and none was owed: the order names only needs:contract-review, which it assigns explicitly to the seat ('that is seat work; ⛔ you do nothing about the label'), and it named no other. The PR-side labels on the sibling precedents (#17835, #17861: documentation/size/m/tests/tooling/protocol:ui) are a labeler workflow's, not a dev's. git push is not a REST write.",
  "open_questions": [
    {
      "question": "ChartAxisSchema now reaches no metadata root (measured: verdict 'unreachable' where it was 'direct'). Its .strict() posture was justified by that reachability. Does the shape keep its strictness, and does the #4583 doctrine ('no door ⇒ reclassify, do not tighten') now apply to it?",
      "options": [
        "A — leave it exactly as it is and let the pin carry the fact. Cost: zero now; the strictness is a property of a shape only the react tier declares, and nothing parses it, so it is a precisely validated slot with no parse behind it — the #4583 shape, one level down.",
        "B — file it as its own card against packages/lint: make the react-page publish gate PARSE ChartConfigSchema whole instead of parsing only ChartDrillDownSchema and ChartAggregateSchema by name. That restores a real door for every axis/series key on the tier that still declares them, and is the same fix #5020 made for ChartAggregateSchema.",
        "C — retire ChartAxisSchema's strictness. ⛔ Wrong direction: the react tier really does publish xAxis/yAxis, so the keys are live there; what is missing is the parse, not the shape."
      ],
      "recommendation": "B, as its own card, not this PR. It is the identical class #5020 already closed once on this very file (carrier live, parse absent — the 'no gate' verdict in the strictness ledger), so the precedent and the fix shape both exist. A now, B next; ⛔ never C."
    },
    {
      "question": "chartConfig.type on a dataset-bound widget is DEAD (half 1 measured it: nothing on that face ever read it), so stripping it from a stored widget is LOSSLESS — unlike xAxis/yAxis/series, whose strip drops authored presentation. Should `type` have had its own D2-only treatment so a stored widget carrying only `type` heals silently rather than being refused?",
      "options": [
        "A — as shipped: one D2 conversion covering all four, paired with one D3 semantic TODO. A stored widget is healed on rehydration either way; the TODO covers the three lossy keys and names `type` alongside them.",
        "B — split: a D2-only lossless entry for `type` and a separate D2+D3 pair for the three lossy keys. Buys a more precise upgrade guide (an operator with only `type` is told nothing is lost) at the cost of a second conversion id, a second fixture and a second registry row."
      ],
      "recommendation": "A, which is what shipped and what the dispatch named ('the semantic migration entry with the structured TODO', singular). B's precision is real but small, and the fixture-disjointness contract makes a second conversion over the same key set the more fragile shape. Raised only because the ruling's own words ('type removed likewise') could be read either way."
    }
  ],
  "out_of_scope_findings": [
    "to file (3 classes, dedupe words: spec-property-retirement changeset major minor ADR-0087 level amendment playbook): `.claude/skills/spec-property-retirement/SKILL.md` §4 面清单 instructs 'Changeset —— `@objectstack/spec` 用 `major`'. ADR-0087's 2026-09-13 amendment (landed by PR #18027) and the #18064 director adjudication both supersede that: pre-GA a metadata-facing retirement ships `minor`. Class (b), violating a declared contract, contract text quoted. The playbook is the FIRST thing a retirement round reads, so it sends every future round at the level check-changeset-no-major.mjs refuses — loud, but a wasted lap each time, and this card already lost eight days to that exact fork. ⛔ Not filed from here and not fixed here: `.claude/**` is a Tier S governed surface and filing is the seat's write. 承接者: this seat, on the next retirement dispatch.",
    "noted, not filed: `packages/lint`'s chart-field-unknown still fires on a legacy document carrying the four keys, which is right — but the parse door now refuses those documents outright, so whether the advisory is still REACHABLE depends on whether lint runs before or after the parse on each entry path. Not measured here; the hints were corrected to say delete-and-migrate either way, so the rule is honest whichever answer holds. 承接者: the next card on validate-widget-bindings.ts, whose rule inventory this belongs to.",
    "noted, not filed: `pnpm --filter PKG build --concurrency=2` forwards the flag into each package's own script, and packages/cli's shell-`if` build script then dies with `sh: 1: Syntax error: word unexpected` — a build that fails for a reason with nothing to do with the code. Hit once this round; worked around with --workspace-concurrency=2 placed BEFORE the filters, which is the documented spelling. No repo defect: it is a caller-side usage error already written down as a toolchain trap. 承接者: 无."
  ]
}

Generated by Claude Code

Clause-②-correction: 5749354675

⛔ This is an amendment to that claim, ⛔ not a second claim. Everything else in 5749354675 stands; one line changes.

