Skip to content

docs: guide adopters on legal footing, partners and the law's lifecycle - #2619

Open
jeremi wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
docs/adopter-modelling-guidance
Open

jeremi wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
docs/adopter-modelling-guidance

Conversation

@jeremi

@jeremi jeremi commented Nov 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Summary

Adopter guidance in existing pages (no new pages). Owning area: public docs, plus one line in the platform config conventions.

  • start/adopt.mdx:
    • what goes in the registry;
    • a partner-situations table mapping each situation to a product, with "do not integrate" as a valid answer;
    • a per-partner relationship sheet;
    • "promise Read first";
    • "point to records another office keeps";
    • payments are custom code today;
    • five signs it is time to climb to the next path.
  • explanation/data-minimization-and-purpose-limitation.mdx: "Ask for the weakest answer that does the job", a disclosure ladder.
  • explanation/registry-modeling-patterns.mdx:
    • a legal-footing block ("not stated" allowed);
    • combining starters by authority;
    • keep together what must be right together;
    • model the law's lifecycle and label engine gaps (worked example: revocation from active or suspended as two guarded Actions);
    • choosing a licensing shape by the renewal question, with temporal.lastDayField for inclusive last days;
    • roles derived from the job.
  • tutorials/derive-a-registry-from-publicschema.mdx: PublicSchema as a starting vocabulary inside and a contract at the edge, replacing the "without a round of naming meetings" claim. It also says to replace the generated authority placeholder.
  • start/evidence-quickstart.mdx: who mints a Requirement URI, and reuse a standard's code (such as SP-DCI) where one exists.
  • explanation/configuration-defined-registry.mdx: the exits that are true today (project YAML, bregctl data export, your PostgreSQL database).
  • explanation/where-each-rule-lives.mdx: keep numbers that change in records, not scripts.
  • index.mdx, reference/breg-configuration.mdx: programme officer and legal drafter roles; labels and refusal wording come from the law and forms.
  • products/platform/CONFIG-CONVENTIONS.md: an output a maintained tool reads back is a registered contract, not reader: none.

Evidence

  • npm ci && npm test in docs/site: 949 passed, 0 failed.
  • npm run check in docs/site: exit 0, covering:
    • full Astro build;
    • llms check, 1030 passed;
    • SEO check;
    • built link check, 446,939 internal links;
    • relative links.
  • Vale on the edited pages: 0 errors, 0 warnings.
  • markdownlint: 0 issues.
  • products/platform/scripts/check-config-conventions.py: 0 unrecorded, 0 stale, 0 errors.
  • Feature claims were read against code and reference docs (static reading, no live journey):
    • guard operators have no one-of test;
    • temporal.lastDayField is documented in reference/breg-api.mdx;
    • bregctl init --from publicschema writes a "{title} Authority" placeholder (render.rs);
    • external: {namespace} exists on event-record subject and source roles;
    • the Adapter ingestion job is not yet released, and the table says so.
  • Inconclusive: "no Registry Stack product sends payments" is an absence claim; nothing found contradicts it.

Notes

Docs only. No release, security, migration or compatibility impact.

DCO

  • Every commit includes a Signed-off-by trailer.
  • I reviewed the submitted changes and am responsible for the contribution.

Adopters were left to infer who owns a register, how to work with partner
institutions, and what to do when the engine cannot express their law.
The docs now ask for a short legal-footing block with "not stated"
allowed, map partner situations to products, show the disclosure ladder,
model the law's lifecycle and report engine gaps, frame PublicSchema as a
starting vocabulary inside and a contract at the edge, and name the exits
that are true today.

Signed-off-by: Jeremi Joslin <jeremi@joslin.fr>
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Nov 9, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Codex Review Summary: ✅ Completed

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-11-09T09:16:31.705042Z 305ec95 New commits
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

Signed-off-by: Jeremi Joslin <jeremi@joslin.fr>
@jeremi
jeremi added this pull request to the merge queue Nov 9, 2026
@github-merge-queue
github-merge-queue Bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks Nov 9, 2026

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant