Plan §6 says each P5 item is spec-first with its own session. These are the
specs; no implementation is authorised by them and none was written.
plans/mode-layer-reunification.md 5a — ALIGNMENT defect 1, the largest
architectural gap. Storage-policies the
ModeBase orchestration the way P2 did
MLPCore, rather than binding monolithic
mode objects into WASM (which would
contradict the locked two-instance RT
architecture).
plans/browser-mode-coverage-spec.md 5b — an audio-topology notion so Manifold
stops cataloguing 4 modes that
structurally cannot run in a browser.
plans/curated-presets-spec.md 5c — ALIGNMENT defect 2, built on the
operator's §7.6 definition: a curated
preset is configuration only, network
untrained.
plans/hardware-editor-spec.md 5d — ALIGNMENT defect 3, applying
useq-celium's existing discipline (C
header as wire truth + TS mirror + parity
test) to a MEMLNaut serial protocol.
2434 lines. I spot-checked their path citations mechanically against
git ls-files: of 170 backticked paths, every unresolved one is either a file
the spec proposes to create or a cross-reference to a sibling spec in this same
commit. None describes deleted code as live — which is the failure mode that
made half the existing corpus untrustworthy, and the reason the §8 pass earlier
today had so much to do.
The preset spec is the most valuable byproduct: en route it found five places
where existing docs still describe a deleted world, including
manifold-parity-features-spec.md §1.1 specifying a PipelineLayer over
engine/input-pipeline.ts and output-pipeline.ts, both deleted at one-core P4.
Also carries the doc sync for the telemetry and benchmark work in a77770f:
AGENT-REFERENCE gains the throughput and loss-history entries, and dock-spec
§1.3 records that its long-deferred diagnostics suite shipped PARTLY — the loss
curve and weight-health table are real, GradientFlow is not built and is not
planned as drawn (the core records no per-layer gradient magnitudes, and the
fabricated version was deleted in Phase 1).
60584606a8