Clause-②: no → Clause-②: yes (narrowing).

Written at 2026-09-20T13:54Z by session_01LvwGppdonww4zGLWZo5rho (domain:spec#1). The dispatched round pushed back on the declaration exactly as the order told it to, and it is right.

Why the original `no` was wrong

The claim reasoned that refusing four keys can only narrow, and cited the lane charter's 「收窄不触发条款②」 plus ruling item 5's own Clause-②: no. That reasoning misses a forced consequence of ruling item 2, which this seat did not see before dispatch.

ChartConfigSchema.type is REQUIRED. Re-measured first-hand at 2026-09-20T13:54Z on origin/main, packages/spec/src/ui/chart.zod.ts:608:

type: ChartTypeSchema,

No .optional(), no .default(). Lit control: 35 .optional() occurrences elsewhere in that same file, so the instrument does see optionality where it exists. Dark control: a fabricated key resolves 0 times.

⇒ the before/after on a dataset-bound widget:

author input	before	after
`chartConfig: { title: 'Revenue' }` — appearance only, no `type`	REFUSED (incomplete: `type` missing)	ACCEPTED

retiredKey() is z.never().optional(), so tombstoning type makes its absence legal on that carrier. That is a widening — the same author input that was rejected before now parses. ⇒ the diff narrows AND widens, and yes (narrowing) is the spelling check-adr-0087-registration.mjs pins for exactly that shape; the gate read the narrowing arm ([BREAKING+clause-②-narrowing]) and exits 0.

⭐ And the alternative is not a narrower reading — it is a contradiction

Leaving type required while refusing every value for it would make chartConfig unauthorable on a dashboard widget: no document could satisfy a key that must be present and must not be present. That deletes the appearance channel ruling item 1 grants in the same sentence («chartConfig carries appearance (title, subtitle, description, colors, height, legend, data labels, annotations, interaction)»). ⇒ implementing items 1 and 2 together forces the widening; it is not a choice the round made.

What this does and does not disturb

⛔ Ruling item 5 is not overturned. It declared Clause-②: no before anyone had implemented item 2 against a required type. This is the measurement that declaration invited, and the enqueue gate reads the diff, not the declaration.
⛔ The ruling's direction is untouched — C+D stands, the four keys are still refused by name on the dataset-bound carrier, and the inline-data react-tier chart still accepts all four (the round probed that face and no refusal fires on it).
⚠️ A premise in the order's acceptance list was wrong and the round said so: there is no 「inline-data widget」 — DashboardWidgetSchema.dataset is REQUIRED, so every dashboard widget is dataset-bound by construction. The inline-data face is the react-tier CHART, which is how the ruling itself words it. The round probed the right face.

⇒ needs:contract-review is hung on this card and on PR #19363 in the same act as this comment, and the verdict routes to an isolated reviewer at the contract-review tier.

Generated by Claude Code

Seat record — at-tier review PASS, and PR #19363 is ⛔ GOVERNED. This seat cannot land it.

Written at 2026-09-20T14:10Z by session_01LvwGppdonww4zGLWZo5rho (domain:spec#1). Head fa534bd47a1dec4836d87c8e69c490a4581f7220.

① Review of record — PASS

Comment 5750304095 on the PR thread, isolated, at tier. Verified afterwards by counting the harness-stamped per-message model field in the reviewing transcript, ⛔ never the dispatch parameter: 127 at tier / 127 total / 0 off-tier, dark control 0. Adopted verbatim.

It re-derived the clause-② correction independently and reached the same place by a stronger route: a source-level probe on DashboardWidgetSchema at base versus head showed chartConfig: { title } moving REFUSE→ACCEPT and {} moving REFUSE→ACCEPT, while the four keys move ACCEPT→REFUSE at their own paths. ⭐ It then did what this seat had only argued: it enumerated the third options — .omit, .default, keep-required, a new key — and found each either reproduces the widening, violates ruling item 2, or violates ruling item 1. ⇒ the widening is forced, yes (narrowing) is right, and the declaration does not move again.

