finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged #14659

Open
Open
finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged#14659
Labels
domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling

Description

@os-litant
os-litant
opened on Sep 2, 2026

Observation from the objectstack-ui entry split (PR #14658). Not a defect in the gate's verdict — it reported correctly and its remedy worked — but a friction the next split in the same programme will hit identically, so it is worth recording once rather than rediscovering.

What happened

scripts/role-word-baseline.json maps file path → occurrence count. skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md carried 2, for two long-baselined lines:

  • "the tab-bar role, so a tabs user-filter would render a second, colliding"
  • "Write fields + semantic roles; the renderer decides the pixels. Reach for"

The split moved those two lines, byte-identical, into rules/list-views.md and rules/navigation.md. Because the ledger is path-keyed, check:role-word then reported three problems at once:

  • two "NEW use of the reserved word" errors, one per new file;
  • one ratchet-DOWN on the old path ("baselined file is clean/gone (was 2)").

The total occurrence count never moved: 2 before, 1 + 1 after. Nothing was added, nothing newly admitted.

Why it is worth a card

The only remedy the gate offers for the two "NEW use" rows is node scripts/check-role-word.mjs --update, which the message marks ⛔ MAINTAINER-ONLY and warns "rewrites the whole baseline from the current tree … do not take this path to get CI green". That framing is right for a genuine new boundary and wrong for this case, where the same occurrences simply changed address. An author doing a pure relocation has to take the loudest, most-gated path in the gate's vocabulary, and the reviewer has to re-derive by hand that the total did not move.

It is not hypothetical for the next flight: #14296 item 1 authorizes the same entry-plus-rules/ split for objectstack-pm-dispatch (#14300), and any baselined file that gets split will reproduce this exactly.

What was done this time, for the record

--update was run and its diff audited to be exactly three lines, in its own commit:

- "skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md": 2
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/list-views.md": 1
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/navigation.md": 1

No other file was re-baselined, so the shrink-only ratchet was not weakened. That audit is the thing a mechanism could do instead of a human.

Possible directions, not a recommendation

  1. Teach the gate a relocation verdict: when a run's NEW-use rows and ratchet-DOWN rows net to zero across the tree, say so and let the author take the ratchet-DOWN remedy that is already theirs, rather than routing them through the maintainer-only path.
  2. Leave the behaviour and only amend the message: name the split/relocation case and what evidence makes it safe (unchanged total, audited three-line diff), so the author and reviewer are not inventing that argument each time.
  3. Do nothing — the friction is one extra round per split, and splits are rare.

Filed unassigned by the skills-lane dev seat while landing PR #14658; not addressed there, and #14658 does not depend on it.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions

      , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all 
       blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '

      Skip to content
      finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged #14659
      Open
      Open
      finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged#14659
      Labels
      domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling
      Description
      @os-litant
      os-litant
      opened on Sep 2, 2026
      Observation from the objectstack-ui entry split (PR #14658). Not a defect in the gate's verdict — it reported correctly and its remedy worked — but a friction the next split in the same programme will hit identically, so it is worth recording once rather than rediscovering.
      What happened
      scripts/role-word-baseline.json maps file path → occurrence count. skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md carried 2, for two long-baselined lines:
      • "the tab-bar role, so a tabs user-filter would render a second, colliding"
      • "Write fields + semantic roles; the renderer decides the pixels. Reach for"
      The split moved those two lines, byte-identical, into rules/list-views.md and rules/navigation.md. Because the ledger is path-keyed, check:role-word then reported three problems at once:
      • two "NEW use of the reserved word" errors, one per new file;
      • one ratchet-DOWN on the old path ("baselined file is clean/gone (was 2)").
      The total occurrence count never moved: 2 before, 1 + 1 after. Nothing was added, nothing newly admitted.
      Why it is worth a card
      The only remedy the gate offers for the two "NEW use" rows is node scripts/check-role-word.mjs --update, which the message marks ⛔ MAINTAINER-ONLY and warns "rewrites the whole baseline from the current tree … do not take this path to get CI green". That framing is right for a genuine new boundary and wrong for this case, where the same occurrences simply changed address. An author doing a pure relocation has to take the loudest, most-gated path in the gate's vocabulary, and the reviewer has to re-derive by hand that the total did not move.
      It is not hypothetical for the next flight: #14296 item 1 authorizes the same entry-plus-rules/ split for objectstack-pm-dispatch (#14300), and any baselined file that gets split will reproduce this exactly.
      What was done this time, for the record
      --update was run and its diff audited to be exactly three lines, in its own commit:
      - "skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md": 2
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/list-views.md": 1
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/navigation.md": 1

