feat: build step 2 — the home page; close Q35, Q37, Q39; Q39's answer corrected the register

Pouya's rulings and the page are one commit, not two, because they are not
separable: Q37 changed the credential label the page renders, Q39 scoped the
arbitration copy, and Q35 gave Med-Arb the row that lets the footer link stand.
Splitting them would produce a commit where the register says one thing and the
page says another.

RULINGS

Q39 — ANSWERED, and my assertion was FALSE as a universal. Pouya checked
rather than defended. Family arbitration in Ontario is gated: prescribed
training, 14h on screening for domestic violence and power imbalances, 30h of
Ontario family law for arbitrators outside the bar, 10h ongoing per two years.
claims-auditor produced that counter-example from inside the repo on 2026-08-26
and it was right. The source is now IN the repo per R14 —
docs/reference/ontario-family-arbitration-training.md, retrieved with its
provenance — and §4 states which half it establishes: the family gate directly,
the commercial half only by absence. So "commercial arbitration in Ontario
requires no licence and no designation" is recorded as Pouya's stated position,
unstamped. What disposes of the question is the scope exclusion: he does not do
family arbitration, so it is NOT OFFERED and the gate never bears on the
practice.

The false universal survived in three more live places, found by grep, not
recall: §4's NOT-NEGOTIABLE boundary bullet (the boundary paragraph breaching
its own boundary), §9's Q33 closure row, and a comment in SiteHeader.astro.

Q35 — ANSWERED, all four items, and the answer supplied a gate that was
missing. Med-Arb gets an Offerings row and stays in the footer sitemap. The six
subject-matter labels pass test 1. §4 gains "Subject-matter areas — the
publication gate": competence to accept an appointment, AND a page that frames
it as positioning without claiming history. Nothing in the nav or footer is
unrowed any more.

Q37 — ANSWERED. "Law and engineering" becomes "Legal training and engineering
practice". A degree is not a practice; the parallel was doing the implying.

Q38/R13 — the committed SVG does not close it; the walk-back went too far. It
renders faithfully BECAUSE it is the raster. R13 stays open.

R1 — surfaced and acknowledged; the interim licensure framing is now carried by
a shipped page rather than a spec, which raises the stakes.

BUILD STEP 2

Seven of docs/01's eight home sections, six new components, zero JavaScript.
Section 7 (Latest insights) ships at step 7 with the collection it lists —
recorded in docs/01 and in the page, not just here. Four credential slots, not
three: §4's paired-disclosure condition requires the Q.Arb stage on any page
that offers arbitration. No booking link (R6). The masthead tagline is
suppressed on / (it duplicated the hero eyebrow). The step-1 proof sheet is
deleted, and five live references to it were found by grep.

WHAT THE REVIEWS FOUND — 24 findings across the two passes

claims-auditor FAILED it on ten, every one implication or scope rather than
fabrication, which is where D13 says the risk lives. The four that mattered:
"I mediate and arbitrate" asserted a track record §4 does not hold for
arbitration; the JSON-LD asserted arbitration twice and stated the stage
nowhere (a crawler-only claim is still a claim); "at one published rate with
preparation time included" misdescribed money against docs/07's two day rates
and capped prep allowance; and "Law and engineering are not blended here" was
Q37's struck parallel relocated into prose one day after Pouya struck it.
It also found the Canadian Tax Foundation missing from §9 Q8 — a stale second
copy of a fact that would have bitten at step 3.

adversarial-reviewer found fourteen, three blocking. The first was
class="section-head" on <SectionHeading> never matching — the parent-cannot-
style-a-child defect for the FOURTH time, written into a diff where I had just
added fresh warnings about it to two other components. Measured: 0px margin,
0px gap, headings over the card edges, with astro check and eslint both clean.
I had looked at a screenshot of that section and passed over it. Fixed with a
page-owned wrapper (48px, measured) and the prop is deleted from six components
so it is now a build error. Also: the credential row was never "two up on a
phone" and its comment said it was; PROCESS was hardcoded in the page against
the reason written in site.ts; 83px of residual overflow at a 200% default font
size, now 3px.

Seven more I found myself first, including <Picture widths> declaring the
untouched 1600px master as the <img src> fallback (254,626 B for a 476px slot,
and the build log said "before: 349kB" either way), and a prop named `as`
silently turning off type-checking for a whole component.

VERIFICATION — run, not asserted. Full figures in AGENTS.md entry (w).

npx tsc 6.0.3 · check 0/0/0 · lint clean · build clean · audit 0
1 <script> and it is JSON-LD; non-JSON-LD scripts 0; no JS bundle; identical
page with script execution disabled (444 nodes, 6,578 chars)
Phase 5 minifier check: no `animation` shorthand beside animation-timeline
overflow 0 at 14 widths, AND every mark measured at 1.5654-1.5657 vs 1.5657
one h1, no heading skips, focus order == DOM order across 44 focusables
31 painted contrast pairs at 3 widths, 0 failures
72/72 hit-test points across 8 cards resolve to the card's link
print 0 hidden, reduced-motion 0 hidden
Lighthouse NOT RUN — tool unavailable until step 7 (R11)
HTML validator NOT RUN, and 4 of 12 srcsets carry a duplicate 1x descriptor

Opened for Pouya: Q40 (one OG image for nineteen pages), Q41 (does Q37 reach
prose; may the comparative be restored; what LAT pre-hearing mediation means),
Q42 (the four "also offered" processes have no row), Q43 (the process timings
are published commitments with no row).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0148NztQskLKKApP5SzAA78e

AGENTS.md

@@ -216,7 +216,8 @@ condition below, which is a **condition**, not a formality.
 **Pouya's ruling, and the reasoning to keep.** His stated basis: ADRIC and ADRIO
 designations — Q.Med, Q.Arb, C.Med-Arb — are **voluntary credentials, not
 licences**, and **commercial arbitral appointment in Ontario is not gated behind
-a designation**. So the constraint on offering arbitration was never *may he
+a designation** — scoped and sourced as the box below now sets out, after the
+unscoped version of that sentence turned out to be false. So the constraint on offering arbitration was never *may he
 act* — only *will parties appoint someone at this stage of the arc*, which is
 **positional** and his to answer. He answers it: **he accepts arbitration
 appointments now**, and that — his acceptance — is what the rows below record.
@@ -224,20 +225,41 @@ appointments now**, and that — his acceptance — is what the rows below recor
 > ⚠️ **The legal proposition underneath is the architect's, not this register's,
 > and it is deliberately NOT stamped `[verified]`.** `[verified — Pouya]` means
 > *the subject reported it*, which can establish what he offers and cannot
-> establish a proposition of Ontario law. No statute or regulation is cited here
-> and none is in the repo, so **no reviewer can check it** — R14 again, in a
-> place that matters more than a logo.
+> establish a proposition of Ontario law. That much is unchanged.
 >
-> It is also **not a universal, and must never be restated as one.** An earlier
-> draft of this paragraph wrote "Anyone may be appointed an arbitrator in
-> Ontario. Nothing in law gates the role behind a designation." `claims-auditor`
-> produced a counter-example from inside this repo: the site ships a
-> **Shareholder & Family Business** practice area, and **family** arbitration in
-> Ontario is understood to be one of the places where arbitrator qualification
-> *is* prescribed. This record does not resolve that — it is **Q39** — but it
-> will not carry an unqualified universal that the site's own nav may already
-> contradict. The rows below are scoped to **commercial** arbitration for that
-> reason.
+> **What HAS changed: there is now a source in the repo** —
+> `docs/reference/ontario-family-arbitration-training.md`, the extract Pouya's
+> Q39 ruling named, retrieved 2026-08-27 with its provenance and the method that
+> produced it. R14 is satisfied for the half of the proposition it covers, and
+> **it does not cover both halves.** Read the next paragraph before relying on
+> either.
+>
+> **THE UNIVERSAL IS STRUCK, AND IT WAS FALSE.** This paragraph carried
+> *"Anyone may be appointed an arbitrator in Ontario. Nothing in law gates the
+> role behind a designation."* `claims-auditor` produced a counter-example from
+> inside this repo — the site ships a **Shareholder & Family Business** practice
+> area, and family arbitration looked like a place where qualification *is*
+> prescribed — and **Pouya checked it and confirmed the counter-example.** His
+> words, 2026-08-27: *"My assertion was FALSE as a universal."* Family
+> arbitrators in Ontario must complete prescribed training: **14 hours** on
+> screening for domestic violence and power imbalances, **30 hours** of Ontario
+> family law for arbitrators outside the Ontario or another Canadian bar, and
+> **10 hours ongoing per two-year period**, five of them on domestic violence or
+> power imbalance. Sourced, per the extract above.
+>
+> **The scoped replacement, and exactly whose it is.** *Commercial arbitration
+> in Ontario requires no licence and no designation.* That is **Pouya's stated
+> position** — `[Pouya's stated basis 2026-08-27]`, deliberately **not**
+> `[verified]`. The extract establishes the **family** gate directly; it
+> establishes the **commercial** half only by *absence*, because a government
+> page about family arbitrators is not authority for what a commercial
+> arbitrator needs. It neither mentions nor excludes commercial arbitration.
+> **Do not cite it as if it did**, and do not let the scoped form drift back
+> toward a universal because it now has a footnote attached.
+>
+> **The reason nothing on the site turns on any of this** is the scope exclusion
+> two paragraphs down, not the reasoning above: family arbitration is not
+> offered.
 
 ### The offering test
 
@@ -288,8 +310,16 @@ footer pending Q35(a).*
 licence gates the activity.** It is not a general licence-free zone, and it must
 never be read as one:
 
-- **Mediation and arbitration are ungated.** No designation is required to be
-  appointed. The offering test governs, and Pouya has answered it.
+- **Mediation, and COMMERCIAL arbitration, are ungated.** No designation is
+  required to be appointed. The offering test governs, and Pouya has answered it.
+  *Scoped 2026-08-27 (Q39).* This bullet read "Mediation and arbitration are
+  ungated" — an unqualified statement about arbitration as a class, in the
+  paragraph headed **NOT NEGOTIABLE**, which is the worst place in this file for
+  one. **Family arbitration in Ontario carries prescribed training**
+  (`docs/reference/ontario-family-arbitration-training.md`), so the class
+  statement was false and the boundary paragraph was the thing breaching its own
+  boundary. Family arbitration is separately **not offered** — see the Offerings
+  table — so the site never relied on the false half; the record did.
 - **Legal services are gated.** Providing legal services and practising law in
   Ontario are restricted activities. For anything on that side of the line the
   binding question is **permission**, the answer is **not established** (see the
@@ -306,9 +336,11 @@ never be read as one:
 | Offering | Status |
 |---|---|
 | **Mediation** — sole mediator | `[verified 2026-08-26 — Pouya]`. Q.Med held; §4 also verifies multiple completed sole mediations |
-| **Arbitration — sole arbitrator** (commercial) | `[verified 2026-08-26 — Pouya, Q33/Q36]`. Offered **now**. Not gated by Q.Arb. **Commercial** — see Q39 on family arbitration |
+| **Arbitration — sole arbitrator** (commercial) | `[verified 2026-08-26 — Pouya, Q33/Q36]`. Offered **now**. Not gated by Q.Arb. **Commercial**, and the scope is now load-bearing rather than provisional: Q39 closed 2026-08-27 and **family arbitration is excluded by Pouya's choice** — see the row below |
 | **Arbitration — party-appointed** | `[verified 2026-08-26 — Pouya, Q33/Q36]`. Offered **now** |
 | **Arbitration — co-arbitration** | `[verified 2026-08-26 — Pouya, Q33/Q36]`. Offered **now**. This closes Q36, which had flagged the claim as asserted in three specs and resting on no §4 row — the row is here |
+| **Med-Arb** — mediation-arbitration | `[verified 2026-08-27 — Pouya, Q35]`. Offered **now**. Both halves are live: Q.Med is held, and arbitration appointments are accepted (rows above). Ungated by the same reasoning as arbitration. This closes the "Still unanswered" note that used to sit below this table, and it is why `/med-arb/` may stay in the footer sitemap |
+| ~~**Family arbitration** under the *Family Law Act*~~ | **NOT OFFERED — a scope exclusion, not a gating problem** `[verified 2026-08-27 — Pouya, Q39]`. Pouya has confirmed he does not do family arbitration. It is therefore out of scope by his choice, and the prescribed-training question never arises for this practice. Recorded because the register reasoned from a false universal for one day and must not do so again — see the box above and `docs/reference/ontario-family-arbitration-training.md`. **`Shareholder & Family Business` does not touch this:** it means commercial disputes among family shareholders — shareholder and partnership disputes, co-founder breakdowns, business succession — and its page must say plainly that family law matters are not accepted |
 | ~~Tribunal secretary~~ | **Not offered.** D14 removed the rate and bars offering it |
 
 **How the arbitration page must read** (`docs/01` §`/arbitration/`, step 4):
@@ -318,10 +350,39 @@ about the stage is the differentiator — do not hedge it into vagueness.* So
 neither half may be dropped. Naming the stage is not a disclaimer bolted onto an
 offering; it is the reason a sophisticated reader believes the offering.
 
-**Still unanswered — do not infer from this section.** Whether **Med-Arb** is
-offered now is not recorded here; Pouya named the three arbitration forms and
-mediation, and nothing else. Med-Arb is ungated by the same reasoning, so the
-question is his competence call alone — but it is still a question. See Q35.
+### Subject-matter areas — the publication gate (Q35, 2026-08-27)
+
+**This gate did not exist, and its absence is what let `Med-Arb` sit in the
+site-wide footer as an unrowed offering three sentences below a paragraph
+telling readers not to infer exactly that.** Pouya's words: *"Add the
+publication gate you identified was missing."* Same force as the two gates
+above.
+
+> **A practice area may be named — in the nav, in the footer, in a card — where
+> BOTH hold:**
+>
+> 1. **He can competently accept an appointment in that subject matter.** His
+>    call, and only his. A subject-matter area is not a gated activity (the
+>    processes conducted in it are mediation and arbitration, both ungated), so
+>    the offering test's question 1 is already answered for it and question 2 is
+>    what remains.
+> 2. **The page frames it as positioning, not as claimed history.** `docs/03`:
+>    *"Built to facilitate procurement and subcontract disputes on Ontario's
+>    megaproject pipeline"* — not *"extensive experience resolving"*. A page that
+>    claims volume it does not have fails this gate even though the label passes
+>    condition 1.
+>
+> Condition 1 is about the **label**; condition 2 is about the **page**. A label
+> may ship before its page exists only where the page is already specified to
+> meet condition 2 — which `docs/01` does for all six areas, `/practice/energy/`
+> most explicitly (*"Write it as a genuine position, not a claim of existing
+> volume"*).
+
+**Applied, 2026-08-27 — Q35 CLOSED.** `Energy, Grid & Regulatory`,
+`Shareholder & Family Business`, and the other four labels **pass condition 1**
+on Pouya's answer; condition 2 is each page's job at build step 5. `Med-Arb`
+now has an Offerings row of its own and stays in the footer sitemap. Nothing in
+the nav or footer is unrowed or ungated any more.
 
 ### Forbidden — must not appear on the site
 
@@ -394,12 +455,14 @@ the audience it targets. Revisit at month 12–18. `[verified 2026-08-25 — dec
 