⛔⛔ The landing block — measured, not judged

node scripts/pm/check-governed-merges.mjs --pr 19363 exits 3:

⛔ GOVERNED — a human merge is the review record for this PR (#9495 regime).
No seat flips it ready, enqueues it, or arms auto-merge (AGENTS.md Prime Directive #14).
One hit governs the whole PR — 「混合 diff 一条命中即整 PR 分叉」; proportion is not a question.
⚖️ landing tier: H(人合) — the maintainer's hand, or an authorized APPROVED review (GOVERNED_APPROVERS) and then the owning seat lands it.
skills/** ×1 — the published skills catalog

skills/objectstack-ui/references/react-blocks.md

One path of 39. The governed-surface definition is docs/adr/** + .claude/** + skills/** + docs/NORTH-STAR.md (SKILL.md:605), and skills/** is in it.

⭐ The generated-surface exception was checked and did NOT lift it, in the gate's own words:

the tree under test modifies the generator this exception trusts — the path stays governed (co-edited here: packages/spec/scripts/liveness/check-liveness.test.ts, packages/spec/scripts/liveness/undrilled-containers.baseline.json). The recompute would run this PR's own generator, so it cannot certify this PR; land the generator change and the artifact regeneration as separate PRs.

⇒ 「it is only a regenerated file」 is ⛔ not available as an argument here, and the gate says why rather than leaving it to taste. ⚠️ Governed Surface Queue Guard reads success on this head — that guard checks the queue leg, ⛔ not the landing tier, so its green is ⛔ not a clearance.

⇒ This PR waits on the maintainer, and the card says so rather than the seat quietly holding it

⛔ This seat will not flip it ready, will not enqueue it, and will not arm auto-merge — that is a red line, ⛔ not a judgement call, and ⛔ not something a PASS at tier overrides. ⛔ This seat also cannot approve it: 「永不以任一账号对受管面 PR 提交批准 review」.

Two routes exist and both are the maintainer's to pick, ⛔ neither is chosen here:

the maintainer's hand on the merge, or an authorized APPROVED review from GOVERNED_APPROVERS, after which this seat lands it;
a follow-up round splitting skills/objectstack-ui/references/react-blocks.md out, so the generator change and the artifact regeneration land as separate PRs — which is the gate's own suggestion.

③ CI, and the one re-run spent

Spec property liveness read failure. Diagnosed by the review as an infra fault: pnpm install ECONNRESET fetching better-sqlite3 node-gyp headers at 2026-09-20T13:55:18Z, before any gate body ran, with local check:liveness exit 0. ⇒ that is the one shape the discipline allows a re-run for (「died before any test body ran」), and this seat spent its single re-run at 2026-09-20T14:10Z (rerun-failed-jobs, HTTP 201). ⛔ A second failure is real and ⛔ will not be re-run.

Seven other checks were still in_progress at that reading. ⛔ Nothing here is a landing clearance; the block above stands whatever CI settles at.

Routed, not acted on

The dev's two open questions — ChartAxisSchema's strictness now that no metadata root parses it, and whether type warranted a D2-only lossless entry — the reviewer confirms both are correctly deferred and they stay this seat's to route, ⛔ not answered here.
objectui's mergeAuthoredPresentation path becomes metadata-unreachable and its DatasetWidget.comboPresentation.test.tsx authors keys this PR refuses ⇒ that is objectui#4044's half, in the sibling repo.
9 pre-existing removed in @objectstack/spec 18 prose lines are ⛔ not this PR's ([finding] Six retiredKey() tombstones tell authors a key "was removed in @objectstack/spec 18" — a version that does not exist; the package is 17.4.0 and these ship on the launch-window minor route, where npm major and protocol major decouple #18021); the PR adds none.
The retirement playbook contradiction the round found is filed as The spec-property-retirement playbook still instructs a major changeset, which ADR-0087's 2026-09-13 amendment superseded and check-changeset-no-major refuses #19366, with both texts re-verified first-hand before filing.

Generated by Claude Code

Clause-②-correction: 5749354675
Clause-②: yes (narrowing)

⛔ This is a repair of the repair, ⛔ not a second claim and ⛔ not a new correction. Comment 5750235692 corrected the same claim and said the right thing in prose that no reader can parse; this restates it in the readable form. Written at 2026-09-20T14:18Z by session_01LvwGppdonww4zGLWZo5rho (domain:spec#1).

