{
  "doc_id": "project_progress_model",
  "category_id": "overview_scope",
  "category_title": "Project Progress Model",
  "source_file": "/home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json",
  "docs_branch": "doc.id === \"project_progress_model\" && state.categoryId === \"overview_scope\"",
  "phase": "phase_01",
  "export_type": "documentation_bucket_content",
  "buckets": [
    {
      "bucket": "Overview",
      "status": "MISSING",
      "cards": []
    },
    {
      "bucket": "Prerequisites",
      "status": "PASS",
      "cards": [
        {
          "title": "Material existence of the progress modeling authority",
          "content": "WHAT:\nPrerequisites must establish that Project Progress Model already exists as the declared category responsible for how Devon structurally represents progress once advancement has been recognized as real\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket is the lawful entrypoint of the category because the project cannot consume progress consistently if the modeling authority itself is absent; before any state vocabulary, aggregation rule or representational surface can be trusted, Devon needs a sovereign artifact that owns the shape of progress representation\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n\nVALIDATION:\n- exists(file_path) == true\n\nFAIL:\n- exists(file_path) == false -> MISSING\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category has no material authority to define progress representation\n- progress remains exposed to ad-hoc modeling across docs, panel and review surfaces\n- the project can recognize advancement canonically but still fail to express it coherently"
        },
        {
          "title": "Admission of the progress model into the root architecture baseline",
          "content": "WHAT:\nPrerequisites must prove that Project Progress Model is registered in the Master Architecture Index as an official Phase 01 category artifact instead of floating as an isolated file with no sovereign architectural standing\n\nWHY:\nthe role of this bucket is to guarantee that progress representation is not treated as optional notation; it must be admitted into the same root baseline that governs the rest of Devon, otherwise the project can end up with lawful progress semantics but no architecturally recognized model for expressing them\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/master_architecture_index.md\n- search_term: Project Progress Model\n\nVALIDATION:\n- master_registration_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- master_registration_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the progress model becomes architecturally orphaned\n- later surfaces may consume representational logic that was never sovereignly admitted\n- the project loses continuity between structural canon and modeled progress state"
        },
        {
          "title": "Phase-01 placement before downstream consumption",
          "content": "WHAT:\nPrerequisites must place Project Progress Model inside Phase 01 Overview & Scope so Devon defines the representational grammar of progress before reporting, panel interpretation or operational review starts consuming progress state\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket exists to force ordering discipline at the project level: the system must know how progress is represented before downstream surfaces read, compare or aggregate it, otherwise each consumer is tempted to invent its own state language\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/hub_index.json\n- expected_phase_id: phase-01\n- expected_category_id: overview_scope\n- expected_doc_id: project_progress_model\n\nVALIDATION:\n- phase_binding_present == true\n- category_binding_present == true\n- doc_id_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- phase_binding_present == false -> FAIL\n- category_binding_present == false -> FAIL\n- doc_id_present == false -> MISSING\n\nIMPACT:\n- progress representation enters the project too late\n- downstream surfaces may establish their own competing modeling logic first\n- the project loses sequencing discipline between definition and consumption of progress state"
        },
        {
          "title": "Documentation Hub reachability of the modeling contract",
          "content": "WHAT:\nPrerequisites must guarantee that Project Progress Model is reachable from Documentation Hub as the operator-facing source of truth for the structure, state vocabulary and aggregation grammar of progress\n\nWHY:\nthe role of this bucket is to ensure that modeling authority is not trapped in storage; if operators cannot reach the category where progress representation is defined, then readable progress state remains declared in files but absent from practical project use\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/hub_index.json\n- expected_doc_id: project_progress_model\n- expected_category_id: overview_scope\n\nVALIDATION:\n- nav_doc_entry_present == true\n- nav_category_binding_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- nav_doc_entry_present == false -> MISSING\n- nav_category_binding_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- operators lose access to the category that should standardize progress representation\n- DH stops serving as the execution-facing interface of modeled progress state\n- the project drifts back toward surface-specific progress vocabularies"
        },
        {
          "title": "Dedicated rendering readiness for progress representation",
          "content": "WHAT:\nPrerequisites must ensure that Project Progress Model is prepared to render through its own custom DH branch so the category can expose a modeling contract instead of collapsing into generic document output\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket exists because progress representation is not passive prose; the project needs the category to speak in its own operational language about states, units and modeled structure, otherwise representational authority is flattened before it even begins to function\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- expected_branch_signature: doc.id === \"project_progress_model\" && state.categoryId === \"overview_scope\"\n\nVALIDATION:\n- custom_branch_exists == true\n\nFAIL:\n- custom_branch_exists == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category can exist while still failing to expose its own representational logic\n- DH reduces progress modeling authority to generic content exposure\n- the project loses semantic precision exactly where shared progress grammar should become explicit"
