feat: build step 4 — /mediation/, /arbitration/, /med-arb/; source ADRIC's rules

Three pages, five in the build, zero JavaScript. /arbitration/ carries §4's
paired-disclosure condition on four surfaces and Q39's struck universal appears
in no form. /med-arb/ meets the procedural-fairness objection at the level of
process design and ships deliberately without Pouya's own protocol commitments,
which are Q54.

docs/01 directed the mediation page to name the "ADRIC Model Mediation Rules".
No such document exists — 0 occurrences across all four of ADRIC's rules pages
against 10 for "National Mediation Rules"; "Model" belongs to the Model Dispute
Resolution Clause inside the rules. Caught only because R14 requires the source
before the claim. docs/reference/adric-rules.md + adric-extract/ carry it, with
the digest drift measured rather than assumed: the HTML changes per request, the
text extracts are byte-stable, so the extracts are the artefact.

Four review passes, 21 defects, and the pattern was mine: I wrote the Q54 gate
into the page and then breached it four times, then round 2 found two survivors
of round 1's own fixes and one defect round 1's fix created. Also removed a
<title> naming a practised role §4 does not grant, a habitual presupposing awards
issued, and a claim about what ADRIC's rules permit that my own reference doc
says is unsupported.

Two instrument failures caught before they became conclusions: touch targets
measured over file:// with no CSS loaded (uniform 18px, including on a .btn with
a 44px floor), and a schema.org validator call that parsed nothing and returned
0 warnings for everything. Both re-run with the instrument validated first.

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

docs/04-seo-spec.md

@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ JSON-LD only. Validate against Google's Rich Results Test before cutover.
 |---|---|---|
 | `Person` | `/about/`, referenced site-wide | **Emitted:** `name`, `url`, `jobTitle`, `description`, `alumniOf` (Bond University), `knowsLanguage` (en, fa), `hasCredential` (Q.Med), `sameAs` (LinkedIn), `email`, `image`. **Emitted on `/about/` only:** `memberOf` — the four §4 memberships as `Organization` nodes (Q53, ruled 2026-08-28). `/` shows no memberships, so its Person node omits it: structured data represents the page it sits on. **Withheld:** `worksFor` — Q49(b) declined the row 2026-08-28; `provider → Person → worksFor` would assert a same-entity claim §4 does not row. *(This enumeration listed `worksFor` as emitted while the same cell said it was withheld, and omitted `url` and `email`, which are — wrong in both directions. The enumeration is the part an implementer copies. Found by `adversarial-reviewer`.)* **CHANGED 2026-08-28 — Q47.** This row read *"`jobTitle` = 'Director of Firm Operations'; omit `worksFor`"*, which put the boutique title on a node whose `url` is this ADR practice's `/about/` — so a consumer could attach it to this entity. Pouya's ruling reframes the field: `jobTitle` describes **this practice**, not the boutique role, which D16 keeps unnamed. The visible role line is unchanged and still reads "Director of Firm Operations at a Toronto litigation and ADR boutique". **THE VALUE IS `PRACTICE_JOB_TITLE` IN `src/data/site.ts` AND THIS ROW DOES NOT RESTATE IT** — §7's rule, applied to a string with a live revert trigger on it: this row carried the literal text for one pass, and `adversarial-reviewer` noted it would go stale the moment the constant moved. Cite, do not copy. **`worksFor` IS WITHHELD** — set for one pass under Q47, then reverted: `ProfessionalService.provider` is this Person, so `provider → Person → worksFor` asserts the same-entity claim `schema.ts` explicitly declines, and §4 says "alongside the practice" where the ruling says "operates through". **`memberOf` is emitted** — see the sentence above; Q53 closed 2026-08-28. *(This cell asserted `memberOf` was both emitted and withheld for one pass, which is the defect it already records itself being caught for on `worksFor`, in the opposite direction. The enumeration is the part an implementer copies.)* See `src/data/schema.ts` |
 | `ProfessionalService` | Home | `areaServed` Toronto/Ontario, `serviceType` **Mediation / Commercial arbitration / Mediation-arbitration (med-arb)** — *scoped 2026-08-28 on `claims-auditor`'s finding; this row instructed the unscoped class form "Mediation/Arbitration" that Q39 struck and that `schema.ts` deliberately does not follow. Family arbitration carries prescribed training and has its own NOT OFFERED row, so unscoped "Arbitration" is the struck universal in a field nobody reads. Do not widen these strings without a §4 row to widen them from* — `provider` → Person, `priceRange` once `/fees/` is real. **Never `LegalService`** — schema.org defines it as a business providing legal advice and *representation*, which asserts in machine-readable form exactly what D13 bars and §4 Forbidden calls out |
-| `Service` | Each practice page | `serviceType`, `provider` → Person, `areaServed` |
+| `Service` | **`/mediation/`, `/arbitration/`, `/med-arb/`** and each practice page | `serviceType`, `provider` → Person, `areaServed`. **The Person node travels in the same `@graph`** so `provider: {'@id'}` resolves in one document rather than relying on a crawler joining two — `homeGraph`'s reasoning, applied. `serviceType` is scoped where §4 scopes it: *Commercial arbitration*, never a bare "Arbitration". No `BreadcrumbList` on the three — one hop from the root, no visible breadcrumb, and this spec requires the markup to match the visible one |
 | `Article` | Each article | `headline`, `description`, `datePublished`, `dateModified`, `author` → Person, `image` |
 | `BreadcrumbList` | All nested pages | Matches visible breadcrumbs |
 | `FAQPage` | `/for-parties/`, `/med-arb/` | Only where the visible page genuinely is Q&A. Never fabricate questions to farm a rich result |