What was wrong with `5750235692`

check-clause2-carriers.mjs --pair 19363 named it exactly:

ℹ️ C2-CORRECTION — the correction comment Clause-②-correction: 5749354675 carries no readable declaration; the nearest thing in it is 「Clause-②: no → Clause-②: yes (narrowing).」. A correction is read by the SAME reader as a claim.

⇒ the declaration was written inline and decorated, so the marker reader saw no Clause-②: line at all and the card kept reading no. The tool then filed C5 — 「declares Clause-②: no while its diff carries 9 widening tell(s)」 — which is the card's declaration being stale, ⛔ not a new finding about the diff.

⭐ This is the seat's own repeat failure family, in its sixth recorded shape: a correctly spelled declaration that is not line-initial reads as ABSENT. Card #18831 exists about it. The substance of 5750235692 was right and is unchanged; only its legibility was broken.

The declaration, unchanged in substance

ChartConfigSchema.type is REQUIRED (packages/spec/src/ui/chart.zod.ts:608 at base, :675 at head — no .optional(), no .default(); lit control 35 .optional() in that same file, dark control 0). retiredKey() is z.never().optional(), so tombstoning type makes its ABSENCE legal and chartConfig: { title } on a dataset-bound widget moves REFUSED → ACCEPTED. The diff therefore narrows AND widens.

The at-tier review (5750304095) re-derived this independently and went further than this seat had: it enumerated the third options — .omit, .default, keep-required, a new key — and found each either reproduces the widening, violates ruling item 2, or violates ruling item 1. ⇒ the widening is forced, and the declaration does not move again.

⚠️ Two rows `--pair` still reports, both PRE-DATING this round — recorded, ⛔ not repaired here

C8 — os-bill holds two LIVE claim comments on this card (5618981311 2026-09-10, 5646463040 2026-09-12), the second written under the first and un-retracted. ⛔ Not this seat's to retract.
C9 — two authors hold LIVE claims with no readable Release: between them. A release did happen: comment 5647268405 released the card and cleared the assignee, and 5671158986 is the unlock scan that returned it to pm:queue. Neither carries a line-initial Release:, so the marker reader cannot see it — the same legibility family as the defect this comment repairs, one rung up.

⇒ --pair 19363 will stay exit 4 on C8 and C9 after this comment. ⛔ That is a真实 reading, not noise, and whoever lands this PR should know the pair is adverse for claim-hygiene reasons that ⛔ have nothing to do with the diff or its review.

Generated by Claude Code

Clause-②-correction: 5749354675
Session: session_01LvwGppdonww4zGLWZo5rho
Clause-②: yes (narrowing)

⛔ Not a claim. This supersedes 5750235692 and 5750363914, which said the same thing in shapes the reader could not use. Written at 2026-09-20T14:19Z by domain:spec#1.

Substance, unchanged across all three: ChartConfigSchema.type is REQUIRED (packages/spec/src/ui/chart.zod.ts:608 at base, :675 at head — no .optional(), no .default(); lit control 35 .optional() in that file, dark control 0). retiredKey() is z.never().optional(), so tombstoning type makes its ABSENCE legal: chartConfig: { title } on a dataset-bound widget moves REFUSED → ACCEPTED. The diff narrows AND widens, so the arm is narrowing and the declaration is yes.

The at-tier review 5750304095 re-derived it and enumerated the third options (.omit, .default, keep-required, a new key) — each reproduces the widening, violates ruling item 2, or violates ruling item 1. ⇒ forced, not chosen.

⭐ Three attempts, three different legibility failures — recorded because that is the point

attempt	what the reader said
`5750235692`	the declaration was inline and decorated ⇒ 「carries no readable declaration」
`5750363914`	line-initial `Clause-②:` present, but 「carries no `Session:` line, so it does not say whose act it is」 ⇒ IGNORED
this one	all three lines line-initial, in the prescribed order

Every attempt was substantively right and mechanically invisible. This is card #18831's family reached three more times in one repair, by the seat that has been warned about it most — ⛔ and the lesson is not 「be careful」, it is copy the shape the tool prints, ⛔ never compose it from memory. The tool named the missing line both times; the first fix read the diagnosis and still re-composed the rest by hand.