 | Thing | Value |
 |---|---|
-| Framework | **Astro 7.2.7**, `output: 'static'` `[verified 2026-08-26 — npm view astro version, D1 as amended]`. `@astrojs/mdx` 7.0.8, `@astrojs/sitemap` 3.7.3, `sharp` 0.35.4 |
-| Lint toolchain | ESLint **10.9.1**, `@eslint/js` 10.0.1, `globals` 17.11.0, `eslint-plugin-astro` **3.1.0**, `eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y` 6.10.2, `typescript-eslint` 8.68.0, `typescript` 5.9.3 — **every pin at the registry's `latest` except `typescript`** `[verified 2026-08-26 — npm view, all 14 pins]`. `@eslint/js` and `globals` are declared explicitly; before 2026-08-26 `eslint.config.js` imported them and they resolved only by npm hoisting accident. **Accessibility linting is on** — `flat/jsx-a11y-recommended`, 36 rules `[verified 2026-08-26 — 7 rules fired on a deliberately inaccessible .astro file]`. `eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y@6.10.2` declares a stale `eslint ^3..^9` peer range; a one-line `overrides` entry in `package.json` resolves it. ⚠️ **`eslint-plugin-astro@3.1.0` declares `node ^22.22.3 \|\| ^24.16.0 \|\| >=26.3.0`**, which excludes Pouya's Node 25.6.0 — `npm install` prints EBADENGINE there. Dev-time only, and `nvm use` (Node 22 LTS, per `.nvmrc`) clears it. `typescript` is held at 5.x: `typescript-eslint` peers `<6.1.0` and `@astrojs/check` peers `^5 \|\| ^6`, so TypeScript 7.0.2 is unusable here `[verified 2026-08-26 — npm view]` |
+| Framework | **Astro 7.2.9**, `output: 'static'` `[verified 2026-08-27 — npm view astro version, D1 as amended]`. `@astrojs/mdx` 7.0.8, `@astrojs/sitemap` 3.7.3, `sharp` 0.35.4 — all three at `latest`. Bumped from 7.2.7 at the step 1 → step 2 phase boundary under R11: 7.2.8 published 2026-08-26 and 7.2.9 on 2026-08-27, i.e. **two patches appeared inside 48 hours**, which is the argument for checking at boundaries rather than on failure. `engines` unchanged at `node >=22.12.0`, `npm >=9.6.5` `[verified 2026-08-27 — npm view astro@7.2.9 engines]` |
+| Lint toolchain | ESLint **10.9.1**, `@eslint/js` 10.0.1, `globals` 17.11.0, `eslint-plugin-astro` **3.1.0**, `eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y` 6.10.2, `typescript-eslint` 8.68.0, `typescript` **6.0.3** — **every pin at the registry's `latest` except `typescript`** `[verified 2026-08-27 — npm view, all 14 pins]`. `@eslint/js` and `globals` are declared explicitly; before 2026-08-26 `eslint.config.js` imported them and they resolved only by npm hoisting accident. **Accessibility linting is on** — `flat/jsx-a11y-recommended`, 36 rules `[verified 2026-08-26 — 7 rules fired on a deliberately inaccessible .astro file]`. `eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y@6.10.2` declares a stale `eslint ^3..^9` peer range; a one-line `overrides` entry in `package.json` resolves it. ⚠️ **`eslint-plugin-astro@3.1.0` declares `node ^22.22.3 \|\| ^24.16.0 \|\| >=26.3.0`**, which excludes Pouya's Node 25.6.0 — `npm install` prints EBADENGINE there. Dev-time only, and `nvm use` (Node 22 LTS, per `.nvmrc`) clears it. **`typescript` — the hold, and it was too wide by a whole major until 2026-08-27.** `latest` is **7.0.2** and it is unusable here: `typescript-eslint@8.68.0` peers `typescript >=4.8.4 <6.1.0` and `@astrojs/check@0.9.10` peers `^5.0.0 \|\| ^6.0.0`, so taking 7 breaks **both** the linter and `astro check` `[verified 2026-08-27 — npm view <pkg> peerDependencies]`. **But this row previously read "held at 5.x", and 6.0.3 is a stable release both peers accept** — so the pin sat a full major behind for no reason the record could name, in a row whose whole job is to name the reason. Now at **6.0.3**, the newest version compatible with both peers; `npx tsc --version` reports 6.0.3 and the full gate is green `[verified 2026-08-27]`. The 6.x listing is mostly `-dev` and `-beta` tags; **6.0.2 and 6.0.3 are the only stable 6.x releases**, which is why `npm view typescript version` (7.0.2) is not the number to pin against here. Re-check at the next phase boundary: the hold ends when `typescript-eslint` widens its peer range past `<6.1.0` |
 | Lighthouse CI | **Not installed, and that is now stated wherever the check is claimed.** `@lhci/cli` was the sole source of all 10 `npm audit` findings (7 high, via `lighthouse → puppeteer-core → extract-zip`), 0.15.1 is `latest` so there was no clean upgrade, and it cannot run at all — no pages, no `lighthouserc`. Removed 2026-08-26; **`npm audit` now reports 0 vulnerabilities** `[verified 2026-08-26 — npm audit]`. Removing it left a **documented control that no longer exists** — `docs/04`, `CLAUDE.md` and `/build` Phase 5 all required a run that had silently become impossible, which is Q22's defect in a different costume. Fixed 2026-08-26: the unavailability is stated in `docs/04-seo-spec.md` (budget table, the callout under Performance, and the post-launch checklist), `CLAUDE.md` (performance budget and the definition of done), `.claude/commands/build.md` Phase 5, `docs/06-deployment.md` (PR checks and the cutover checklist), and `.claude/agents/adversarial-reviewer.md` §4 — which is also told **not** to raise the absence as a finding. **Re-add at build step 7** with a pin verified that day and a check for a patched release; do not assume 0.15.1 is still the ceiling (R11) |
 | Node | **22 LTS line**, `.nvmrc` holds `22` so it tracks the latest 22.x rather than freezing at a floor. `package.json` declares **`engines.node` = `^22.13.0 || >=24`** (verbatim — it excludes Node 23, an EOL odd line, which a flat `>=22.13.0` would have admitted) and **`engines.npm >=9.6.5`** — the intersection of every dependency's own floor: Astro 7 and `@astrojs/mdx` 7 need `>=22.12.0`, ESLint 10 needs `^20.19.0 \|\| ^22.13.0 \|\| >=24` `[verified 2026-08-26 — npm view astro@7.2.7 engines, npm view eslint@10.9.1 engines]`. **Pouya's machine reports Node v25.6.0** `[verified 2026-08-26 — node -v]`, an odd-numbered non-LTS line; it satisfies the floor, but `nvm use` keeps local and CI on the same runtime |
 | Styling | Plain CSS with custom properties. No Tailwind, no CSS-in-JS `[verified 2026-08-25]` |
-| Client JS | **Zero. Not "minimal" — none.** `dist/type-scale/index.html` contains **0 `<script>` tags** and `dist/_astro/` contains no JS bundle `[verified 2026-08-26 — built, counted, and confirmed in headless Chrome]`. The reveal was an inline `IntersectionObserver` in `<head>` until 2026-08-26; it was removed because `docs/05-backend-spec.md` specifies `script-src 'self'` with no `unsafe-inline`, so the only script on the site was the one thing the site's own CSP would refuse to run. `animation-timeline: view()` in `global.css` replaces it. **Both scroll-driven animations must use `animation-*` LONGHANDS** — Lightning CSS folds the `animation` shorthand together with `animation-timeline` into an invalid declaration and discards it, which works in `npm run dev` and is dead in `npm run build`. It happened twice in one session: once in the header condense, then again in the fix written for it. `/build` Phase 5 now greps `dist` for it. Islands remain available where a feature genuinely cannot be CSS or progressive HTML — none has been needed |
+| Known HTML-conformance error | **Astro's `<Picture>` + `densities` emits a duplicate-density `srcset`, and it is upstream of this repo.** The pattern is `url, url 1x, url 2x, url 3x` — the first candidate carries no descriptor and therefore defaults to `1x`, so two candidates claim the same density, which puts the document in error per the HTML spec. **Behaviour is benign** and selection is correct at DPR 1, 2 and 3 `[verified 2026-08-27 — measured in headless Chrome]`. It affects **4 of the 12 `srcset` attributes on `/`** — the `<source>` elements of every `<Picture>` using `densities`, i.e. the three `InfinityMark` instances. The hero portrait uses `widths` + `sizes` and emits clean `w` descriptors. **Consequence for the record: do not claim "HTML validator clean" for any page carrying a mark**, and do not re-open this as a defect in this repo — it is `<Picture>`'s output, not ours. It would go if `InfinityMark` moved to `widths` + `sizes`, which would mean every call site supplying a `sizes` string for a fixed-size decorative image; not worth it for a conformance nit. Recorded on `adversarial-reviewer`'s request, 2026-08-27; first raised as step-1 review finding #8 |
+| Deploy ordering | **`/` must not be deployed before `/about/` exists**, and the reason is machine-readable rather than visible. The home page's `Person` JSON-LD sets `url` and `@id` to `https://adr.smlcompany.ca/about/`, which is a **404 until build step 3**. The `@id` resolves inside the page's own `@graph`, so `provider` is fine; `Person.url` is the exposure, and it is the one part of the page a crawler acts on rather than renders. Every internal link is in the same position, which is inherent to a nineteen-page build order — **but D11 already governs this: "Build everything, one clean cutover", and nothing deploys until step 11.** Recorded because `npm run deploy` is a single command from this machine and the guard is a decision rather than a mechanism. Raised by `adversarial-reviewer`, 2026-08-27 |
+| Client JS | **Zero. Not "minimal" — none.** `dist/index.html` contains **1** `<script>` tag and it is `type="application/ld+json"`; non-JSON-LD scripts **0**, and `dist/_astro/` contains no JS bundle `[verified 2026-08-27 — built, counted, and re-confirmed with script execution disabled at the CDP level: 444 DOM nodes, 6,578 characters of visible text, 5,665 px of content, i.e. the identical page]`. *(This row cited `dist/type-scale/index.html` until 2026-08-27; that page was the step-1 proof sheet and step 2 deleted it, so the row named a file that no longer exists. `/` is now the page to count.)* The reveal was an inline `IntersectionObserver` in `<head>` until 2026-08-26; it was removed because `docs/05-backend-spec.md` specifies `script-src 'self'` with no `unsafe-inline`, so the only script on the site was the one thing the site's own CSP would refuse to run. `animation-timeline: view()` in `global.css` replaces it. **Both scroll-driven animations must use `animation-*` LONGHANDS** — Lightning CSS folds the `animation` shorthand together with `animation-timeline` into an invalid declaration and discards it, which works in `npm run dev` and is dead in `npm run build`. It happened twice in one session: once in the header condense, then again in the fix written for it. `/build` Phase 5 now greps `dist` for it. Islands remain available where a feature genuinely cannot be CSS or progressive HTML — none has been needed |
 | Content | Astro **Content Layer API** collections, MDX for Insights. Config lives at **`src/content.config.ts`**; collections declare a `loader`, not a `type`; `z` imports from `astro/zod`. **Astro 5 introduced** the Content Layer API and this location; **Astro 6 removed** the legacy `src/content/config.ts` fallback — moving the file back now raises `LegacyContentConfigError` `[verified 2026-08-26 — reproduced by moving it back]` |
 | Fonts | Instrument Serif + Geist + Geist Mono, **self-hosted**, `font-display: swap`. **Files present as of 2026-08-26** — six `.woff2` cuts, **123,804 bytes** total, in `public/fonts/` (`du -sh` says 136K; that is disk blocks, not transfer, and this row is read in a performance context); provenance, licences (all SIL OFL 1.1) and the reason they are committed rather than pulled at build are in `docs/reference/fonts-provenance.md`. Before this they were *declared* in `global.css` and **absent from disk**, so every face silently fell back to Georgia and the system sans `[verified 2026-08-26 — built and listed]`. Instrument Serif 400 latin (21,032 B) and Geist latin (29,400 B) are preloaded in `BaseLayout.astro` — about 50 kB at first paint; nothing else is. Every font URL carries **`?v=1`**, because the deploy script serves `/fonts/*` `immutable` for a year: replacing a cut means bumping that query in `global.css` and in the preload together `[verified 2026-08-26 — byte counts]` |
 | AWS account | `327082975128` `[verified 2026-08-26 — inventory]` |
@@ -473,7 +536,7 @@ Nothing below can be invented. Each needs an answer from Pouya.
 | Q5 | Booking tool — **parked 2026-08-26 at Pouya's request.** Build `/contact/` with the form only and a clean slot for the embed. Now tracked as standing reminder R6 | `/contact/` — non-blocking |
 | ~~Q6~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-26.** Supplied and committed: `src/assets/pouya-lajevardi.jpg` (1600×1600 master) and `src/assets/og-portrait.jpg` (1200×630 link-preview crop) | — |
 | ~~Q7~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-26.** Pouya reverted to generic. The boutique is **never named**; refer to it as *a Toronto litigation and ADR boutique* throughout | — |
-| ~~Q8~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-26.** ADRIC, ADRIO, OBA sections. Not OCNI. Not LSO (see §4) | — |
+| ~~Q8~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-26.** ADRIC, ADRIO, OBA sections, **and the Canadian Tax Foundation** (CTF added 2026-08-26; this row omitted it until `claims-auditor` found the omission on 2026-08-27 — a second, stale copy of the memberships fact in a place nobody re-reads, which is the failure mode §7's single-source rule exists to stop. §4 is the source; this row is a pointer). Not OCNI. Not LSO (see §4) | — |
 | ~~Q9~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-26.** Gitea, repo `adr-sml`, clone at `/Users/pouya/Dev/Websites/adr-sml` | — |
 | ~~Q10~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-26.** Full inventory captured; values in §7 | — |
 | ~~Q18~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-26.** `smlcompany.ca` is verified for sending — `true`. The `None` in the earlier listing was a query artefact, not a fault | — |
@@ -487,16 +550,23 @@ Nothing below can be invented. Each needs an answer from Pouya.
 | ~~Q29~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-26 by implementation.** Guard widened on both counts: the two secrets are checked (emptiness only, never echoed), and `INTAKE_ENDPOINT` is promoted to job-level `env:` and guarded. Every `vars.*` and `secrets.*` the workflow consumes is now covered except `BOOKING_URL`, empty by decision (R6) | — |
 | ~~Q30~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-26 — federally, under the CBCA**, and it does **not** appear in the footer. Recorded in §4 with the caution that it implies nothing about licensure or about where the practice may operate. The footer reads `© <year> SML Company Ltd` and stops there (Pouya's direction, given twice). `src/data/site.ts` un-nulled, `TODO(pouya)` removed. Note the spelling: §4 writes *SML Company Ltd.* with a terminal period; the rendered string has none, because that is how Pouya specified it | — |
 | ~~Q31~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-26 — Plausible**, and decided rather than defaulted. Pouya checked and found his own assumption wrong: Fathom is Canadian-owned but stores non-EU traffic on US servers, isolating in the EU only for EU visitors; Plausible holds everything in the EU. D15 amended with that reasoning. The value that was guessed and nulled is now the value that was chosen — which is not the same thing, and the difference is why it was nulled | — |
-| **Q35** | **NARROWED 2026-08-26 — two of the four items are resolved; two are not.** `Arbitration` is answered (Q33) and is now a **§4 Offerings** row. What remains: **(a) Med-Arb** — ungated by the same reasoning, so it is purely a competence call, and Pouya named mediation and the three arbitration forms without naming it. Do not infer it. **(b) `Energy, Grid & Regulatory` and `Shareholder & Family Business`** — subject-matter areas rather than gated activities, so the offering test asks only whether he is competent to mediate or arbitrate in them, which is his answer to give. `docs/03` already fixes how the pages must read once answered — *"Frame as positioning, not as history"* — so this is not a blocker on writing them, only on claiming capability in a one-word nav label before the page exists. Original framing follows | Med-Arb (step 4); the practice pages (step 5) |
+| ~~Q35~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-27, all four items, and the answer added a gate that was missing.** **(a) Med-Arb** — *"he holds Q.Med and now accepts arbitration appointments, so both halves are live. Keep it in the nav. Removing it unilaterally orphaned the page — restoring it was right."* It now has its own row in **§4 Offered now**, and stays in the footer sitemap (`docs/01` keeps it out of the *primary* nav deliberately; that is unchanged). **(b) `Energy, Grid & Regulatory`, `Shareholder & Family Business` and the other four** — *"subject-matter labels, already governed by `docs/03`'s 'positioning, not history'. They pass test 1; test 2 is the page's job."* **(c) THE GATE.** Pouya: *"Add the publication gate you identified was missing: a practice area may be named where he can competently accept an appointment in that subject matter, and where the page frames it as positioning without claiming history. That hole is why Med-Arb sat in the footer under a paragraph telling readers not to infer it."* Written into **§4 → Subject-matter areas — the publication gate.** Nothing in the nav or footer is now unrowed or ungated. Narrowed framing follows | — |
+| ~~Q35-narrowed~~ | **NARROWED 2026-08-26 — two of the four items are resolved; two are not.** `Arbitration` is answered (Q33) and is now a **§4 Offerings** row. What remains: **(a) Med-Arb** — ungated by the same reasoning, so it is purely a competence call, and Pouya named mediation and the three arbitration forms without naming it. Do not infer it. **(b) `Energy, Grid & Regulatory` and `Shareholder & Family Business`** — subject-matter areas rather than gated activities, so the offering test asks only whether he is competent to mediate or arbitrate in them, which is his answer to give. `docs/03` already fixes how the pages must read once answered — *"Frame as positioning, not as history"* — so this is not a blocker on writing them, only on claiming capability in a one-word nav label before the page exists. Original framing follows | Med-Arb (step 4); the practice pages (step 5) |
 | ~~Q35-orig~~ | **May the header nav and footer sitemap name a service or practice area the register does not establish as a present capability, before the page that qualifies it exists?** This is the architecture-versus-register question that `claims-auditor` has now raised twice, and it is not one an implementer should settle. The nav and footer ship on all nineteen pages and today carry **`Arbitration`**, **`Med-Arb`**, **`Energy, Grid & Regulatory`** and **`Shareholder & Family Business`** — none of which trace to a §4 row. Every one of them is also **locked architecture**: D5 and §6 fix the sitemap, and `docs/01` specifies each page. The specs already anticipate the tension and answer it at page level — `docs/03`: *"Frame as positioning, not as history"*; `docs/01` on energy: *"Write it as a genuine position, not a claim of existing volume"* — so the question is precisely whether a **one-word nav label**, which has no room to frame anything, inherits that licence. Three ways out: accept the labels as taxonomy and rely on the pages to qualify (status quo), rename toward capability-neutral wording, or hold items out of the nav until their page ships. **Claude Code declined to act unilaterally on either audit pass**; recorded so the judgement is visible rather than missed | The header and footer on every page; sharpest at step 5 |
 | ~~Q36~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-26 — yes, and so are sole-arbitrator and party-appointed appointments.** Now a row in **§4 Offerings** rather than an unsourced assertion in three specs. `docs/01`, `docs/03` and `docs/07-fees.md` no longer need to cite an open question against it. Original text follows | — |
 | ~~Q36-orig~~ | **Is co-arbitration work available now?** Asserted in three specs — `docs/01` §`/arbitration/`, `docs/03` §Voice as model copy, and `docs/07-fees.md`, which instructs *"The page must say so"* — and **it is in no §4 row.** §4 records the Q.Arb pathway as commenced August 2026 and nothing about what is available in the meantime. The sentence is offered under the heading *"Name the limits"*, so the unverified half travels inside advice about honesty, which is how it survived. All three files now cite this question; none has been deleted, because the *shape* of the sentence is right and only its second clause is unsourced. Raised by `claims-auditor`, 2026-08-26 | `/arbitration/` (step 4) and `/fees/` (step 9) |
-| **Q37** | **Is "Law and engineering" the right label under `JD + ML`?** §4's substitution principle supplies the three credential-row **values** (`Q.Med` / `JD + ML` / `EN · FA`); the labels come from `docs/03` and are not themselves registered. `claims-auditor` reads this one as a D13 implication risk: "engineering" is shorthand for a **verified practising** claim, so the parallel invites "Law" to be read the same way, and D13 bars implication as hard as assertion. Left as written — it is approved copy and changing approved copy is not an implementer's call — with a `TODO(pouya)` on it in `src/data/site.ts`. Nothing renders it yet. Raised by `claims-auditor`, 2026-08-26 | The credential row on `/` (step 2) and `/about/` (step 3) |
-| ~~Q33~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-26 — the question rested on a false premise.** It assumed the constraint on describing arbitration was about *entitlement*. ADR designations are voluntary credentials, not licences, and **anyone may be appointed an arbitrator in Ontario** — so the constraint was always positional, never legal, and it was Pouya's to answer. He accepts arbitration appointments now. `Mediation · Arbitration · Toronto` is **restored to the masthead one-liner**, and `docs/04`'s specified home `<title>` stands as written. See **§4 Offerings**, added for exactly this class of statement. The original question text follows for the record | — |
+| ~~Q37~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-27 — the label changes.** `JD + ML` is now labelled **"Legal training and engineering practice"**, not "Law and engineering". Pouya's reasoning, and it is the finding rather than the fix: *"The parallel was doing the implying — a degree and a practice under one noun. The asymmetry is the honest part."* A degree is not a practice, and a label that renders them as two instances of one thing invites the reader to supply the missing symmetry — which for "Law" is precisely the licensure implication D13 bars. The new label is longer and less tidy, deliberately. `docs/03`'s credential-row table is amended, and the `TODO(pouya)` is gone from `src/data/site.ts`. Original question follows | — |
+| ~~Q37-orig~~ | **Is "Law and engineering" the right label under `JD + ML`?** §4's substitution principle supplies the three credential-row **values** (`Q.Med` / `JD + ML` / `EN · FA`); the labels come from `docs/03` and are not themselves registered. `claims-auditor` reads this one as a D13 implication risk: "engineering" is shorthand for a **verified practising** claim, so the parallel invites "Law" to be read the same way, and D13 bars implication as hard as assertion. Left as written — it is approved copy and changing approved copy is not an implementer's call — with a `TODO(pouya)` on it in `src/data/site.ts`. Nothing renders it yet. Raised by `claims-auditor`, 2026-08-26 | The credential row on `/` (step 2) and `/about/` (step 3) |
+| ~~Q33~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-26 — the question rested on a false premise.** It assumed the constraint on describing arbitration was about *entitlement*. ADR designations are voluntary credentials, not licences, and **commercial arbitral appointment in Ontario is not gated behind a designation** — so the constraint was always positional, never legal, and it was Pouya's to answer. *(This row said "anyone may be appointed an arbitrator in Ontario" until 2026-08-27. **Pouya checked it and it is false as a universal** — family arbitration is gated; see Q39. Corrected in place, because §9 is Current Truth. The Change Log entries that quote the original stand unedited, which is where the history lives.)* He accepts arbitration appointments now. `Mediation · Arbitration · Toronto` is **restored to the masthead one-liner**, and `docs/04`'s specified home `<title>` stands as written. See **§4 Offerings**, added for exactly this class of statement. The original question text follows for the record | — |
 | ~~Q33-orig~~ | **How is arbitration described in site-wide copy before Q.Arb is conferred?** Not a wording question — a positioning one, and it recurs on every page. §4 records the Q.Arb pathway as **commenced August 2026**, "never as held or nearing completion". `SITE.tagline` reads `Mediation · Arbitration · Toronto`, and `docs/01` specifies that exact string as the **Home hero eyebrow** — where the hero copy beneath it can qualify it. Build step 1 promoted it to a masthead line under Pouya's name on every page, where nothing qualifies it and it reads as a designation strip; `claims-auditor` flagged it and **it has been removed from the header**. But the question it exposed is still open and lands at build step 2: does the hero eyebrow keep `Arbitration` as specified, qualify it, or hold it until designation? `/arbitration/` (step 4) is separately specced to state the position plainly, which is the honest model — the issue is the one-line forms that have no room to. **Second pass, same day:** the removal from the header did not sweep the proof sheet, where the same string was **hand-typed** as a type specimen and rendered ten times at up to 96px. Both defects fixed — the specimen is now a neutral pangram — and the lesson is the sweep rule again: a removal is a `grep`, not a memory. The nav item `Arbitration` also survives, deliberately; that is Q35. Raised by `claims-auditor`, 2026-08-26 | The Home hero (step 2); `docs/04`'s specified home `<title>`; any bio or one-line descriptor |
 | **Q34** | **Do §2's measurements of the previous build still hold, and were they measured against the deployed file?** Two of `claims-auditor`'s findings were unverified old-site assertions published in copy, which sent Claude Code to measure the live URL on 2026-08-26. What came back does not straightforwardly match §2. **Reproduced:** the response is a single **2,206,032-byte** file, and `<title>` is still `SML Company · Dispute Resolution`. **Could not be reproduced from the served HTML:** there are **zero** `base64,` occurrences anywhere in it — §2 records "two logo PNGs ~1 MB, base64-inlined" — and no reference to `unpkg` or a React development build. **Why this is a question and not a correction:** the served document is a *bundler harness*. 2,210,921 bytes of it are inline `<script>`, the real `<head>` sits JSON-escaped inside a `<script type="__bundler/template">`, and the application is loaded from **nine UUID-named script files that were not fetched**. The logos and the CDN references may well be in those bundles. So §2 may be right, may be stale, or may have been measured against the local source rather than the deployment — this record cannot tell which. **Why it matters beyond tidiness:** `docs/02` and `CLAUDE.md` both cite the base64-logo figure as the *reason* for a standing convention, and §12 R8 exists because unverified premises propagate. Nobody should quote these numbers in public copy until the question closes. Raised by Claude Code, 2026-08-26 | Nothing structural. It governs whether §2's figures may be cited as fact |
-| **Q39** | **Does the arbitration offering extend to FAMILY arbitration, and is that activity gated?** Raised by `claims-auditor` 2026-08-26 as a counter-example from inside this repo, and it is a good one. §4 Offerings rests on the proposition that arbitral appointment in Ontario is not gated behind a designation. The site ships a **`Shareholder & Family Business`** practice area — and **family** arbitration in Ontario is understood to be one of the places where arbitrator qualification *is* prescribed by statute and regulation. If so, the offering test's own boundary applies: where an activity is gated, the question is **permission**, and permission is not established. **This record does not resolve it** — Claude Code will not assert a proposition of Ontario law, and neither may a self-report. What is needed: (a) does the practice-area page contemplate family-law arbitration at all, or only shareholder, partnership and family-*business* disputes, which is a different thing; and (b) if it does, the gating question needs a checkable source in the repo, per R14. **Interim:** §4's arbitration rows are scoped to **commercial** arbitration and the universal has been removed from the reasoning. Nothing ships that turns on it | The `Shareholder & Family Business` page (step 5); `/arbitration/` (step 4) |
-| **Q38** | **A true vector master for the infinity mark.** The mark is a shaded ribbon — variable-width band, maroon flowing into champagne, twisting in three dimensions and passing over itself at the crossing. That is gradient-mesh artwork, and there is no honest way to express it as the flat vector paths `docs/02` assumes. An SVG **is** held — `src/assets/brand/sml-logo-source.svg` — and **it renders faithfully**: rasterised at 8333 px it reproduces the master exactly, at the same 1.566:1 `[verified 2026-08-26 — rendered and measured]`. *An earlier draft of this row called it "a raster in a vector wrapper", which was unfair and is corrected.* What rules it out is **payload and composition**: 257,278 bytes against **3,063** for the AVIF a Retina browser actually takes — 84× — plus **seven embedded base64 PNGs** and a 1,225-stop gradient mesh, so inlining it would breach `CLAUDE.md`'s rule against base64-inlining images. What is wanted is a master that is faithful **and** light. **Pouya is commissioning a proper vector master.** Until it lands, `InfinityMark.astro` renders an optimised raster and that is a **documented, temporary exception to `docs/02`'s inline-SVG rule** (R13 keeps it from becoming permanent). When the master arrives: replace the component's `<Picture>` with inline SVG, regenerate the favicons from it, and delete the exception from `docs/02` and this row. Raised by Claude Code 2026-08-26; scoped by Pouya the same day | Nothing — the mark renders correctly. This is fidelity and payload, not function |
+| ~~Q39~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-27 — and the answer is that the register's premise was FALSE.** Pouya checked it rather than defending it. His words: *"My assertion was FALSE as a universal."* **(a) Is it gated? YES.** Family arbitrators in Ontario must complete prescribed training — 14 hours on screening for domestic violence and power imbalances, 30 hours of Ontario family law for arbitrators outside the Ontario or another Canadian bar, and 10 hours ongoing per two-year period. **Sourced, and the source is now in the repo** per R14: `docs/reference/ontario-family-arbitration-training.md`, retrieved 2026-08-27 with provenance. **(b) Does the offering extend to it? NO** — and that is what actually disposes of the question. Pouya does not do family arbitration, so it is a **scope exclusion, not a gating problem**, and the prescribed-training requirement never bears on this practice. `Shareholder & Family Business` means **commercial disputes among family shareholders** — shareholder and partnership disputes, co-founder breakdowns, business succession — and its page must state plainly that family law matters are not accepted. *One sentence, not a section: Pouya's instruction is that it earns its place only by saving a wasted intake call.* **(c) One honest limit on the source.** The extract establishes the family gate directly and the commercial half only by absence — it neither mentions nor excludes commercial arbitration. §4 therefore carries *"commercial arbitration in Ontario requires no licence and no designation"* as **Pouya's stated position, unstamped**, not as a sourced fact. Do not let the footnote promote it. **Also swept:** the false universal survived in three live places outside the paragraph that was corrected — §4's NOT-NEGOTIABLE boundary bullet, §9's Q33 closure row, and a comment in `SiteHeader.astro`. All three fixed; the `grep` and its output are pasted in **Change Log entry (w), §Sweeps**. *(`adversarial-reviewer` flagged this citation while it still pointed at nothing: the entry was written at Phase 6, after review, so for the duration of the review a §9 row asserted in the present tense that evidence "is in the Change Log" before it was. Fair catch. The row now names the entry, and the reviewer independently re-ran the sweep and confirmed it was genuinely complete.)* Original question follows | — |
+| ~~Q39-orig~~ | **Does the arbitration offering extend to FAMILY arbitration, and is that activity gated?** Raised by `claims-auditor` 2026-08-26 as a counter-example from inside this repo, and it is a good one. §4 Offerings rests on the proposition that arbitral appointment in Ontario is not gated behind a designation. The site ships a **`Shareholder & Family Business`** practice area — and **family** arbitration in Ontario is understood to be one of the places where arbitrator qualification *is* prescribed by statute and regulation. If so, the offering test's own boundary applies: where an activity is gated, the question is **permission**, and permission is not established. **This record does not resolve it** — Claude Code will not assert a proposition of Ontario law, and neither may a self-report. What is needed: (a) does the practice-area page contemplate family-law arbitration at all, or only shareholder, partnership and family-*business* disputes, which is a different thing; and (b) if it does, the gating question needs a checkable source in the repo, per R14. **Interim:** §4's arbitration rows are scoped to **commercial** arbitration and the universal has been removed from the reasoning. Nothing ships that turns on it | The `Shareholder & Family Business` page (step 5); `/arbitration/` (step 4) |
+| **Q40** | **All nineteen pages will share ONE Open Graph image, and it is a portrait crop.** `docs/04-seo-spec.md` specifies OG images *"generated at build with `satori` or `astro-og-canvas`... One template: display headline on cream, infinity mark, designation line. Never a screenshot."* What ships is `src/assets/og-portrait.jpg`, the 1200×630 crop Pouya supplied under Q6 — not a screenshot, so the prohibition is not breached, but not the generated template either. The consequence is specific: `docs/04` requires a **unique** title and description per page and every link preview will nonetheless look identical, which is the surface a general counsel actually sees when a colleague pastes the URL into Teams or Slack. **Two decisions, neither an implementer's:** whether to build the generator at all (it adds a dependency and an `npm audit` surface, against R11), and what the card looks like (brand). **Interim:** the portrait crop ships on `/` and is fine on its own terms. Raised by Claude Code, 2026-08-27 | Nothing today. Sharpest once several pages exist — steps 3–5 |
+| **Q41** | **Three copy questions the step-2 claims audit escalated rather than let an implementer settle.** All three were changed to a defensible interim form so `/` could ship; each interim is marked in the source with this question number. **(a) Does Q37's reasoning extend to PROSE, or is it scoped to the credential label?** The approach section opened *"Law and engineering are not blended here"* — the exact parallel Pouya struck one day earlier, relocated from the label into body copy and strengthened by attributing both halves to him personally. `docs/01` §`/` item 3 and `docs/03` §Home both specify the section as *"law and engineering converging on the same dispute"*, so the framing is his; only the construction carrying the implication was changed (to *"what the documents say, and what the engineering says"*). Extend Q37, or scope it to the label and say so. **(b) May the comparative be restored?** *"facts most neutrals take on faith"* is `docs/03`'s core positioning statement and is therefore approved copy — but it is an assertion about a population of third parties, `docs/03`'s own checklist requires *"any comparative claim is factual and verifiable"*, and §4 has no row for it. Interim: *"the documents rather than the pleadings"*, which says the same thing about the work without saying anything about other neutrals. **(c) What does `LAT pre-hearing mediation` mean as an offering?** `docs/01` §`/practice/insurance/` lists that phrase as a **search intent**; as a service blurb it reads as conducting mediation inside the LAT's own statutory process, which is not what a privately retained neutral is appointed to do. Interim: *"private mediation of matters before the LAT"*. Confirm the intent before the page ships. Raised by `claims-auditor`, 2026-08-27 | (a) and (b): `/` is live with the interim wording — his ratification or reversal. (c): `/practice/insurance/` at step 5 |
+| **Q42** | **The four "also offered" processes have no §4 Offerings row, and `/practice/` is specified to offer them.** `docs/01` §`/practice/` calls that page *"the natural home for the 'also offered' strip: early neutral evaluation, settlement counsel, dispute-system design, and pre-dispute technical advisory"*, and `FEES.hourly` in `src/data/site.ts` prices them at $500/h. **None has a row**, and §4 is explicit: *"An offering may not be published until it has a row in 'Offered now'... or it is a category that authorises everything by saying nothing."* Found on `/` first: the practice-areas link read *"All six areas, and what else is offered"*, which asserted offerings beyond the six — the Med-Arb-in-the-footer defect in a new place. **Reworded to "All six practice areas" and nothing is claimed today.** Each of the four is a **process**, so each needs its own row and its own competence answer; they are ungated the same way mediation and arbitration are, so this is a competence call and his alone. Raised by `claims-auditor`, 2026-08-27 | The `/practice/` index and its "also offered" strip (step 5); `/fees/` prices them (step 9) |
+| **Q43** | **The five process timings are published commitments with no §4 row.** `Day 0 · Days 1–7 · Days 7–21 · Days 21–30 · Day 30 onward` come from `docs/01` §`/process/` and are now on a public page. They are **not** a forbidden statistic — no matter count, no settlement rate, no median time to award — but they are checkable, specific, and about how the practice runs, which is precisely the class §4 exists to gate. `docs/03` §Process requires *"five steps with real timing"* and warns against evasions, so softening them to "typical" is barred and inventing them was never on. **Interim:** the numbers are published exactly as `docs/01` specifies, and the editorial claim *"with real timing"* — which asserted a quality about them rather than stating them — is gone from `/`. What is wanted is either an Offerings-style row confirming them for publication, or his explicit sign-off. Raised by `claims-auditor`, 2026-08-27 | `/process/` (step 6) states them in full; `/` states them now |
+| **Q38** | **A true vector master for the infinity mark.** The mark is a shaded ribbon — variable-width band, maroon flowing into champagne, twisting in three dimensions and passing over itself at the crossing. That is gradient-mesh artwork, and there is no honest way to express it as the flat vector paths `docs/02` assumes. An SVG **is** held — `src/assets/brand/sml-logo-source.svg` — and **it renders faithfully**: rasterised at 8333 px it reproduces the master exactly, at the same 1.566:1 `[verified 2026-08-26 — rendered and measured]`. *The characterisation has now moved twice and Pouya has settled it.* This row first called the file **"a raster in a vector wrapper"**; a later draft withdrew that as unfair. **The withdrawal went too far, and Pouya's ruling of 2026-08-27 restores the substance:** *"It renders faithfully because it IS the raster. Your first characterisation was accurate and the walk-back went too far."* Both things are true at once and the row must hold both — the file is a faithful rendering **and** it is faithful because seven base64 PNGs are carried inside it, which is why fidelity was never the question. **The Canva SVG does not close this question.** Pouya: *"Keep it committed, keep the AVIF render path. R13 stays open for a true vector master."* What rules it out is **payload and composition**: 257,278 bytes against **3,063 B** for the AVIF a Retina browser takes in the header — **84×** — plus **seven embedded base64 PNGs** and a 1,225-stop gradient mesh, so inlining it would breach `CLAUDE.md`'s rule against base64-inlining images. *Restated 2026-08-27, because the single number stopped covering the case:* build step 2 added a **232 px** call site (the home page's approach section, rendering at 225.5 px) beside the existing 64 px one, and at that size a DPR-2 device takes **14,555 B** and DPR-3 **22,639 B** — a ratio of ~11×, not 84×. `adversarial-reviewer` caught the three copies of the old figure going stale together, which is the SES-DKIM duplication in a new place. Both ladders are in `docs/reference/brand-assets.md`; **quote the size with the call site, never on its own.** Also worth knowing before someone reads it as a regression: the PNG fallback at 232 px runs **38,094 / 91,618 / 150,215 B**. Nothing that negotiates content types takes it — a DPR-3 device with neither AVIF nor WebP does not exist in practice — and the AVIF above is what real clients fetch. Accepted deliberately rather than capped, because capping it would blunt the mark on the high-DPI desktops that are the only place the 696 px variant is used at all. What is wanted is a master that is faithful **and** light. **Pouya is commissioning a proper vector master.** Until it lands, `InfinityMark.astro` renders an optimised raster and that is a **documented, temporary exception to `docs/02`'s inline-SVG rule** (R13 keeps it from becoming permanent). When the master arrives: replace the component's `<Picture>` with inline SVG, regenerate the favicons from it, and delete the exception from `docs/02` and this row. Raised by Claude Code 2026-08-26; scoped by Pouya the same day | Nothing — the mark renders correctly. This is fidelity and payload, not function |
 | ~~Q32~~ | **ANSWERED 2026-08-26 — and the answer was that the reconstruction was WRONG.** Pouya rendered the committed path against the master (`SML Company Just Logo Transparent.png`, 3000×3000) and rejected it on three counts. Two reproduce from the path alone: **(a) TANGENT, NOT CROSSING** — all four cubic branches meet the origin at exactly 90°, so the loops are mutually tangent on a vertical line and at stroke-width 28 render as *two kissing circles*, the one thing an infinity mark must not be `[verified 2026-08-26 — tangent vectors computed per segment, independently reproduced]`. Both lobes are strictly confined to their own half-plane (x is monotone on every segment), so the signed crossing number is **0** — they cannot cross anywhere, not merely at the node. Worse at the size actually shipped: the two strokes stay fused into one mass wherever the centreline separation `y²/192` is under 28, i.e. across **61% of the mark's height** — at 2rem that is a 16.8px blob out of a 27.4px-tall mark. No stroke-width, viewBox or scale change can produce a crossing from this centreline; **(b) WRONG PROPORTION** — the master's ink bounding box is **2668 × 1704 = 1.5657:1** `[verified 2026-08-26 — measured]`, and **(c)** the master is a shaded ribbon where the trace was two flat uniform strokes. ***1.23:1 — RECONCILED, and it was a real measurement, not a slip.*** It is the bounding box of the path's **coordinates** rather than of the **curve**. The control points sit at y = ±160 while the curve only reaches ±120 — the standard 3/4 pull-in of a cubic — so a coordinate-hull box is 400 × 320 = 1.2500, and with stroke-width 28 applied on all four sides it is **428 × 348 = 1.2299**. Pouya's figure to four significant figures, from one method applied consistently `[verified 2026-08-26 — derived]`. **It is a trap rather than a slip:** because x is monotone on every segment, the control points give the *correct* width (±200) and a 33% inflated height, so the obvious sanity check — "does the width look right?" — passes. Any tool that reads a bbox from parsed coordinates lands here; `getBBox()` would have returned 400 × 240. **And the direction is inverted from how it read:** measured from the curve, the traced path is 6.4% *wider and flatter* than the master, not squatter. **Consequence worth keeping:** the declared viewBox 440:280 = 1.5714 is within **0.35%** of the master's 1.566, so re-tuning the layout to the true ratio was ~0.18px of work at the shipped 2rem — and **re-tuning to 1.23 would have actively broken it** — at any given width 1.2299 allocates 1.5657/1.2299 = **27% more height** than the mark occupies, so the header would have been rebuilt around a box a quarter too tall. The ratio was never sufficient grounds on its own; **(a) tangency is, and it is exact.** **The traced path is deleted, not kept as a fallback**, on Pouya's instruction: *a wrong mark that renders is worse than a missing one, because it stops looking wrong.* Now closed by Q38 for the vector master | — |
 | ~~Q32-orig~~ | *(superseded — the original wording of this question is preserved in entry (v))* | `src/components/InfinityMark.astro` is built from geometry lifted verbatim from the deployed site's own loading-thumbnail SVG — the element it labels `smlMark`, fetched from `https://adr.smlcompany.ca/` on 2026-08-26. Path, both stroke widths (28 / 6) and the 0.7 inner opacity are the source's; the only change is folding a `translate(60 0)` into the coordinates. So it is SML's own artwork rather than a redrawing — but a loading placeholder is not necessarily the canonical file, and D7 says the mark carries over *unchanged*. If a master SVG or AI/EPS exists, supply it and the component gets replaced. Raised by Claude Code, 2026-08-26 | Nothing — the mark renders. This is about fidelity, not a blocker |
 | **Q23** | **Is a Gitea `act_runner` registered, and are Actions enabled in `app.ini`?** *The version half is closed:* the instance reports **1.27.2** `[verified 2026-08-26 — /api/v1/version]`, so the `vars` context is supported and the first-step guard is belt-and-braces rather than load-bearing. **What remains is not a fact to look up but a dependency on a person:** git.larsnolden.com is **jointly administered**, and both enabling Actions and registering a runner need the second administrator. Until then `npm run deploy` is the path, and it is documented rather than treated as a workaround | How deploys are triggered — not what they do |
@@ -548,7 +618,7 @@ never being raised again.
 
 | # | Reminder | Raised | Why it must keep coming back |
 |---|---|---|---|
-| R1 | **Licensure.** No site exists yet — `src/pages/` does not exist. **As specified**, the copy will assert the JD only and describe the boutique role as *active litigation exposure*, never *practice*. Pouya flagged that as an interim position and asked to be reminded to change it. §4 now records licence status as `[unestablished]`, which is the honest state, not a resolution | 2026-08-26 | If he is licensed and in good standing, it is the first credential appointing bodies and opposing counsel look for, and its absence from a detailed credentials page is conspicuous. If licensure is in progress, the copy should be rewritten the moment it completes. Either way this is a **temporary** framing that will otherwise ossify |
+| R1 | **Licensure — RAISED 2026-08-27 and acknowledged by Pouya; still open, and the stakes are higher than when it was written.** His words: *"The interim licensure framing is now carried by shipped pages rather than specs, which raises the stakes. Keep surfacing it."* So it is surfaced, and it will be surfaced again next session. **The opening sentence below is now false and is kept only because §12 rows are not rewritten silently:** `src/pages/` exists, `/` ships at build step 2, and the framing is on a public page rather than in a document. Original text follows. **Licensure.** No site exists yet — `src/pages/` does not exist. **As specified**, the copy will assert the JD only and describe the boutique role as *active litigation exposure*, never *practice*. Pouya flagged that as an interim position and asked to be reminded to change it. §4 now records licence status as `[unestablished]`, which is the honest state, not a resolution | 2026-08-26 | If he is licensed and in good standing, it is the first credential appointing bodies and opposing counsel look for, and its absence from a detailed credentials page is conspicuous. If licensure is in progress, the copy should be rewritten the moment it completes. Either way this is a **temporary** framing that will otherwise ossify |
 | R2 | **Matter counts stay off the site until they are independently credible.** Revisit once there is a number a sophisticated GC would find persuasive on its own | 2026-08-26 | §4 forbids them now. That rule has an expiry date nobody has set |
 | R3 | **The month 12–18 practice-area review — now two candidates, not one.** *(a)* **Indigenous engagement**, deliberately omitted at launch (§6). *(b)* **Tax-adjacent disputes**, added 2026-08-26 on the Canadian Tax Foundation membership: it is the one credential none of the six areas touch, and valuation, earn-out, indemnity and shareholder disputes that turn on a tax position are ADR territory. Reasoning for both is in `docs/01-architecture.md`. One review, two candidates | 2026-08-26 | The brief rates the Indigenous niche the most valuable single one, and omission there is a timing call rather than a permanent one. The tax case is the same shape and fails for the same reason today: a practice page is a claim of present capability, and a membership is a credential, not a caseload. Both stop being true at some point, and nothing will tell you when |
 | R4 | **Insights cadence.** D9 commits to monthly. A blog that stops is worse than one that never started | 2026-08-26 | The section's whole value is compounding |
@@ -558,7 +628,7 @@ never being raised again.
 | R10 | **Annually-renewing memberships.** §4 verifies the **OBA sections** (Construction & Infrastructure, ADR, Civil Litigation) and the **Canadian Tax Foundation** as of 2026-08-26 — *for now*. Both renew yearly. *Widened 2026-08-26 when CTF was added; it was OBA-only before* | 2026-08-26 | A credential that lapses quietly is the failure mode §4 exists to prevent, and OCNI already did exactly this (§4 records it as "not current, do not publish"). Re-confirm at each renewal, and before any page listing memberships ships — `/about/` at build step 3 is the first one that will |
 | R11 | **Re-check dependency currency at every phase boundary in the build order** (`docs/01-architecture.md` §Build order, 11 steps). Run `npm view <pkg> version` across **every** pin in `package.json` and compare; do not wait for something to break. Verified does not mean latest — record the reason for any deliberate hold in §7. **Carries one specific re-add trigger: at step 7, put `@lhci/cli` back.** Check for a patched release — do not assume `0.15.1` is still the ceiling just because it was on 2026-08-26 — pin it against `npm view` that day, write a `lighthouserc` with the budgets from `docs/04-seo-spec.md`, and delete the UNAVAILABLE notices this repo now carries in six places (§7 lists them). If the advisories are still unfixed, that is a decision to take deliberately, not a reason to leave the gap unstated | 2026-08-26 | `astro: "^5.0.0"` was recalled rather than checked and was two majors stale the day it was written, which meant a framework carrying high-severity XSS advisories. Between phases is cheap; after a phase of pages is written is not. The build order has ten more boundaries |
 | R12 | **`compressHTML: true` is a deliberate deviation from the Astro 7 default (`'jsx'`).** Measured 2026-08-26: in an `.astro` template an inline pair split across two lines renders as `<em>a</em><strong>b</strong>` under the default — the space is silently deleted. MDX prose is unaffected | 2026-08-26 | It is a deviation, and undocumented deviations become folklore. Revisit **with a measurement**, not a preference — and re-measure after any Astro major, since the behaviour could change again |
-| R13 | **The infinity mark ships as a RASTER, and that is temporary.** `InfinityMark.astro` renders an optimised AVIF/WebP from `src/assets/brand/sml-infinity-mark.png` — a deliberate, documented exception to `docs/02`'s "inline SVG, never a PNG", because the mark is gradient-mesh artwork and no true vector master exists yet (Q38). **Removal trigger: the commissioned vector master lands.** Then replace the `<Picture>` with inline SVG, regenerate `favicon.ico` and `apple-touch-icon.png` from it, and delete the exception from `docs/02`, from the component, and from Q38 | 2026-08-26 | Pouya flagged this himself when he made the ruling: *an interim raster is exactly the kind of temporary measure that becomes permanent by never being raised.* It costs ~8 KB and works, which is precisely why nobody will notice it again. There is no build error to prompt anyone — only this row |
+| R13 | **The infinity mark ships as a RASTER, and that is temporary. RAISED 2026-08-27; Pouya ruled the committed SVG does NOT close it** — *"Keep it committed, keep the AVIF render path. Your own measurement is the reason: 257 KB wrapping seven embedded base64 PNGs. It renders faithfully because it IS the raster."* So the exception stands and the reminder stays live. `InfinityMark.astro` renders an optimised AVIF/WebP from `src/assets/brand/sml-infinity-mark.png` — a deliberate, documented exception to `docs/02`'s "inline SVG, never a PNG", because the mark is gradient-mesh artwork and no true vector master exists yet (Q38). **Removal trigger: the commissioned vector master lands.** Then replace the `<Picture>` with inline SVG, regenerate `favicon.ico` and `apple-touch-icon.png` from it, and delete the exception from `docs/02`, from the component, and from Q38 | 2026-08-26 | Pouya flagged this himself when he made the ruling: *an interim raster is exactly the kind of temporary measure that becomes permanent by never being raised.* It costs ~8 KB and works, which is precisely why nobody will notice it again. There is no build error to prompt anyone — only this row |
 | R14 | **Anything a spec makes a claim about must be reachable from the repository.** If the artefact lives only in Drive, in a console, or on someone's disk, no reviewer can check the claim and the claim is unverifiable by construction — see the rule now in `CLAUDE.md` | 2026-08-26 | **This has now cost twice.** Q24 was `AWS-Hosting-Guide.md`, the only record of how the infrastructure was hand-built, living outside the repo. Q32 was the infinity mark: Claude Code traced it from the old site's *loading placeholder*, wrote a scrupulous provenance comment recording exactly that doubt — and **two adversarial review passes still could not catch it**, because the artwork they would have had to compare against was not in the repo. The doubt was correctly stated and structurally uncheckable. That is the failure mode: not a missing warning, a missing artefact |
 | ~~R7~~ | **RATIFIED / SUPERSEDED 2026-08-26.** (a) Cache-policy table matching the pipeline — **accepted**; documenting what the pipeline does beats documenting an intention. (b) `s3:AbortMultipartUpload` omitted — **accepted, reasoning corrected**: the lifecycle rule does not exist and is therefore not the cover; the actual cover is that `aws s3 sync` only goes multipart above 8 MB and the largest asset is a 357 KB portrait. Recorded in `docs/06-deployment.md` with a revisit trigger. (c) The `aws s3 ls` pre-flight — **superseded** by the variable guard now running as the workflow's first step | 2026-08-26 | — |
 | ~~R8~~ | **PROMOTED TO A RULE 2026-08-26.** A reminder was too weak for a pattern that survived three entries. *A sweep is a command, not a claim* now sits in `CLAUDE.md` under Conventions, in `/build` Phase 6, and in `/wrap` step 3: any claim that a change was applied across files must cite the command and be written only after reading its output | 2026-08-26 | — |
@@ -567,6 +637,542 @@ never being raised again.
 