      No other file was re-baselined, so the shrink-only ratchet was not weakened. That audit is the thing a mechanism could do instead of a human.
      Possible directions, not a recommendation
      1. Teach the gate a relocation verdict: when a run's NEW-use rows and ratchet-DOWN rows net to zero across the tree, say so and let the author take the ratchet-DOWN remedy that is already theirs, rather than routing them through the maintainer-only path.
      2. Leave the behaviour and only amend the message: name the split/relocation case and what evidence makes it safe (unchanged total, audited three-line diff), so the author and reviewer are not inventing that argument each time.
      3. Do nothing — the friction is one extra round per split, and splits are rare.
      Filed unassigned by the skills-lane dev seat while landing PR #14658; not addressed there, and #14658 does not depend on it.
      Metadata
      Metadata
      Assignees
      No one assigned
        Labels
        domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling
        Type
        No type
        Projects
        No projects
          Milestone
          No milestone
          Relationships
          None yet
          Development
          No branches or pull requests
          Issue actions
          
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

          Skip to content
          finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged #14659
          Open
          Open
          finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged#14659
          Labels
          domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling
          Description
          @os-litant
          os-litant
          opened on Sep 2, 2026
          Observation from the objectstack-ui entry split (PR #14658). Not a defect in the gate's verdict — it reported correctly and its remedy worked — but a friction the next split in the same programme will hit identically, so it is worth recording once rather than rediscovering.
          What happened
          scripts/role-word-baseline.json maps file path → occurrence count. skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md carried 2, for two long-baselined lines:
          • "the tab-bar role, so a tabs user-filter would render a second, colliding"
          • "Write fields + semantic roles; the renderer decides the pixels. Reach for"
          The split moved those two lines, byte-identical, into rules/list-views.md and rules/navigation.md. Because the ledger is path-keyed, check:role-word then reported three problems at once:
          • two "NEW use of the reserved word" errors, one per new file;
          • one ratchet-DOWN on the old path ("baselined file is clean/gone (was 2)").
          The total occurrence count never moved: 2 before, 1 + 1 after. Nothing was added, nothing newly admitted.
          Why it is worth a card
          The only remedy the gate offers for the two "NEW use" rows is node scripts/check-role-word.mjs --update, which the message marks ⛔ MAINTAINER-ONLY and warns "rewrites the whole baseline from the current tree … do not take this path to get CI green". That framing is right for a genuine new boundary and wrong for this case, where the same occurrences simply changed address. An author doing a pure relocation has to take the loudest, most-gated path in the gate's vocabulary, and the reviewer has to re-derive by hand that the total did not move.
          It is not hypothetical for the next flight: #14296 item 1 authorizes the same entry-plus-rules/ split for objectstack-pm-dispatch (#14300), and any baselined file that gets split will reproduce this exactly.
          What was done this time, for the record
          --update was run and its diff audited to be exactly three lines, in its own commit:
          - "skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md": 2
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/list-views.md": 1
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/navigation.md": 1