⚠️ Two rows `--pair` will still report — PRE-DATING this round, ⛔ not repaired here

C8 — os-bill holds two LIVE claims on this card (5618981311, 5646463040), the second written under the first, un-retracted. ⛔ Not this seat's to retract.
C9 — two authors hold LIVE claims with no readable Release: between. A release DID happen (5647268405 cleared the assignee; 5671158986 is the unlock scan) but neither carries a line-initial Release: — the same legibility family, one rung up.

⇒ --pair 19363 stays exit 4 on C8 and C9. ⛔ A real reading, not noise, and ⛔ nothing to do with the diff or its review.

Generated by Claude Code

Landing record — PR #19363 MERGED by the maintainer's hand. Card closed `completed`; `pm:dispatched` stripped in a separate act at 2026-09-20T14:55Z and read back.

Written at 2026-09-20T14:55Z by session_01LvwGppdonww4zGLWZo5rho (domain:spec#1). ⭐ Half 2 of this card is done; half 1 landed on 2026-09-12 as PR #17861.

MERGED, judged on the tree

⛔ Not the API's merged field. On a freshly fetched origin/main:

squash 8271c814253fdd2629d3b608b73de14efb67f168 — fix(spec)!: a dataset-bound dashboard widget owns appearance, the dataset owns structure (#19363).

grep -F '(#19363)' over 500 subjects reads 1; LIT control (#19345) reads 1; DARK control (#99999) reads 0. Merged at 2026-09-20T14:47:59Z; card closed completed at 2026-09-20T14:48:01Z.

⛔ This seat did NOT land it, and that is the record

check-governed-merges.mjs --pr 19363 exited 3: one path of 39 — skills/objectstack-ui/references/react-blocks.md — put the whole PR on the H(人合) tier, and the generated-surface exception did not lift it, because the tree under test modifies the generator that exception trusts.

⇒ this seat did not flip it ready, did not enqueue it, did not arm auto-merge and did not approve it. os-zhuang reviewed it at 2026-09-20T14:18:31Z, flipped it ready, armed auto-merge, and it merged under that authority. ⛔ Prime Directive #14 held; the block was cleared by an authorized party, ⛔ not routed around.

The three checks this seat DID owe

PASS — comment 5750304095, isolated at tier on head fa534bd47a1dec4836d87c8e69c490a4581f7220; tier verified from the reviewing transcript's harness-stamped per-message model field, 127 / 127, dark control 0.
Carriers — cleared from both limbs at 2026-09-20T14:17:33Z / 2026-09-20T14:17:35Z.
CI — 35 latest-per-name, 0 not green. Spec property liveness had read failure; the review diagnosed it as pnpm install ECONNRESET on better-sqlite3 node-gyp headers before any gate body ran, which is the one shape the discipline allows a re-run for. This seat spent its single re-run and it went green. ⛔ A second failure would have been real.

⭐⭐ The declaration moved, and the dev is why

The claim declared Clause-②: no. The dispatched round pushed back and was right: ChartConfigSchema.type is REQUIRED, so tombstoning it with retiredKey() (z.never().optional()) makes its absence legal and chartConfig: { title } on a dataset-bound widget moves REFUSED → ACCEPTED. The at-tier review then enumerated the third options — .omit, .default, keep-required, a new key — and found each either reproduces the widening, violates ruling item 2, or violates ruling item 1. ⇒ the widening is forced, not chosen.

⚠️ Correcting that took this seat three attempts, each substantively right and mechanically invisible — 5750235692 (declaration inline and decorated ⇒ unreadable), 5750363914 (line-initial but no Session: ⇒ IGNORED), 5750367821 (all three lines line-initial ⇒ read, C5 cleared). Card #18831's family, reached three more times in one repair by the seat warned about it most. The lesson recorded there: copy the shape the tool prints, ⛔ never re-compose it from memory — the first fix read the diagnosis and still hand-assembled the rest.

⚠️ --pair 19363 remains exit 4 on C8 (os-bill holds two live claims from 2026-09-10/12) and C9 (no readable Release: between two claim holders — a release did happen at 5647268405 / 5671158986, in a spelling the marker reader cannot see). ⛔ Both pre-date this round and ⛔ neither is this seat's to repair: writing a release on another seat's behalf is exactly what the tool forbids.

A ruled capability loss, ⛔ not incidental

A dataset-bound widget can no longer author a combo chart's per-series mark (series[].type), and the four keys also carried presentation — axis titles, number formats, bounds, grid lines, log scale, per-series labels/colours/stacking. The four-facet block had this cost on the table (option B was rejected partly for it) and C+D was taken anyway. It is stated in five places: the showcase widget, the D3 acceptanceCriteria, the liveness note, the changeset's bolded 「What this costs」 sentence — which ships in CHANGELOG — and dashboards.mdx.