 # Change Log
 
+## 2026-08-27 (w) — Build step 2: `/` ships. Q35, Q37 and Q39 close, and Q39's answer was that this register had been reasoning from a falsehood
+
+**Pouya ruled on all five parked items in one message.** Four are implemented
+here; R1 is acknowledged and stays live by design. The most important of them
+did not confirm this file — it corrected it.
+
+### Q39 — ANSWERED, and my assertion was FALSE as a universal
+
+His words: *"My assertion was FALSE as a universal; correct it, then close the
+question simply."* He checked rather than defended, against
+`ontario.ca/page/training-family-arbitrators`.
+
+**Family arbitration in Ontario is gated.** Prescribed training: 14 hours on
+screening for domestic violence and power imbalances, 30 hours of Ontario family
+law for arbitrators outside the Ontario or another Canadian bar, and 10 hours
+ongoing per two-year period with five on domestic violence or power imbalance.
+**`claims-auditor` produced this counter-example from inside the repo on
+2026-08-26 and it was right.**
+
+**The source is now IN THE REPO** — `docs/reference/ontario-family-arbitration-
+training.md`, retrieved 2026-08-27 with its provenance and method. That closes
+R14 for the half of the proposition it covers, and §4 now says which half that
+is, because the distinction matters more than the citation:
+
+- The extract establishes the **family** gate **directly**.
+- It establishes the **commercial** half only by **absence** — it neither
+  mentions nor excludes commercial arbitration. A government page about family
+  arbitrators is not authority for what a commercial arbitrator needs.
+
+So *"commercial arbitration in Ontario requires no licence and no designation"*
+is recorded as **Pouya's stated position, deliberately unstamped**, with the
+citation attached to the family half only. **A footnote must not be allowed to
+promote the scoped form back into a universal.**
+
+**What actually disposes of the question is the scope exclusion, not the law.**
+Pouya does not do family arbitration. §4 Offerings carries it as **NOT
+OFFERED — a scope exclusion, not a gating problem**, so the prescribed-training
+requirement never bears on this practice at all. `Shareholder & Family Business`
+means commercial disputes among family shareholders; its page must say plainly
+that family law matters are not accepted — **one sentence, not a section**, on
+his instruction that it earns its place only by saving a wasted intake call.
+Recorded in `docs/01` §`/practice/shareholder/` for build step 5.
+
+### The false universal had survived in three more places, and the grep found them
+
+Correcting the paragraph that carried it was not the fix. `grep -rn "Anyone may
+be appointed"` plus a paraphrase sweep for `No designation is required`:
+
+```
+$ grep -rn "anyone may be appointed\|Anyone may be\|No designation is required" \
+    --include='*.md' --include='*.astro' --include='*.ts' .
+AGENTS.md:238   <- my new text, quoting what was struck (correct)
+AGENTS.md:313   <- §4 BOUNDARY bullet: "Mediation and arbitration are ungated"  FIXED
+AGENTS.md:548   <- §9 Q33 closure row, bolded as an assertion               FIXED
+AGENTS.md:774   <- Change Log entry (v), append-only history (correct)
+src/components/SiteHeader.astro:141  <- a live comment in shipped source    FIXED
+```
+
+The §4 instance is the one worth dwelling on: it was in the paragraph headed
+**THE BOUNDARY, AND IT IS NOT NEGOTIABLE**, which is the worst place in this
+file for an unscoped claim about a class of activity. The boundary paragraph was
+breaching its own boundary.
+
+### Q35 — ANSWERED, all four items, and the answer supplied a gate that was missing
+
+- **Med-Arb** — *"he holds Q.Med and now accepts arbitration appointments, so
+  both halves are live. Keep it in the nav. Removing it unilaterally orphaned
+  the page — restoring it was right."* Now its own §4 Offerings row. It stays in
+  the footer sitemap; `docs/01` keeps it out of the *primary* nav deliberately
+  and that is unchanged.
+- **The six subject-matter labels** — *"subject-matter labels, already governed
+  by `docs/03`'s 'positioning, not history'. They pass test 1; test 2 is the
+  page's job."*
+- **THE GATE** — *"Add the publication gate you identified was missing... That
+  hole is why Med-Arb sat in the footer under a paragraph telling readers not to
+  infer it."* §4 gains **Subject-matter areas — the publication gate**: a
+  practice area may be named where (1) he can competently accept an appointment
+  in that subject matter, and (2) the page frames it as positioning without
+  claiming history. Condition 1 is about the label; condition 2 is about the
+  page. **Nothing in the nav or footer is unrowed or ungated any more.**
+
+### Q37 — ANSWERED. The label changes, and the reasoning is the finding
+
+`JD + ML` is labelled **"Legal training and engineering practice"**, not "Law and
+engineering". Pouya: *"The parallel was doing the implying — a degree and a
+practice under one noun. The asymmetry is the honest part."* A JD is a degree;
+engineering is a verified practice. Rendering them as two instances of one thing
+invited the reader to supply the symmetry, and for "Law" the missing half is a
+licence. It is longer and deliberately lopsided; `CredentialRow` carries a
+comment telling the next reader not to tidy it back into a parallel.
+
+### Q38 / R13 — the committed SVG does not close it, and my walk-back went too far
+
+Pouya: *"Keep it committed, keep the AVIF render path. Your own measurement is
+the reason: 257 KB wrapping seven embedded base64 PNGs. It renders faithfully
+because it IS the raster. Your first characterisation was accurate and the
+walk-back went too far."* Q38 and `docs/02` now hold both halves at once — the
+fidelity is real, and it is bought with embedded raster, which is exactly why
+fidelity was never the question. R13 stays open.
+
+### Q32 — Pouya ratifies the reconciliation, and identifies that his own step 3 would have broken the layout
+
+*"My 1.23:1 was measured from the path's coordinate hull rather than the curve,
+and step 3 of my Q32 ruling would have broken the layout had you followed it.
+Your reconciliation was right. The tangency was the only sound ground of the
+three."* Recorded because a ruling that turns out to be wrong in one of its three
+grounds is exactly the thing this file exists to keep visible.
+### Build step 2 — `/` ships. Zero JavaScript, and six components
+
+Eight sections specified in `docs/01` §`/`; **seven are built.** Hero ·
+credential row · the approach · two processes · six practice areas · process
+preview · contact band. New components, all from `docs/02`'s list: `Eyebrow`,
+`SectionHeading`, `Pill`, `CredentialRow`, `PracticeCard`, `ProcessStep`, plus
+`src/data/schema.ts` for the JSON-LD.
+
+**Section 7, Latest insights, is NOT built, and that is the only spec item this
+page does not deliver.** `src/content/insights/` is empty; the collection, the
+`ArticleCard` component and the drafted slate all arrive together at step 7
+(`docs/01` §Build order, D9). Rendering it now means shipping a component's
+scoped CSS to every visitor for an empty block, plus a props surface with no
+call site — already an open finding against `InfinityMark`. `SiteHeader` gates
+the Insights nav item on the same collection, so the page and the nav appear
+together. The omission is commented in the page source, not just here.
+
+**Deviations from spec, each deliberate and each recorded in place:**
+
+- **The credential row has FOUR slots, not `docs/01`'s three.** §4 Offerings'
+  paired-disclosure condition is the higher authority and requires the stage of
+  the arc stated wherever arbitration is offered; `/` says *arbitration
+  appointments* in its second sentence, so the stage belongs on this page and
+  not only in the footer. `docs/03` already authorised a fourth slot and now
+  records that on `/` it is required.
+- **No booking link in the contact band**, which `docs/01` item 8 asks for.
+  Booking is parked (R6) and `CONTACT.bookingUrl` is `null`. Stated, not
+  silently dropped.
+- **The masthead tagline is suppressed on `/`.** It is the same string as the
+  hero eyebrow, so at ≥76 rem the page opened with the same six words twice —
+  step-1 review finding #10, left open to "decide at step 2". The hero keeps it
+  (`docs/01` puts it there and gives it copy underneath to qualify it); the
+  masthead drops it, because the masthead is the placement Q33-orig objected to.
+  This only ever removes a claim from one page.
+- **The step-1 proof sheet at `/type-scale/` is deleted**, as its own comment,
+  `InfinityMark`'s comment and `astro.config.mjs`'s sitemap filter all said it
+  would be. Five live references to it survived the deletion and were found by
+  `grep`, including §7's Client JS row, which cited
+  `dist/type-scale/index.html` as the file proving the site ships no JavaScript.
+
+### R11 at the phase boundary — two pins were stale, one hold was too wide
+
+Run before writing any code, which is what R11 asks. `astro` **7.2.7 → 7.2.9**
+(two patches inside 48 hours). `typescript` **^5.9.3 → ^6.0.3** — a full major
+behind and installable. §7 had recorded the TypeScript hold as "held at 5.x",
+which was **too wide by a whole major**: 7.0.2 is genuinely blocked
+(`typescript-eslint@8.68.0` peers `>=4.8.4 <6.1.0`, `@astrojs/check@0.9.10`
+peers `^5 || ^6`), but 6.0.3 is stable and both peers accept it. The row now
+names the version, the blocker, and the condition that ends the hold. Committed
+separately as `8a2f513` so step 2's verification is not confounded by a
+toolchain change.
+### What the claims audit found — ten defects, and every one was implication or scope
+
+`claims-auditor` returned **FAIL**. Not one finding was a fabrication of the kind
+the old site carried; all ten were implication, scope, or a fact restated
+loosely — *which is exactly where D13 says the risk lives.* All ten are fixed or
+escalated. The four highest-value ones:
+
+- **`I mediate and arbitrate commercial disputes`.** §4 verifies that he
+  **accepts** arbitral appointments, and separately verifies *"multiple completed
+  sole mediations"* — **there is no counterpart row for a completed
+  arbitration.** Present-indicative "arbitrate" beside "mediate" invites the
+  reader to supply a track record for both. Now offering-shaped: *"I mediate
+  commercial disputes from Toronto, and I accept arbitration appointments."* The
+  clean form was already on the same page, in the arbitration card.
+
+- **The JSON-LD asserted arbitration twice and stated the stage nowhere.** The
+  visible page satisfied §4's paired-disclosure condition with the fourth
+  credential slot; the machine-readable graph did not. Both node descriptions
+  now carry *"the Q.Arb pathway commenced August 2026"*, and `hasCredential`
+  stays Q.Med-only — the stage belongs in prose, never in a field that means
+  *holds*. **A crawler-only claim is still a claim**, and this is the first time
+  the register has had to say so.
+
+- **`at one published rate with preparation time included` misdescribed money.**
+  Checked against `docs/07-fees.md`: D14's card sets **two** day rates ($2,000
+  half, $4,000 full), so "one published rate" reads as one price for both. And
+  `docs/07` says in terms that the bundled prep is a **capped** allowance which
+  *"must be stated on the page — 'including 2 hours of preparation'... Do not
+  quietly fold it into the hours figure."* A home card is the wrong place to
+  state it properly and stating it improperly is worse than silence, so the fee
+  claim is gone from `/` in both places it appeared. "Published" was also
+  forward-looking: `/fees/` ships at step 9.
+
+- **`Law and engineering are not blended here`** — Q37's struck parallel,
+  relocated from the credential label into body copy **one day after Pouya
+  struck it**, and strengthened by attributing both halves to him personally.
+  The section now reads *"what the documents say, and what the engineering
+  says"*: asymmetric, which was Pouya's whole point. The **argument** `docs/01`
+  and `docs/03` specify is unchanged. Whether Q37 formally reaches prose is his
+  call — **Q41(a)**.
+
+Also fixed: *"what else is offered"* asserted four processes with no §4 row
+(**Q42**); *"LAT pre-hearing mediation"* was a `docs/01` **search intent** read
+as a service (**Q41c**); *"facts most neutrals take on faith"* is an
+unverifiable comparative about third parties, replaced with *"the documents
+rather than the pleadings"* (**Q41b**); the editorial *"with real timing"* is
+gone while the timings themselves stand as specified (**Q43**); and the Q.Arb
+noun is now §4's own — *pathway*, not *designation*.
+
+**And the auditor found a stale copy of a fact in §9 itself.** Q8 still listed
+memberships as *"ADRIC, ADRIO, OBA sections"* — **the Canadian Tax Foundation
+was missing**, added to §4 on 2026-08-26. A second copy of a fact in a place
+nobody re-reads is the failure mode §7's single-source rule exists to stop, and
+this is the same shape as the stale enumeration that was found inside
+`claims-auditor`'s own brief. Fixed, and rewritten as a pointer to §4 rather
+than a second list. It would have bitten at step 3, the first page to publish
+memberships.
+
+### Seven defects I found in my own work before the reviewers reported
+
+Kept because the pattern in them is the point, not the count. Full list in the
+verification section; the three worth reading:
+
+- **`<Picture widths>` declared the untouched 1600 px master as the `<img src>`
+  fallback** — 254,626 bytes, for a 476 px slot. Passing `width`/`height`
+  alongside `widths` pins it to the 960 variant (78,665 B) and the 1600 px file
+  stops being generated. **The build log hid it completely**: it printed
+  "before: 349kB" for every variant either way. Found by reading the emitted
+  `src` and that file's real dimensions.
+
+- **Naming a prop `as` silently turned off prop type-checking for a whole
+  component.** `astro check` reported it only as `ts(6196) 'Props' is declared
+  but never used`, which reads like lint noise. It is not: `<Eyebrow dot as="h9"
+  bogusProp={1} />` compiled with **0 errors**, while the same probe against the
+  four other new components produced `ts(2322)` on all four. Renaming the single
+  identifier to `tag` restored it. **Do not silence a `ts(6196)` with
+  `Astro.props as Props`** — that hides the warning and leaves every call site
+  unchecked.
+
+- **96 px of cream sandwiched between the maroon contact band and the ink
+  footer.** Found by looking at a full-page screenshot, not by reading CSS.
+
+### And one alarm of my own that was wrong, in the direction of panic
+
+Measuring the marks, `img.naturalWidth` came back **64 at every DPR** — which
+looks exactly like *the density ladder is not being generated at all*, i.e. a
+shipped step-1 defect on the header mark of every page. **It is not.** For an
+image chosen from a `srcset` with an `x` descriptor, `naturalWidth` is
+**density-corrected**: a 192 px file selected at 3x correctly reports 64.
+Ground truth from disk: 64×41, 128×82, 192×123, in all three formats.
+
+The real defect underneath was smaller and mine: the home page added a **225.5
+px** call site to a component whose ladder was sized for 50 px and 56 px, so it
+upscaled 3.52× at DPR 3. `InfinityMark` now takes `width` and `loading`; the
+approach mark passes `width={232}` (→ 232/464/696, covering 676 device px) and
+`loading="lazy"`, since it sits a screen and a half down. All three instances
+now measure ≤1.0× upscale at DPR 1, 2 and 3.
+
+**That is the fifth time on this project that my own instrument misread**, and
+the pattern across all five is the same: a number that looks like a finding, from
+a probe nobody checked. `naturalWidth` joins `timeout`, the coordinate-hull
+bbox, the worst-deviating-instance filter, and the document-level overflow check.
+`CLAUDE.md` gains the general rule.
+
+### What the code review found — and finding 1 is the same defect for the FOURTH time
+
+`adversarial-reviewer` returned **fourteen findings, three blocking.** It also
+noted that the working tree moved under it mid-review, because the claims fixes
+above were being applied while it ran, and it re-verified each finding against