          No other file was re-baselined, so the shrink-only ratchet was not weakened. That audit is the thing a mechanism could do instead of a human.
          Possible directions, not a recommendation
          1. Teach the gate a relocation verdict: when a run's NEW-use rows and ratchet-DOWN rows net to zero across the tree, say so and let the author take the ratchet-DOWN remedy that is already theirs, rather than routing them through the maintainer-only path.
          2. Leave the behaviour and only amend the message: name the split/relocation case and what evidence makes it safe (unchanged total, audited three-line diff), so the author and reviewer are not inventing that argument each time.
          3. Do nothing — the friction is one extra round per split, and splits are rare.
          Filed unassigned by the skills-lane dev seat while landing PR #14658; not addressed there, and #14658 does not depend on it.
          Metadata
          Metadata
          Assignees
          No one assigned
            Labels
            domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling
            Type
            No type
            Projects
            No projects
              Milestone
              No milestone
              Relationships
              None yet
              Development
              No branches or pull requests
              Issue actions
              
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

              Skip to content
              finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged #14659
              Open
              Open
              finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged#14659
              Labels
              domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling
              Description
              @os-litant
              os-litant
              opened on Sep 2, 2026
              Observation from the objectstack-ui entry split (PR #14658). Not a defect in the gate's verdict — it reported correctly and its remedy worked — but a friction the next split in the same programme will hit identically, so it is worth recording once rather than rediscovering.
              What happened
              scripts/role-word-baseline.json maps file path → occurrence count. skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md carried 2, for two long-baselined lines:
              • "the tab-bar role, so a tabs user-filter would render a second, colliding"
              • "Write fields + semantic roles; the renderer decides the pixels. Reach for"
              The split moved those two lines, byte-identical, into rules/list-views.md and rules/navigation.md. Because the ledger is path-keyed, check:role-word then reported three problems at once:
              • two "NEW use of the reserved word" errors, one per new file;
              • one ratchet-DOWN on the old path ("baselined file is clean/gone (was 2)").
              The total occurrence count never moved: 2 before, 1 + 1 after. Nothing was added, nothing newly admitted.
              Why it is worth a card
              The only remedy the gate offers for the two "NEW use" rows is node scripts/check-role-word.mjs --update, which the message marks ⛔ MAINTAINER-ONLY and warns "rewrites the whole baseline from the current tree … do not take this path to get CI green". That framing is right for a genuine new boundary and wrong for this case, where the same occurrences simply changed address. An author doing a pure relocation has to take the loudest, most-gated path in the gate's vocabulary, and the reviewer has to re-derive by hand that the total did not move.
              It is not hypothetical for the next flight: #14296 item 1 authorizes the same entry-plus-rules/ split for objectstack-pm-dispatch (#14300), and any baselined file that gets split will reproduce this exactly.
              What was done this time, for the record
              --update was run and its diff audited to be exactly three lines, in its own commit:
              - "skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md": 2
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/list-views.md": 1
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/navigation.md": 1

              No other file was re-baselined, so the shrink-only ratchet was not weakened. That audit is the thing a mechanism could do instead of a human.
              Possible directions, not a recommendation
              1. Teach the gate a relocation verdict: when a run's NEW-use rows and ratchet-DOWN rows net to zero across the tree, say so and let the author take the ratchet-DOWN remedy that is already theirs, rather than routing them through the maintainer-only path.
              2. Leave the behaviour and only amend the message: name the split/relocation case and what evidence makes it safe (unchanged total, audited three-line diff), so the author and reviewer are not inventing that argument each time.
              3. Do nothing — the friction is one extra round per split, and splits are rare.
              Filed unassigned by the skills-lane dev seat while landing PR #14658; not addressed there, and #14658 does not depend on it.
              Metadata
              Metadata
              Assignees
              No one assigned
                Labels
                domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling
                Type
                No type
                Projects
                No projects
                  Milestone
                  No milestone
                  Relationships
                  None yet
                  Development
                  No branches or pull requests
                  Issue actions
                  
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '

                  Skip to content
                  finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged #14659
                  Open
                  Open
                  finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged#14659
                  Labels
                  domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling
                  Description
                  @os-litant
                  os-litant
                  opened on Sep 2, 2026
                  Observation from the objectstack-ui entry split (PR #14658). Not a defect in the gate's verdict — it reported correctly and its remedy worked — but a friction the next split in the same programme will hit identically, so it is worth recording once rather than rediscovering.
                  What happened
                  scripts/role-word-baseline.json maps file path → occurrence count. skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md carried 2, for two long-baselined lines:
                  • "the tab-bar role, so a tabs user-filter would render a second, colliding"
                  • "Write fields + semantic roles; the renderer decides the pixels. Reach for"
                  The split moved those two lines, byte-identical, into rules/list-views.md and rules/navigation.md. Because the ledger is path-keyed, check:role-word then reported three problems at once:
                  • two "NEW use of the reserved word" errors, one per new file;
                  • one ratchet-DOWN on the old path ("baselined file is clean/gone (was 2)").
                  The total occurrence count never moved: 2 before, 1 + 1 after. Nothing was added, nothing newly admitted.
                  Why it is worth a card
                  The only remedy the gate offers for the two "NEW use" rows is node scripts/check-role-word.mjs --update, which the message marks ⛔ MAINTAINER-ONLY and warns "rewrites the whole baseline from the current tree … do not take this path to get CI green". That framing is right for a genuine new boundary and wrong for this case, where the same occurrences simply changed address. An author doing a pure relocation has to take the loudest, most-gated path in the gate's vocabulary, and the reviewer has to re-derive by hand that the total did not move.
                  It is not hypothetical for the next flight: #14296 item 1 authorizes the same entry-plus-rules/ split for objectstack-pm-dispatch (#14300), and any baselined file that gets split will reproduce this exactly.
                  What was done this time, for the record
                  --update was run and its diff audited to be exactly three lines, in its own commit:
                  - "skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md": 2
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/list-views.md": 1
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/navigation.md": 1

                  No other file was re-baselined, so the shrink-only ratchet was not weakened. That audit is the thing a mechanism could do instead of a human.
                  Possible directions, not a recommendation
                  1. Teach the gate a relocation verdict: when a run's NEW-use rows and ratchet-DOWN rows net to zero across the tree, say so and let the author take the ratchet-DOWN remedy that is already theirs, rather than routing them through the maintainer-only path.
                  2. Leave the behaviour and only amend the message: name the split/relocation case and what evidence makes it safe (unchanged total, audited three-line diff), so the author and reviewer are not inventing that argument each time.
                  3. Do nothing — the friction is one extra round per split, and splits are rare.
                  Filed unassigned by the skills-lane dev seat while landing PR #14658; not addressed there, and #14658 does not depend on it.
                  Metadata
                  Metadata
                  Assignees
                  No one assigned
                    Labels
                    domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling
                    Type
                    No type
                    Projects
                    No projects
                      Milestone
                      No milestone
                      Relationships
                      None yet
                      Development
                      No branches or pull requests
                      Issue actions
                      
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

                      Skip to content
                      finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged #14659
                      Open
                      Open
                      finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged#14659
                      Labels
                      domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling
                      Description
                      @os-litant
                      os-litant
                      opened on Sep 2, 2026
                      Observation from the objectstack-ui entry split (PR #14658). Not a defect in the gate's verdict — it reported correctly and its remedy worked — but a friction the next split in the same programme will hit identically, so it is worth recording once rather than rediscovering.
                      What happened
                      scripts/role-word-baseline.json maps file path → occurrence count. skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md carried 2, for two long-baselined lines:
                      • "the tab-bar role, so a tabs user-filter would render a second, colliding"
                      • "Write fields + semantic roles; the renderer decides the pixels. Reach for"
                      The split moved those two lines, byte-identical, into rules/list-views.md and rules/navigation.md. Because the ledger is path-keyed, check:role-word then reported three problems at once:
                      • two "NEW use of the reserved word" errors, one per new file;
                      • one ratchet-DOWN on the old path ("baselined file is clean/gone (was 2)").
                      The total occurrence count never moved: 2 before, 1 + 1 after. Nothing was added, nothing newly admitted.
                      Why it is worth a card
                      The only remedy the gate offers for the two "NEW use" rows is node scripts/check-role-word.mjs --update, which the message marks ⛔ MAINTAINER-ONLY and warns "rewrites the whole baseline from the current tree … do not take this path to get CI green". That framing is right for a genuine new boundary and wrong for this case, where the same occurrences simply changed address. An author doing a pure relocation has to take the loudest, most-gated path in the gate's vocabulary, and the reviewer has to re-derive by hand that the total did not move.
                      It is not hypothetical for the next flight: #14296 item 1 authorizes the same entry-plus-rules/ split for objectstack-pm-dispatch (#14300), and any baselined file that gets split will reproduce this exactly.
                      What was done this time, for the record
                      --update was run and its diff audited to be exactly three lines, in its own commit:
                      - "skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md": 2
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/list-views.md": 1
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/navigation.md": 1