        },
        {
          "title": "Runtime dispatch admission of the progress model",
          "content": "WHAT:\nPrerequisites must verify that the DH render dispatcher actually routes Project Progress Model into its dedicated branch instead of bypassing it during runtime\n\nWHY:\nthe role of this bucket is to close the gap between declared category presence and live execution; if dispatch does not admit the category, Devon has nominal modeling authority but no actual delivery of that authority to the surfaces that should use it\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- expected_dispatch_gate:\n  - doc.id === \"project_progress_model\" && state.categoryId === \"overview_scope\"\n\nVALIDATION:\n- direct_render_dispatch_includes_project_progress_model == true\n\nFAIL:\n- direct_render_dispatch_includes_project_progress_model == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the progress model remains declared but non-operational\n- DH can silently route around the category that should standardize progress representation\n- the project loses trust in the bridge between canon and runtime behavior"
        },
        {
          "title": "Declared representational boundary of progress state",
          "content": "WHAT:\nPrerequisites must show that the category already declares what a progress representation is supposed to govern, including the units being modeled, the state vocabulary being used, the distinction between partial and completed representation and the rules that prevent representational drift across surfaces\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket exists because Project Progress Model cannot govern representation if it does not first declare the perimeter of that representation; the project needs a visible boundary between modeled progress state and free-form narrative before later stages can configure, validate or prove the model\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- expected_model_controls:\n  - progress unit representation\n  - state vocabulary definition\n  - partial versus completed representation\n  - anti-drift modeling boundary\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- progress_unit_representation_present == true\n- state_vocabulary_definition_present == true\n- partial_vs_completed_representation_present == true\n- anti_drift_modeling_boundary_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- progress_unit_representation_present == false -> FAIL\n- state_vocabulary_definition_present == false -> FAIL\n- partial_vs_completed_representation_present == false -> FAIL\n- anti_drift_modeling_boundary_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category starts without its own representational perimeter\n- later stages would configure and validate an undefined model\n- the whole project becomes exposed to inconsistent progress-reading semantics\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because the representational boundary is still being validated from declared canonical content rather than enforced through machine-readable model contracts"
        },
        {
          "title": "Authority separation from progress law and sibling categories",
          "content": "WHAT:\nPrerequisites must establish that Project Progress Model governs only how progress is represented after recognition, without absorbing ownership of lawful advancement decisions from Project Progress Canonical or ownership from scope, architecture, deployment, sandbox, server identity, runtime or delivery categories\n\nWHY:\nthe role of this bucket is to keep the category in its proper lane from the start; if the model begins deciding what counts as progress instead of how progress is represented, the project loses the separation between recognition law and representational grammar and starts collapsing category boundaries\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- source_scope: Project Progress Model overview and prerequisite definitions\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- progress_model_authority_scope_is_clean == true\n- no_progress_canonical_absorption == true\n- no_scope_absorption == true\n- no_architecture_absorption == true\n- no_deployment_absorption == true\n- no_sandbox_absorption == true\n- no_server_registry_absorption == true\n- no_runtime_absorption == true\n- no_delivery_absorption == true\n\nFAIL:\n- progress_model_authority_scope_is_clean == false -> FAIL\n- any sibling authority absorption == true -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category begins with corrupted ownership boundaries\n- DH governance becomes harder to trust because recognition and representation overlap\n- the project loses determinism about who decides lawful advancement and who only defines its readable model\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because authority separation is still being validated from rendered contract semantics rather than formal structural ownership bindings"
        },
        {
          "title": "Process-stage skeleton for modeled progress governance",
