Repository navigation
docs: define RTL audit evidence policy - #6046
nynexman4464 merged 4 commits into
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
PR Analysis Report📚 Storybook Preview🧪 Sandbox PreviewNo new or modified components detected. Bundle Size Summary
Accessibility AuditStatus: No accessibility violations detected. Visual Regression38 of 474 shot(s) changed. A change here is a question, not a failure: check whether the after is the
and 18 more. Generated by PR Enrichment workflow | Storybook | Sandbox | View full report |
|
/approve-spec a1a63a9 |
cixzhang
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for separating measured RTL evidence, verified non-applicability, historical coverage debt, and merge-gate policy instead of treating one implementation as already decided. Approved as the canonical RTL audit-evidence record at exact head a1a63a9238fe5d382cb49b3b3c493b6d48e83ed3.
|
AI review status for this pull request.
|
a1a63a9 to
6b322f5
Compare
6b322f5 to
7a6f774
Compare
7a6f774 to
2351e08
Compare
2351e08 to
2210a40
Compare
2210a40 to
9ec6f33
Compare
9ec6f33 to
b06bce9
Compare
b06bce9 to
0abdba7
Compare
0abdba7 to
0e1beec
Compare
0e1beec to
7355ffd
Compare
|
/approve-spec 7355ffd |
Stack
Intent
Define the evidence boundary between a story-level D1 fixture exclusion and component-wide RTL applicability. This record specifies intended behavior; the fixture metadata implementation is separate in #7489 and is not part of this stack.
Authority
The record is promoted to
authority: currentwithapproved_by: nynexman4464andapproved_at: 2026-10-15, on the owner's approval of the reviewed claims. The exact-head/approve-speccommand on this pull request records that decision for the final head. Approval does not ship INV12–INV16 enforcement: the record keeps that implementation state explicit, and component-wide verified N/A, historical debt, D7 size enforcement, and required-check rollout remain open decisions.Existing authority searched
architecture:rtl-audit-evidence; reuse the existing docs: define RTL audit evidence policy #6046 record. Currentarchitecture:knowledge-contractsseparates owner decisions, claim-scoped authority, and evidence; AST-030 owns CI routing rather than RTL applicability semantics. AST-020 retains target-size ownership.apps/storybook/rtl-audit/, Storybook preview metadata,SVGIconRegistry,scripts/component-packages.cjs,pr-rtlscope/shard/join, weekly summaries, and physical-property lint;rtlAudit.D1, candidate ordering, coverage rollup, verified-N/A declarations.Authority and ownership
Extend
architecture:rtl-audit-evidence, not a new parallel policy record.nynexman4464is listed first, retainingcixzhangandimdreamrunner. Human RTL meaning remains withdesign:bidirectionality; provider behavior remains with the internationalization record.Cross-cutting evidence
The global
testingroute supplies selected RTL evidence and exemption-review claims without importing product intent or workflow topology into every component.design:bidirectionalityowns the shared component-facing RTL outcomes; local records own component states and verification. The route does not settle component-wide N/A, debt, or gate rollout.Policy clarification
Component-wide verified-N/A closure, historical coverage-debt admission, required-check rollout, and D7 size enforcement remain separately identified gaps/decisions. This change does not decide them or require them to be settled before claim-scoped review of the fixture policy.
Implementation relationship
The base implementation does not contain the new D1 metadata transport or exclusion tests. The record says so explicitly. #7489 provides candidate implementation evidence: focused tests, reordered-story before/after proof, fail-closed metadata handling, and a registry-only run showing continued D5/D6 coverage. Those results do not independently approve the policy.
The complete exclusion inventory and semantic review requirements in INV16 are intended requirements, not already-implemented summary enforcement. They remain separate follow-up work; successful candidate metadata tests do not ratify an exemption's meaning.
Validation
pnpm check:repo, knowledge validation, formatting, andgit diff --checkpass.Writing rubric results
R1 narration: replaced the draft-origin narrative and approval dependency on unrelated open decisions with the claim-scoped evidence boundary. Promotion removed draft-readiness wording rather than narrating the approval.
R2 research: current scores and historical experiments are not normative record content.
R3 evidence: the D7 gap describes the missing size assertion and observable failure, not the old PR that demonstrated it.
R4 rejected alternatives: no rejected-options narrative was added.
R5 change references: removed the superseded debt-baseline PR and historical touch-target PR from the record.
R6 open questions: component-wide N/A, debt, and rollout questions remain open; the fixture-only policy does not answer them.