+the current tree so it could say which were still live. That is the right
+behaviour and it is worth recording as the reason the two reviewers should not
+be run against a moving target next time — brief them, then stop editing.
+
+**1. BLOCKING. `class="section-head"` on `<SectionHeading>` never matched, and
+three section headings collided with their content.**
+
+This is the defect `CLAUDE.md` already records twice under *"A parent cannot
+style a child component's root element"*, which then recurred a third time with
+`<Picture>` inside `InfinityMark` — and I wrote a fresh warning about it into
+`Eyebrow` and `Pill` in this very diff and then did it again in the page.
+
+The emitted evidence, side by side:
+
+```
+dist/_astro/index.*.css   .section-head[data-astro-cid-lcdefpme]{margin-block-end:var(--space-7)}
+dist/index.html           <div class="heading-block section-head" data-astro-cid-ypavld2q>
+```
+
+Measured before the fix: `margin-block-end: 0px` and a **0 px gap** to the next
+block on all three call sites — 48 px of intended separation gone. Not merely
+tight: `.display` sets `line-height: 0.98`, so the glyphs overflow the line box
+and *"Two processes."* sat over the top edge of the Mediation and Arbitration
+cards. **`astro check` reported 0 errors and `eslint` was clean**, which is
+exactly what `CLAUDE.md` says this failure looks like: no error, no warning, and
+the CSS reads correctly in the source.
+
+**I had looked at a full-page screenshot of this section and passed over it.**
+The gap looked plausible because a serif's descender space reads as air. A
+screenshot is not a substitute for a computed-style assertion, and the reverse is
+also true — three of my own findings today came only from looking.
+
+Fixed by wrapping each in a page-owned `<div class="section-head">`. Measured
+after: **48 px margin, 48 px gap, all three.** And the prop is gone —
+`SectionHeading` no longer accepts `class`, so passing one is now a **build
+error** rather than a silent no-op. Same deletion applied to `CredentialRow`,
+`Pill`, `ProcessStep`, `PracticeCard` and `Eyebrow`, all of which declared a
+`class` prop with no call site: five more invitations to the same mistake.
+
+**2. BLOCKING, already fixed in flight — the mark was upscaled 3.5× on the home
+page.** Covered above. The reviewer added the follow-up that mattered: the fix
+**invalidated a figure cited as load-bearing reasoning in three places.**
+`docs/02` §Components and §9 Q38 both argued *"257,278 ÷ 3,063 = 84×"* against
+the committed SVG, and none was updated when a second, larger ladder appeared —
+the home page's mark takes **14,555 B** at DPR 2, so the ratio there is ~11×.
+That is the SES-DKIM duplication in a new costume: the copy nobody re-reads goes
+stale. All three now carry both ladders and the instruction to **quote the size
+with the call site, never on its own.**
+
+**3. BLOCKING, partly fixed in flight — 234 px of horizontal content loss at a
+large default font size.** The three `minmax(Nrem, 1fr)` grids were mine to fix
+and were fixed; the reviewer then re-measured and found **83 px still going**,
+from two elements this diff introduced:
+
+- `.feature` measured **411 px in a 342 px container** — `padding: var(--space-7)`
+  is 192 px a side at root 32 px, and `.feature-title`'s min-content did not
+  shrink because **`overflow-wrap: break-word` permits a break at layout time
+  but does not reduce min-content size.** Now a clamped padding plus
+  `overflow-wrap: anywhere`.
+- `.contact-action { flex: none }` is `0 0 auto`, so the button could not shrink
+  below its **425 px** max-content. Now `0 1 auto` with `min-inline-size: 0`.
+
+**4. The credential row was never "two up on a phone", and its comment said it
+was.** `repeat(auto-fit, minmax(11rem, 1fr))` resolved to a **single 342 px
+track** at 390 px with all four items stacked and the band ~430 px tall — with
+`Q.Arb / Commenced August 2026`, which §4's paired-disclosure condition puts on
+this page, at the bottom of it. The arithmetic is not subtle: two 176 px tracks
+plus a 24 px gap need 376 px and the container is 342. **A measured-sounding
+comment that was false**, which is this project's own named failure mode, written
+by me on the same day I added the rule about it to `CLAUDE.md`.
+
+Now explicit: `repeat(2, minmax(0, 1fr))`, becoming four at 56 rem where four
+genuinely fit. Measured after: **2 rows at 320 / 390 / 640 / 768** (band height
+296 / 280 / 272 / 260 px, down from ~430), **1 row from 896 px.**
+
+**5. A §9 row cited a `grep` "in the Change Log" before the entry existed.** Q39
+said so in the present tense while the newest heading was still `(v)` — because
+`/build` writes the entry at Phase 6, after review. Fair catch, and the reviewer
+independently re-ran the sweep and confirmed it was genuinely complete. Q39 now
+names the entry.
+
+**7. `PROCESS` was hardcoded in the page, against the reason written in
+`site.ts` for centralising the practice blurbs.** *"`/` and `/practice/` both
+render them and two copies of a claim-bearing sentence is one copy that will
+eventually be wrong."* `PROCESS` is the same shape of content, `/process/`
+renders the same five steps at step 6, and the staged step-3 body carried the
+fee claim the claims audit had just found to be **wrong**. It existed in one
+place today and would have existed in two. Moved to `src/data/site.ts`.
+
+**8. The section-7 omission was recorded only in a comment in the file that
+deviates.** `docs/01` was edited in this same diff and not amended. Compare
+`SiteHeader`'s sticky-threshold deviation, which was written back into `docs/02`
+— the project's own precedent. `docs/01` §`/` item 7 now records it.
+
+**9. Two of FOUR above-the-fold faces were not preloaded, and the comment said
+"the two faces used above the fold".** Network probe on a cold cache: `/`
+requests four. The **serif italic** sets `<em class="it">the room</em>` inside
+the `<h1>`, and a swap there moves the last line of a 96 px headline — now
+preloaded. **Geist Mono** sets the eyebrow, which is the first visible text, and
+is deliberately **not**: preloading it puts 95,688 B of font on the critical path
+instead of 72,560 B, for one short line of 12 px reflow. A trade, stated as one,
+revisited against Lighthouse at step 7. *The reviewer was straight about its own
+limit here: throttled to slow 4G + 4× CPU it measured **LCP 896 ms, CLS 0.000**
+and could not reproduce a shift.*
+
+**10. Dead API surface.** `Eyebrow`'s `tag` prop had zero call sites, so its
+`<span>` branch was unreachable and the file carried two near-identical
+templates for it — deleted, keeping the `as`-naming discovery. `PORTRAIT_ALT` in
+`schema.ts` was exported and referenced nowhere — deleted. `SectionHeading`
+exposed both a `title` prop and a `heading` slot for one job — the prop is gone.
+Five `class?: string` props — gone, per finding 1.
+
+**11–14, all `consider`, all recorded rather than churned.** The
+duplicate-density `srcset` and the `/about/`-404-in-JSON-LD note are now **§7
+rows** so neither is re-discovered as a defect in this repo. The portrait's 1:1
+declaration under a 4:5 crop stays, with its reasoning already in the source and
+CLS measured at 0. The named-landmark inconsistency is fixed by **removing**
+`aria-labelledby` from the four content sections that have visible `<h2>`s and
+keeping `aria-label` only on the credential band, which has no heading — the rule
+being *name a region only where it has no heading of its own.* That takes the
+region list from eleven entries to six.
+
+**And one of its findings was wrong, which it said itself.** The reviewer
+reported seeing **two** portrait fetches at 390 px / DPR 3, flagged it
+low-confidence, and named the likely artefact — `setDeviceMetricsOverride`
+applied around navigation. Checked: **one fetch at 390/DPR 1, 2 and 3 and at
+1280/DPR 2 and 3**, cache cleared each time. It was the artefact. A reviewer that
+states its own uncertainty is doing the job; the answer was to run the probe, not
+to dismiss it.
+
+**What it checked and found clean**, so the gap is auditable: 26 real `Tab`
+keydowns dispatched, all 26 focused elements matched `:focus-visible` with a
+visible ring, skip link first; **72/72** hit-test points across eight cards
+resolved to the card's link; heading outline dumped, 23 headings, no skips; every
+computed contrast pair recomputed from scratch including `.approach-metaphor` at
+**11.09:1**; zero `client:*` directives and zero non-JSON-LD `<script>` tags;
+**41 KB total transfer** cold-cache at 1280/DPR 2 with **zero JS bytes**; zero
+`data:` and zero `base64,` in the HTML and CSS; no third-party host; and both
+minifier traps re-verified in the emitted CSS.
+
+### Verification — run, not asserted
+
+Harness: a zero-dependency CDP driver (Node 22+ has a global `WebSocket`)
+against `--headless=new` Chrome, serving `dist/` over `python3 -m http.server`.
+Every figure below came from a command whose output was read.
+
+| Gate | Result |
+|---|---|
+| `npx tsc --version` | 6.0.3 |
+| `npm run check` | **0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 hints** (19 files) |
+| `npm run lint` | clean — ESLint + Prettier |
+| `npm run build` | complete, 1 page |
+| `npm audit` | **0 vulnerabilities** |
+| **Lighthouse** | **NOT RUN — tool unavailable.** `@lhci/cli` removed 2026-08-26; R11's re-add trigger is step 7. Stated, not omitted |
+
+**Zero JavaScript, in the emitted page.** `dist/index.html` carries **1**
+`<script>` and it is `type="application/ld+json"`; non-JSON-LD scripts **0**;
+`dist/_astro/*.js` no matches. With script execution disabled at the protocol
+level: **444 DOM nodes, 6,578 characters of visible text, 5,665 px of content** —
+the identical page.
+
+**Phase 5, the minifier check.** `grep -o 'animation:[^;}]*' dist/_astro/*.css`
+returns only `animation:none!important` twice, which is the reduced-motion and
+print override. No `animation` shorthand beside `animation-timeline`. Both
+longhand blocks survived: `animation-timeline:scroll()` with
+`animation-name:header-lift`, and `animation-timeline:view()` with
+`animation-name:reveal-in`.
+
+**Layout, 14 widths (320 → 1920).** Document overflow **0 at every one**, with
+zero elements past the viewport. **And the elements were measured, not only the
+page** — this is the correction entry (v) owed: every rendered infinity mark
+came back at aspect **1.5654–1.5657** against the master's 1.5657, at all 14
+widths. Header **189 px** ≤414, **141 px** 640–1024, **81 px `sticky`** from
+1056, matching `--header-h`.
+
+**Accessibility.** One `<h1>`; heading levels never skipped (outline dumped and
+read). Landmarks 1/2/1/1. **Focus order == DOM order** across 44 focusables.
+Every `<img>` has `alt` and explicit `width`/`height`; 0 missing either; 0 empty
+links. **Contrast: 32 distinct foreground/background/size triples computed from
+what the browser actually painted, at 390 / 768 / 1280 px — 0 failures.** Print
+media: 0 revealed elements at opacity < 1 (10 targets). Reduced motion: 0 hidden.
+
+**Touch targets, and the instrument mattered here.** The eight cards report
+26–39 px-tall `<a>` boxes and are **not** a finding: hit-testing nine points per
+card at three widths put **9/9 inside the link on all 24 cards** — the whole card
+is the target via `::after { inset: 0 }`. Two standalone paragraph links **were**
+real at 18 px tall and are fixed. One inline link (164 × 21) is deliberately left
+under WCAG 2.5.8's sentence exception.
+
+**Reflow, and one case that is not clean.** Page zoom passes: 1280 at 200% is the
+640 column and at 400% is the 320 column, both 0 overflow, so WCAG 1.4.4 and
+1.4.10 are covered. With the reader's **default font size** at 200% (root 32 px —
+not page zoom) `/` started at **234 px** of overflow at 390 and came down in
+three measured steps to **3 px at 390 and 65 px at 320**: the three
+`minmax(Nrem, 1fr)` grids guarded with `min()`, then `.credentials` made
+explicit, then `.feature`'s padding clamped with `overflow-wrap: anywhere` on its
+title and `.contact-action` allowed to shrink. **`overflow-wrap: break-word`
+permits a break at layout time but does not reduce min-content size** —
+`anywhere` does, and that was the whole of one fix. The residual is the header's
+deliberate `flex-wrap: nowrap` above 66 rem (**602 px** at 1280) plus
+`white-space: nowrap` on the brand name and the headline's 104 px floor; undoing
+either re-opens the measured step-1 header decision, so they stand. Beyond what
+`docs/02`'s floor requires, since page zoom is clean — a robustness margin, not a
+failure. The table is in `docs/02`.
+
+**Payload.** HTML **27,334 B** · CSS **26,572 B** (linked, over the 4 kB inline
+threshold) · hero portrait AVIF **5.6 / 7.3 / 11.1 / 14.8 / 21.5 kB** across five
+widths, `<img src>` fallback now the 960 variant at **78,665 B** · mark AVIF
+**1,720 / 3,063 / 4,843 B** at 64 px and **6,017 / 14,555 / 22,639 B** at 232 px
+· fonts ~50 kB preloaded. **JS 0 B** against a 100 kB budget.
+
+**Not verified, and named as such.** Lighthouse (above). **The HTML validator was
+not run, and the page carries a known conformance error:** 4 of 12 `srcset`
+attributes declare two candidates at 1x, because Astro's `densities` emits
+`url, url 1x, url 2x, url 3x` and a descriptor-less candidate is implicitly 1x.
+Harmless in browsers; step-1 review finding #8, still open. **Do not claim
+"validator clean".** *(And my first check of it reported "ok" — it compared
+`undefined` against the string `'1x'`.)*
+
+### Sweeps — the commands, not the claims (R8)
+
+```
+$ grep -rn "anyone may be appointed\|Anyone may be\|No designation is required" \
+    --include='*.md' --include='*.astro' --include='*.ts' .
+  -> 5 hits: 2 correct (my new text quoting the struck line; entry (v) history),
+             3 FIXED (§4 boundary bullet, §9 Q33 row, SiteHeader comment)
+
+$ grep -rn "Med-arb\|med-Arb" --include='*.astro' --include='*.ts' --include='*.md' .
+  -> 1 hit, FIXED (index.astro:313 -> Med-Arb, the form §4 and docs/01 use)
+
+$ grep -rn "Law and engineering" --include='*.md' --include='*.ts' --include='*.astro' .
+  -> label FIXED in site.ts + docs/03; the PROSE instance on / is reworded and
+     the two spec instances (docs/01:136, docs/03:150) are Q41(a) for Pouya
+
+$ grep -rn "type-scale\|proof sheet" ... | grep -v dist
+  -> 5 live references to the deleted page, all FIXED (§7 Client JS row,
+     robots.txt, docs/05, brand-assets.md, InfinityMark.astro). Change Log
+     entries (u) and the struck Q33-orig row keep theirs — append-only history
+
+$ grep -cEi 'OCNI|Law Society|LSO|testimonial|Since 20|London|New York' dist/index.html
+  -> 1, and it is a FALSE POSITIVE: "I aLSO practise". Case-sensitive: 0
+
+$ grep -cEi 'leading|premier|top-rated|best|proven|guarantee|extensive' dist/index.html
+  -> 2, both FALSE POSITIVES: "the pLEADINGs" twice. No superlative on the page
+
+$ grep -cE 'LegalService|worksFor|priceRange|aggregateRating' dist/index.html
+  -> 0
+```
+
+### Superseded
+
+**Entry (v)'s "⏸ RESUME HERE" section is spent.** All five items it listed as
+awaiting a ruling — Q35, Q39, Q37, Q38/R13, R1 — were ruled on 2026-08-27 and are
+handled above. Its six non-blocking review findings: **#7 fixed** (`--text-2xs`,
+`--space-05`, `--focus-offset` added), **#8 still open and now measured** (4 of 12
+srcsets; see Verification), **#9 unchanged** (`--header-h` has 0.81 px of
+headroom), **#10 fixed** (the masthead tagline is suppressed on `/`), **#11
+unchanged** (~3.16 MB of brand binaries), **#12 fixed, and by deletion rather than by
+use** — `InfinityMark`'s `class` prop is **removed**. It had no call site and
+`class:list` put it on the `<img>`, so a parent writing
+`<InfinityMark class="foo" />` would have got a rule compiled against the
+parent's cid that never matches: the exact defect `CLAUDE.md` records twice on
+this project, offered as an API. `label` stays with its reason written down (all
+three current call sites are decorative; the next one may not be), and `width`
+and `loading` are new and used. Entry (v) is not edited; this is where the
+state lives now.
+
+---
+
 ## 2026-08-26 (v) — The mark was wrong; §4 gains an Offerings category; and two of my own tools lied to me
 
 **Who:** Pouya ruled on the mark (Q32), on arbitration (Q33, Q36), and on the