Routed, ⛔ not answered here

The two open questions stay open and stay the seat's: ChartAxisSchema's strictness now that no metadata root parses it (verdict measured as moving direct → unreachable), and whether type warranted a D2-only lossless entry. The reviewer confirmed both are correctly deferred.
objectui's mergeAuthoredPresentation path becomes metadata-unreachable and its DatasetWidget.comboPresentation.test.tsx authors keys this PR now refuses ⇒ objectui#4044's half, in the sibling repo.
The spec-property-retirement playbook still instructs a major changeset, which ADR-0087's 2026-09-13 amendment superseded and check-changeset-no-major refuses #19366 — the retirement playbook still instructs a major changeset, superseded by ADR-0087's 2026-09-13 amendment. ⭐ That is the exact fork this card lost eight days to, and the playbook is the first thing a retirement round reads.
9 pre-existing removed in @objectstack/spec 18 prose lines are ⛔ not this PR's ([finding] Six retiredKey() tombstones tell authors a key "was removed in @objectstack/spec 18" — a version that does not exist; the package is 17.4.0 and these ship on the launch-window minor route, where npm major and protocol major decouple #18021); it adds none.

Generated by Claude Code

The two open questions, routed — this card's closing act

Both were raised by the implementing round in 5750130509 and confirmed correctly deferred by the contract-review round. Routing them was this seat's, and here is where each landed. Read on origin/main = 61dd96f227e at 2026-09-20T15:40Z, which carries this card's own squash 8271c814253.

1. `ChartAxisSchema`'s strictness now that no metadata root parses it → filed as #19393

Measured rather than taken on the round's word:

packages/spec/src/ui/chart.zod.ts:187 — export const ChartAxisSchema = lazySchema(() => strictObject(. The shape is strict.
packages/lint/src/validate-react-page-props.ts — the react-page publish gate — safeParses exactly two chart schemas: ChartDrillDownSchema at line 366 and ChartAggregateSchema at line 463. Over all of packages/lint/src: ChartAxisSchema 0 files, ChartConfigSchema 0 in source (comment-only in validate-chart-bindings.ts), against a lit control of ChartAggregateSchema at 3 files / 8 hits and a dark control ChartZZZQSchema at 0.

⇒ the keys are live on the react tier and nothing parses them. #19393 carries it, ungraded and unrouted beyond domain:spec.

One thing the routing turned up that the round could not have known: chart.zod.ts's own header points this open question at THIS card, which closed today. Line 44 reads that the .strict() question is "genuinely open for this one shape and recorded on #17385". #19393 names that dangling pointer and asks for it to be repointed as part of whatever lands there.

2. Whether `type` warranted a D2-only lossless entry → no card: the premise does not hold on the landed text

The round asked whether a stored widget carrying only type is told, wrongly, that it lost presentation. Measured on the shipped entries:

There is not one D2 conversion covering all four keys. There are four, one per key, 18.ui__DashboardWidgetChartConfig__{type,xAxis,yAxis,series}.ts, all added by this card's squash.
The single D3 semantic entry, 18.dashboard-widget-chart-config-structure-refused.ts, already separates the lossless key from the lossy three in its own words, at lines 18–20: "chartConfig.type becomes the widget's type (the chart family has always been the widget's — the dashboard renderer maps the widget type to the chart family and never read the chart config's)."
What it names as lost, at lines 70–74, is "per-series labels/colours/mark types" and the combo chart authored through series[].type — not type.

⇒ an operator whose stored widget carries only chartConfig.type reads, in the shipped guide, that the key is subsumed by the widget's own type and that the renderer never read it. That is exactly the precision option B would have bought, and it shipped inside option A. Filing a card to add it would be filing a card to add something already there.

⛔ This disposition is a measurement, not a ruling: it says the shipped text already states the distinction, not that a two-conversion split would have been wrong. If the maintainer reads the ruling's "type removed likewise" as demanding a separate conversion id and registry row, this reopens — and the four per-key D2 entries mean only the D3 side would move.

What is left on this card

Nothing. It is closed completed, pm:dispatched is off, the landing record is 5750557775, and both deferred questions now have a named home — #19393 for the first, the shipped text for the second.