          "content": "WHAT:\nPrerequisites must confirm that the category already exposes the full stage skeleton required to evolve from declared modeling authority into a complete execution contract for progress representation\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket exists because Project Progress Model is not finished by merely existing; the project needs the category to be structurally ready for installation, configuration, validation, evidence, failure handling and promotion or else modeled progress never matures into a reusable system grammar\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- expected_bucket_names:\n  - Prerequisites\n  - Installation\n  - Configuration\n  - Validation\n  - Observable Evidence\n  - Failure Modes & Recovery\n  - Completion & Promotion\n\nVALIDATION:\n- bucket_name_prerequisites == true\n- bucket_name_installation == true\n- bucket_name_configuration == true\n- bucket_name_validation == true\n- bucket_name_observable_evidence == true\n- bucket_name_failure_modes_recovery == true\n- bucket_name_completion_promotion == true\n\nFAIL:\n- any expected bucket missing -> MISSING\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category cannot mature through an ordered execution path\n- DH loses the operational skeleton needed to turn progress representation into shared project grammar\n- the project remains stuck with declared modeling authority but no staged representational contract"
        },
        {
          "title": "Prerequisites exit condition for the progress model",
          "content": "WHAT:\nPrerequisites are complete only when progress modeling authority materially exists, is architecturally admitted, is placed in Phase 01, is reachable in DH, is render-ready, is dispatch-admitted, already declares the representational boundary of progress state, preserves clean category authority and exposes the stage skeleton needed for downstream execution\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket closes the entrance of the category by ensuring Devon has a lawful starting position for modeled progress before any later stage tries to install vocabulary, configure aggregation, validate representational consistency, prove surface alignment, handle drift or promote modeled maturity\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- aggregate result of all previous prerequisite checks\n\nVALIDATION:\n- all_previous_prerequisite_checks == true\n\nFAIL:\n- any previous prerequisite check false -> NOT COMPLETE\n\nIMPACT:\n- Installation cannot start from a legitimate baseline\n- the category remains only partially constituted as a project-level representational authority\n- Devon keeps producing progress signals without a trustworthy canonical model for expressing them"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "bucket": "Installation",
      "status": "PASS",
      "cards": [
        {
          "title": "Documentation Hub installation of the progress representation contract",
          "content": "WHAT:\nInstallation must materialize Project Progress Model inside Documentation Hub as the live surface where Devon exposes, reads and operates the official representation contract of progress state\n\nWHY:\nthe role of Installation in this category is not to decide whether progress is lawful, but to make the modeling authority operationally present; without installation, the project may have a declared model file yet still lack a usable place where progress representation is actually delivered to operators and downstream interpretation layers\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- expected_branch_signature: doc.id === \"project_progress_model\" && state.categoryId === \"overview_scope\"\n- expected_return_kind: html\n\nVALIDATION:\n- custom_branch_exists == true\n- branch_returns_html_contract == true\n\nFAIL:\n- custom_branch_exists == false -> FAIL\n- branch_returns_html_contract == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the progress model remains declared but not installed as an execution surface\n- DH cannot serve as the shared entrypoint for readable progress state\n- the project keeps producing advancement signals without an installed representational layer to consume them consistently"
        },
        {
          "title": "Installation of the category overview as representational entrypoint",
          "content": "WHAT:\nInstallation must expose the Project Progress Model overview as the first authority layer that tells the operator what this category models, where its boundary begins and why it exists in the project\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket exists because installation is not complete when a category merely renders; it is complete when the category becomes intelligible as the sovereign modeling surface for progress state before downstream buckets begin defining structure, vocabulary and aggregation behavior\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- expected_ids:\n  - project-progress-model-overview-toggle\n  - project-progress-model-overview-more\n\nVALIDATION:\n- overview_block_present == true\n- overview_toggle_present == true\n- overview_expandable_content_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- overview_block_present == false -> FAIL\n- overview_toggle_present == false -> FAIL\n- overview_expandable_content_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category renders without installing its own representational frame\n- operators can see stages without first understanding what the progress model governs\n- the project loses clarity at the point where shared progress grammar should first become readable"
        },
        {
          "title": "Installation into the category workflow layout",
          "content": "WHAT:\nInstallation must place Project Progress Model into the structured category workflow layout so progress representation is installed as an ordered operational system instead of loose explanatory text\n\nWHY:\nthe purpose of this bucket is to make the category inhabit the execution grammar of Documentation Hub; otherwise the progress model may appear as content but not as a governable workflow for representation across the project\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- expected_layout_tokens:\n  - master-two-col\n  - master-col-left\n  - master-col-right\n\nVALIDATION:\n- two_column_wrapper_present == true\n- left_column_present == true\n- right_column_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- two_column_wrapper_present == false -> FAIL\n- left_column_present == false -> FAIL\n- right_column_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category is displayed but not structurally installed as workflow\n- DH loses continuity between modeling authority and staged execution\n- the project inherits a weaker surface for standardizing progress representation"