                      No other file was re-baselined, so the shrink-only ratchet was not weakened. That audit is the thing a mechanism could do instead of a human.
                      Possible directions, not a recommendation
                      1. Teach the gate a relocation verdict: when a run's NEW-use rows and ratchet-DOWN rows net to zero across the tree, say so and let the author take the ratchet-DOWN remedy that is already theirs, rather than routing them through the maintainer-only path.
                      2. Leave the behaviour and only amend the message: name the split/relocation case and what evidence makes it safe (unchanged total, audited three-line diff), so the author and reviewer are not inventing that argument each time.
                      3. Do nothing — the friction is one extra round per split, and splits are rare.
                      Filed unassigned by the skills-lane dev seat while landing PR #14658; not addressed there, and #14658 does not depend on it.
                      Metadata
                      Metadata
                      Assignees
                      No one assigned
                        Labels
                        domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling
                        Type
                        No type
                        Projects
                        No projects
                          Milestone
                          No milestone
                          Relationships
                          None yet
                          Development
                          No branches or pull requests
                          Issue actions
                          
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

                          Skip to content
                          finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged #14659
                          Open
                          Open
                          finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged#14659
                          Labels
                          domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling
                          Description
                          @os-litant
                          os-litant
                          opened on Sep 2, 2026
                          Observation from the objectstack-ui entry split (PR #14658). Not a defect in the gate's verdict — it reported correctly and its remedy worked — but a friction the next split in the same programme will hit identically, so it is worth recording once rather than rediscovering.
                          What happened
                          scripts/role-word-baseline.json maps file path → occurrence count. skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md carried 2, for two long-baselined lines:
                          • "the tab-bar role, so a tabs user-filter would render a second, colliding"
                          • "Write fields + semantic roles; the renderer decides the pixels. Reach for"
                          The split moved those two lines, byte-identical, into rules/list-views.md and rules/navigation.md. Because the ledger is path-keyed, check:role-word then reported three problems at once:
                          • two "NEW use of the reserved word" errors, one per new file;
                          • one ratchet-DOWN on the old path ("baselined file is clean/gone (was 2)").
                          The total occurrence count never moved: 2 before, 1 + 1 after. Nothing was added, nothing newly admitted.
                          Why it is worth a card
                          The only remedy the gate offers for the two "NEW use" rows is node scripts/check-role-word.mjs --update, which the message marks ⛔ MAINTAINER-ONLY and warns "rewrites the whole baseline from the current tree … do not take this path to get CI green". That framing is right for a genuine new boundary and wrong for this case, where the same occurrences simply changed address. An author doing a pure relocation has to take the loudest, most-gated path in the gate's vocabulary, and the reviewer has to re-derive by hand that the total did not move.
                          It is not hypothetical for the next flight: #14296 item 1 authorizes the same entry-plus-rules/ split for objectstack-pm-dispatch (#14300), and any baselined file that gets split will reproduce this exactly.
                          What was done this time, for the record
                          --update was run and its diff audited to be exactly three lines, in its own commit:
                          - "skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md": 2
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/list-views.md": 1
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/navigation.md": 1

