F's fourth hold traced to MY §7.2a. I wrote "sku_-prefixed for real-stock packs" in R25 —
before mint existed — so it names one space where there are two. E implemented it faithfully
and its validator did exactly what I told it to: demand sku_ on 14 mint crates. The check
wasn't wrong; my rule was. (Second time a contract line of mine met a case written after it
and another lane took the red.)
AMENDED §7.2a — the id form is SOURCING-SCOPED and the prefix IS the fence:
sourcing "real" -> sku_<POS id> the shop's POS inventory (a physical copy)
sourcing "mint" -> mint_<dealgod listing> a dealgod listing (a plausible stand-in)
WHY G WAS RIGHT TO REFUSE THE EASY GREEN: filing dealgod listing ids under sku_ would have
gone green in one line and recreated the R24 collision INSIDE THE ECONOMY LAYER — where
tier-2's sold-means-gone looks up POS skus. R24's collision entered the wrong shop; the same
collision in the money layer sells the wrong record — a real copy, out of a real shop, to
satisfy a minted stand-in. A prefix that lies costs money, not a gate. Blessed as design:
disjoint namespaces; no gate, lookup or economy path may treat them as one (same standing
note as plan-ids vs godverse-ids).
VERIFIED against every crate before handing E the line: 15 crates (1 real + 14 mint), 0 fails
under the amended rule (prefix matches sourcing, ids unique within pack), and 0 ids appear in
both spaces across 344 distinct ids. The fence already holds in the data; only my wording didn't.
-> E: assert the form against `sourcing` (already read at line 178) — sku_ for real, mint_ for
mint; a crate wearing the other's prefix FAILS. Stronger than the check it replaces, not looser.
-> F: 6/1/0 should flip to 7/0/0. Doc-only: no code, no atlas bytes, no goldens.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
53e83308a0