        },
        {
          "title": "Installation of the stage sequence for modeled progress governance",
          "content": "WHAT:\nInstallation must expose the full execution path of the category so Project Progress Model is installed as a staged representational pipeline from prerequisites through completion and promotion\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket exists because progress representation in Devon is not one paragraph; it is a chain of governed stages, and installation must make that chain available before the category can mature into reusable project grammar\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- expected_bucket_names:\n  - Prerequisites\n  - Installation\n  - Configuration\n  - Validation\n  - Observable Evidence\n  - Failure Modes & Recovery\n  - Completion & Promotion\n\nVALIDATION:\n- bucket_name_prerequisites == true\n- bucket_name_installation == true\n- bucket_name_configuration == true\n- bucket_name_validation == true\n- bucket_name_observable_evidence == true\n- bucket_name_failure_modes_recovery == true\n- bucket_name_completion_promotion == true\n\nFAIL:\n- any expected bucket missing -> MISSING\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category cannot install as an ordered progress-modeling pipeline\n- DH loses the stage skeleton required to operationalize shared progress grammar\n- the project stays with a declared modeling category but no installed execution flow"
        },
        {
          "title": "Installation bucket materialization",
          "content": "WHAT:\nInstallation itself must be materialized as a real structured bucket inside the right-column workflow instead of remaining a placeholder pending card\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket exists to declare how the category becomes operationally present, so leaving Installation as placeholder means the category skipped the stage that should explain its own materialization inside the project\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- expected_renderer_call: renderStructuredCard(\"Installation\", installationBuckets)\n\nVALIDATION:\n- installation_bucket_structured == true\n\nFAIL:\n- installation_bucket_structured == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category claims staged execution but omits its own installation contract\n- DH keeps a gap where representational presence should be governed\n- the project gets progress-model authority text without explicit installation semantics"
        },
        {
          "title": "Installation linkage between canonical model artifact and rendered category",
          "content": "WHAT:\nInstallation must bind the canonical artifact /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json to the rendered DH category so the progress model exists both as source-of-truth file and as operator-facing execution surface\n\nWHY:\nthe role of this bucket is to prevent split reality between stored model and rendered governance; if installation does not bind the two, the project can end up with one representational contract in data and another in practical consultation\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- installed_surface: Project Progress Model custom branch\n\nVALIDATION:\n- canonical_artifact_present == true\n- installed_surface_present == true\n- artifact_to_surface_linkage_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- canonical_artifact_present == false -> MISSING\n- installed_surface_present == false -> FAIL\n- artifact_to_surface_linkage_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the progress model becomes fragmented between storage and presentation\n- DH can render the category without being anchored to the canonical modeling artifact\n- the project loses trust that the visible progress grammar is the same one officially declared"
        },
        {
          "title": "Installation boundary discipline",
          "content": "WHAT:\nInstallation must install Project Progress Model strictly as the surface for progress representation, state vocabulary and aggregation grammar, without installing lawful advancement decisions, scope perimeter, architecture meaning, sandbox law, server identity, runtime behavior or delivery closure into this category\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket exists because installation can corrupt a category before configuration even starts; if the wrong authority is installed here, the whole project inherits a distorted governance map from the moment the progress model becomes visible\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- source_scope: Project Progress Model overview and installation definitions\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- installation_respects_progress_model_authority == true\n- no_progress_canonical_installation_absorption == true\n- no_scope_installation_absorption == true\n- no_architecture_installation_absorption == true\n- no_sandbox_installation_absorption == true\n- no_server_registry_installation_absorption == true\n- no_runtime_installation_absorption == true\n- no_delivery_installation_absorption == true\n\nFAIL:\n- installation_respects_progress_model_authority == false -> FAIL\n- any sibling installation absorption == true -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category is installed with corrupted ownership boundaries\n- DH starts exposing overlapping governance responsibilities\n- the project loses clarity about what this category is actually allowed to model\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because installation-boundary discipline is still being validated from rendered contract semantics rather than enforced by structural ownership rules"
        },
        {
          "title": "Installation exit condition for the progress model",