                          No other file was re-baselined, so the shrink-only ratchet was not weakened. That audit is the thing a mechanism could do instead of a human.
                          Possible directions, not a recommendation
                          1. Teach the gate a relocation verdict: when a run's NEW-use rows and ratchet-DOWN rows net to zero across the tree, say so and let the author take the ratchet-DOWN remedy that is already theirs, rather than routing them through the maintainer-only path.
                          2. Leave the behaviour and only amend the message: name the split/relocation case and what evidence makes it safe (unchanged total, audited three-line diff), so the author and reviewer are not inventing that argument each time.
                          3. Do nothing — the friction is one extra round per split, and splits are rare.
                          Filed unassigned by the skills-lane dev seat while landing PR #14658; not addressed there, and #14658 does not depend on it.
                          Metadata
                          Metadata
                          Assignees
                          No one assigned
                            Labels
                            domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling
                            Type
                            No type
                            Projects
                            No projects
                              Milestone
                              No milestone
                              Relationships
                              None yet
                              Development
                              No branches or pull requests
                              Issue actions
                              
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();

                              Skip to content
                              finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged #14659
                              Open
                              Open
                              finding: the role-word baseline is keyed by file path, so a pure file SPLIT trips the maintainer-only --update even when the occurrence count is unchanged#14659
                              Labels
                              domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling
                              Description
                              @os-litant
                              os-litant
                              opened on Sep 2, 2026
                              Observation from the objectstack-ui entry split (PR #14658). Not a defect in the gate's verdict — it reported correctly and its remedy worked — but a friction the next split in the same programme will hit identically, so it is worth recording once rather than rediscovering.
                              What happened
                              scripts/role-word-baseline.json maps file path → occurrence count. skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md carried 2, for two long-baselined lines:
                              • "the tab-bar role, so a tabs user-filter would render a second, colliding"
                              • "Write fields + semantic roles; the renderer decides the pixels. Reach for"
                              The split moved those two lines, byte-identical, into rules/list-views.md and rules/navigation.md. Because the ledger is path-keyed, check:role-word then reported three problems at once:
                              • two "NEW use of the reserved word" errors, one per new file;
                              • one ratchet-DOWN on the old path ("baselined file is clean/gone (was 2)").
                              The total occurrence count never moved: 2 before, 1 + 1 after. Nothing was added, nothing newly admitted.
                              Why it is worth a card
                              The only remedy the gate offers for the two "NEW use" rows is node scripts/check-role-word.mjs --update, which the message marks ⛔ MAINTAINER-ONLY and warns "rewrites the whole baseline from the current tree … do not take this path to get CI green". That framing is right for a genuine new boundary and wrong for this case, where the same occurrences simply changed address. An author doing a pure relocation has to take the loudest, most-gated path in the gate's vocabulary, and the reviewer has to re-derive by hand that the total did not move.
                              It is not hypothetical for the next flight: #14296 item 1 authorizes the same entry-plus-rules/ split for objectstack-pm-dispatch (#14300), and any baselined file that gets split will reproduce this exactly.
                              What was done this time, for the record
                              --update was run and its diff audited to be exactly three lines, in its own commit:
                              - "skills/objectstack-ui/SKILL.md": 2
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/list-views.md": 1
+ "skills/objectstack-ui/rules/navigation.md": 1

                              No other file was re-baselined, so the shrink-only ratchet was not weakened. That audit is the thing a mechanism could do instead of a human.
                              Possible directions, not a recommendation
                              1. Teach the gate a relocation verdict: when a run's NEW-use rows and ratchet-DOWN rows net to zero across the tree, say so and let the author take the ratchet-DOWN remedy that is already theirs, rather than routing them through the maintainer-only path.
                              2. Leave the behaviour and only amend the message: name the split/relocation case and what evidence makes it safe (unchanged total, audited three-line diff), so the author and reviewer are not inventing that argument each time.
                              3. Do nothing — the friction is one extra round per split, and splits are rare.
                              Filed unassigned by the skills-lane dev seat while landing PR #14658; not addressed there, and #14658 does not depend on it.
                              Metadata
                              Metadata
                              Assignees
                              No one assigned
                                Labels
                                domain:devxpm:queuepm:retriagepriority:p3tooling
                                Type
                                No type
                                Projects
                                No projects
                                  Milestone
                                  No milestone
                                  Relationships
                                  None yet
                                  Development
                                  No branches or pull requests
                                  Issue actions