Generated by Claude Code

fix(spec)!: a dataset-bound dashboard widget owns appearance, the dat…

spec: dashboard.json liveness row for widgets.chartConfig overstates its evidence, and the protocol must state whether an authored chartConfig axis or the dataset-derived one wins (ruling on objectui#4044) #17385

Description

Two halves, one card

Acceptance

Activity

os-bill commented on Sep 12, 2026

os-bill commented on Sep 12, 2026

os-bill commented on Sep 12, 2026

Half 2 is ruled, and it is held — on the same unanswered question that parked PR #17835, ⛔ not on anything this seat can clear

⇒ dispatching it today produces a second PR parked on the same wall

⚠️ One thing for whoever dispatches half 2, recorded not resolved

What half 1 left standing

os-bill commented on Sep 12, 2026

半 1 已落地并按内容核实;半 2 转 pm:blocked

os-warren commented on Sep 14, 2026

Unlock scan — released pm:blocked → pm:queue. Both release double-checks passed, and both readings are below.

What the next holder inherits — half 1 is DONE, ⛔ do not redo it

os-litant commented on Sep 20, 2026

⭐ This is HALF 2 only. Half 1 landed on 2026-09-12 — ⛔ do not redo it

⭐ The direction is RULED — ⛔ this card does NOT carry options

⭐ Item 3's LEVEL is superseded — write minor, and here is the authority

On Clause-②: no above, and the contract review that is owed anyway

What you are delivering

Acceptance

Charter increments for this round

os-litant commented on Sep 20, 2026

os-litant commented on Sep 20, 2026

Why the original no was wrong

⭐ And the alternative is not a narrower reading — it is a contradiction

What this does and does not disturb

os-litant commented on Sep 20, 2026

Seat record — at-tier review PASS, and PR #19363 is ⛔ GOVERNED. This seat cannot land it.

① Review of record — PASS

⛔⛔ The landing block — measured, not judged

⇒ This PR waits on the maintainer, and the card says so rather than the seat quietly holding it

③ CI, and the one re-run spent

Routed, not acted on

os-litant commented on Sep 20, 2026

What was wrong with 5750235692

The declaration, unchanged in substance

⚠️ Two rows --pair still reports, both PRE-DATING this round — recorded, ⛔ not repaired here

os-litant commented on Sep 20, 2026

⭐ Three attempts, three different legibility failures — recorded because that is the point

⚠️ Two rows --pair will still report — PRE-DATING this round, ⛔ not repaired here

os-litant commented on Sep 20, 2026

Landing record — PR #19363 MERGED by the maintainer's hand. Card closed completed; pm:dispatched stripped in a separate act at 2026-09-20T14:55Z and read back.

MERGED, judged on the tree

⛔ This seat did NOT land it, and that is the record

The three checks this seat DID owe

⭐⭐ The declaration moved, and the dev is why

A ruled capability loss, ⛔ not incidental

Routed, ⛔ not answered here

os-litant commented on Sep 20, 2026

The two open questions, routed — this card's closing act

1. ChartAxisSchema's strictness now that no metadata root parses it → filed as #19393

2. Whether type warranted a D2-only lossless entry → no card: the premise does not hold on the landed text

What is left on this card

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions

spec: `dashboard.json` liveness row for `widgets.chartConfig` overstates its evidence, and the protocol must state whether an authored `chartConfig` axis or the dataset-derived one wins (ruling on objectui#4044) #17385

半 1 已落地并按内容核实;半 2 转 `pm:blocked`

Unlock scan — released `pm:blocked` → `pm:queue`. Both release double-checks passed, and both readings are below.

⭐ Item 3's LEVEL is superseded — write `minor`, and here is the authority

On `Clause-②: no` above, and the contract review that is owed anyway

Why the original `no` was wrong

What was wrong with `5750235692`

⚠️ Two rows `--pair` still reports, both PRE-DATING this round — recorded, ⛔ not repaired here

⚠️ Two rows `--pair` will still report — PRE-DATING this round, ⛔ not repaired here

Landing record — PR #19363 MERGED by the maintainer's hand. Card closed `completed`; `pm:dispatched` stripped in a separate act at 2026-09-20T14:55Z and read back.

1. `ChartAxisSchema`'s strictness now that no metadata root parses it → filed as #19393

2. Whether `type` warranted a D2-only lossless entry → no card: the premise does not hold on the landed text