          "content": "WHAT:\nInstallation is complete only when Project Progress Model is rendered as a live DH surface, exposes its overview as representational entrypoint, occupies the workflow layout, presents the full stage sequence, materializes Installation as a structured bucket, binds the canonical model artifact to the rendered category and preserves clean installation boundaries\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket closes the installation stage by ensuring the category is no longer only declared in canon but is actually present as a usable modeling surface through which Devon can read and standardize progress state\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- aggregate result of all previous installation checks\n\nVALIDATION:\n- all_previous_installation_checks == true\n\nFAIL:\n- any previous installation check false -> NOT COMPLETE\n\nIMPACT:\n- Configuration cannot begin from a properly installed category\n- Project Progress Model remains only partially operational inside DH\n- the project keeps lacking a stable installed surface for shared progress representation"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "bucket": "Configuration",
      "status": "PASS",
      "cards": [
        {
          "title": "Configuration of the progress state vocabulary",
          "content": "WHAT:\nConfiguration must define the official vocabulary that Project Progress Model uses to represent progress states across Devon, including how modeled units express movement, intermediate condition and recognized completion without semantic overlap\n\nWHY:\nthe role of Configuration in this category is to turn modeling authority into usable language; without configured state vocabulary, each surface can describe the same progress differently and the project loses the ability to compare, aggregate or interpret progress consistently\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- expected_model_controls:\n  - state vocabulary\n  - modeled progress states\n  - completed representation\n  - partial representation\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- state_vocabulary_present == true\n- modeled_progress_states_present == true\n- completed_representation_present == true\n- partial_representation_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- state_vocabulary_present == false -> FAIL\n- modeled_progress_states_present == false -> FAIL\n- completed_representation_present == false -> FAIL\n- partial_representation_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category stays installed but linguistically undefined\n- DH can expose the progress model without a stable state language\n- the project becomes exposed to multiple incompatible ways of describing the same progress condition\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because the state vocabulary is still being validated from declared canonical content rather than enforced through machine-readable model schemas"
        },
        {
          "title": "Configuration of modeled progress units",
          "content": "WHAT:\nConfiguration must define what the model treats as a progress unit, how those units are bounded and how they are distinguished from raw task noise, narrative summaries or unrelated operational fragments\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket exists because progress state cannot be modeled without knowing what is being modeled; the project needs a configured representational unit so progress can be read as structured state instead of loose commentary or arbitrary fragments\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- expected_model_controls:\n  - progress unit definition\n  - representational boundaries\n  - unit distinction from raw activity\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- progress_unit_definition_present == true\n- representational_boundaries_present == true\n- unit_distinction_from_raw_activity_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- progress_unit_definition_present == false -> FAIL\n- representational_boundaries_present == false -> FAIL\n- unit_distinction_from_raw_activity_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category cannot stabilize what a modeled state refers to\n- DH loses structural clarity about what each progress record actually represents\n- the project becomes exposed to aggregation and interpretation built on inconsistent units\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because modeled unit boundaries are still being validated from declared canonical semantics rather than formal structural bindings"
        },
        {
          "title": "Configuration of aggregation grammar",
          "content": "WHAT:\nConfiguration must define how individual progress units can be combined, summarized or elevated into larger readable progress views without breaking the meaning of the underlying states\n\nWHY:\nthe role of this bucket is to make modeled progress composable; Devon needs more than isolated state tokens, it needs a configured grammar for how progress rolls up into coherent project views without inventing a new interpretation at each layer\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- expected_model_controls:\n  - aggregation logic\n  - rollup grammar\n  - preservation of state meaning under aggregation\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- aggregation_logic_present == true\n- rollup_grammar_present == true\n- state_meaning_preservation_under_aggregation_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- aggregation_logic_present == false -> FAIL\n- rollup_grammar_present == false -> FAIL\n- state_meaning_preservation_under_aggregation_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category can describe single units but cannot scale them into a usable project view\n- DH loses consistency between local progress state and aggregated interpretation\n- the project becomes exposed to rollups that distort what underlying progress units actually mean\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because aggregation grammar is still being validated from declared model semantics rather than enforced through formal compositional rules"
        },
        {
          "title": "Configuration against representational drift",
          "content": "WHAT:\nConfiguration must define the constraints that prevent progress from being represented one way in canon and another way in docs, panel or downstream operational surfaces\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket exists because Project Progress Model is the anti-drift category of progress representation; if representational constraints are not configured here, the rest of Devon will slowly fork the progress language and destroy shared readability\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- supporting_context:\n  - anti-drift modeling boundary\n  - cross-surface representational consistency\n  - shared progress grammar\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- anti_drift_constraints_present == true\n- cross_surface_representational_consistency_present == true\n- shared_progress_grammar_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- anti_drift_constraints_present == false -> FAIL\n- cross_surface_representational_consistency_present == false -> FAIL\n- shared_progress_grammar_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category loses the ability to keep progress readable across surfaces\n- DH becomes only one more representation among many instead of the shared modeling contract\n- the project becomes exposed to semantic fragmentation of progress state\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because anti-drift controls are still being validated from declared canonical language rather than enforced through cross-surface model checks"
        },
        {
          "title": "Configuration bucket materialization",
          "content": "WHAT:\nConfiguration itself must be materialized as a real structured bucket inside the left-column workflow instead of remaining a placeholder pending card\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket exists because the category cannot claim staged progress modeling while leaving the stage that defines the model parameters empty; Configuration is where representational authority stops being generic and becomes operationally usable\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- expected_renderer_call: renderStructuredCard(\"Configuration\", configurationBuckets)\n\nVALIDATION:\n- configuration_bucket_structured == true\n\nFAIL:\n- configuration_bucket_structured == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category stays installed but under-configured\n- DH exposes modeling authority without declaring the representational rules it should apply\n- the project inherits a progress-model surface with no configured grammar for state interpretation"
        },
        {
          "title": "Configuration continuity with upstream and downstream stages",
          "content": "WHAT:\nConfiguration must connect the authority established in Prerequisites and Installation to the later stages of Validation, Observable Evidence, Failure Modes & Recovery and Completion & Promotion through one coherent representational contract for progress state\n\nWHY:\nthe role of this bucket is not isolated rule writing; it has to become the semantic hinge of the category, turning installed modeling authority into a downstream-operable contract that the rest of the stage flow can actually use\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- stage_context:\n  - Prerequisites\n  - Installation\n  - Configuration\n  - Validation\n  - Observable Evidence\n  - Failure Modes & Recovery\n  - Completion & Promotion\n\nVALIDATION:\n- upstream_to_configuration_continuity_present == true\n- configuration_to_downstream_stages_continuity_present == true\n- coherent_progress_model_contract_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- upstream_to_configuration_continuity_present == false -> FAIL\n- configuration_to_downstream_stages_continuity_present == false -> FAIL\n- coherent_progress_model_contract_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category fragments into disconnected cards instead of one modeling contract\n- DH loses the semantic bridge between declared modeling authority and later verification stages\n- the project cannot rely on one continuous grammar of progress representation from entry to maturity"
        },
        {
          "title": "Configuration authority discipline",
          "content": "WHAT:\nConfiguration must define only the rules of progress representation, state vocabulary, modeled units and aggregation grammar for Project Progress Model, without configuring lawful advancement decisions, scope perimeter, architecture structure, sandbox behavior, server identity, runtime mechanics or delivery closure\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket exists to keep the category honest at the moment its representational rules are written; if Configuration absorbs sibling governance, the project encodes distorted ownership directly into its progress model\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- source_scope: Project Progress Model overview, prerequisites, installation and configuration definitions\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- configuration_respects_progress_model_authority == true\n- no_progress_canonical_configuration_absorption == true\n- no_scope_configuration_absorption == true\n- no_architecture_configuration_absorption == true\n- no_sandbox_configuration_absorption == true\n- no_server_registry_configuration_absorption == true\n- no_runtime_configuration_absorption == true\n- no_delivery_configuration_absorption == true\n\nFAIL:\n- configuration_respects_progress_model_authority == false -> FAIL\n- any sibling configuration absorption == true -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category writes corrupted ownership into its own model rules\n- DH governance boundaries become unstable at the configuration layer\n- the project loses determinism about which category defines progress representation and which categories only provide inputs to it\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because authority discipline is still being validated from rendered contract semantics rather than enforced through structural ownership bindings"
        },
        {
          "title": "Configuration exit condition for the progress model",
          "content": "WHAT:\nConfiguration is complete only when Project Progress Model defines the progress state vocabulary, defines modeled progress units, defines aggregation grammar, configures anti-drift constraints, materializes Configuration as a structured bucket, preserves continuity across the stage flow and respects category authority limits\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket closes the configuration stage by ensuring Devon no longer has only an installed progress-model surface, but a configured system of representation capable of supporting later validation, evidence, recovery and promotion decisions without semantic drift\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- aggregate result of all previous configuration checks\n\nVALIDATION:\n- all_previous_configuration_checks == true\n\nFAIL:\n- any previous configuration check false -> NOT COMPLETE\n\nIMPACT:\n- Validation cannot begin from a configured representational model\n- Project Progress Model remains operationally visible but semantically incomplete\n- the project continues without a trustworthy configured basis for expressing and aggregating progress state"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "bucket": "Validation",
      "status": "PASS",
      "cards": [
        {
          "title": "Validation of state vocabulary integrity",
          "content": "WHAT:\nValidation must verify that Project Progress Model is using a stable and non-overlapping state vocabulary so the same progress condition is not represented by conflicting labels, ambiguous meanings or surface-specific reinterpretations\n\nWHY:\nthe exclusive role of Validation in this category is to test whether the configured representational language can actually hold across Devon without semantic collapse; if state vocabulary integrity fails here, the whole project loses the ability to read progress consistently even when progress itself may already be lawful\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- expected_validation_targets:\n  - state vocabulary integrity\n  - non-overlapping state meanings\n  - cross-surface readability of state labels\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- state_vocabulary_integrity_validation_present == true\n- non_overlapping_state_meanings_validation_present == true\n- cross_surface_state_label_readability_validation_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- state_vocabulary_integrity_validation_present == false -> FAIL\n- non_overlapping_state_meanings_validation_present == false -> FAIL\n- cross_surface_state_label_readability_validation_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category can publish a state model that different surfaces read in different ways\n- DH loses its role as the place where progress vocabulary is stabilized\n- the project becomes exposed to multiple contradictory interpretations of the same modeled progress state\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because vocabulary integrity is still being validated from declared canonical semantics rather than through machine-enforced schema validation"
        },
        {
          "title": "Validation of modeled unit consistency",
          "content": "WHAT:\nValidation must verify that the units chosen by Project Progress Model are consistently bounded and remain distinguishable from raw activities, loose commentary and unrelated operational fragments across the system\n\nWHY:\nthe role of this bucket is to stop the category from modeling progress on unstable objects; if unit consistency fails, the model no longer represents progress state but a mixture of arbitrary fragments that cannot be compared or aggregated reliably\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- expected_validation_targets:\n  - progress unit consistency\n  - unit boundary stability\n  - distinction from raw activity and narrative fragments\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- progress_unit_consistency_validation_present == true\n- unit_boundary_stability_validation_present == true\n- distinction_from_raw_activity_validation_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- progress_unit_consistency_validation_present == false -> FAIL\n- unit_boundary_stability_validation_present == false -> FAIL\n- distinction_from_raw_activity_validation_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category loses control over what each modeled state actually refers to\n- DH can expose progress records that are structurally incomparable\n- the project becomes exposed to aggregation and review built on unstable representational units\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because unit consistency is still being validated from declared model semantics rather than formal structural bindings"
        },
        {
          "title": "Validation of aggregation fidelity",
          "content": "WHAT:\nValidation must verify that when modeled progress units are rolled up into larger views, the resulting representation preserves the meaning of the underlying states instead of inflating, flattening or distorting them\n\nWHY:\nthe exclusive role of this bucket is to test whether the model survives scale; Project Progress Model is only useful to Devon if local progress state can be elevated into project-level views without corrupting what each underlying unit originally meant\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- expected_validation_targets:\n  - aggregation fidelity\n  - preservation of local state meaning under rollup\n  - non-distorting summarized representation\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- aggregation_fidelity_validation_present == true\n- local_state_meaning_preservation_validation_present == true\n- non_distorting_summarized_representation_validation_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- aggregation_fidelity_validation_present == false -> FAIL\n- local_state_meaning_preservation_validation_present == false -> FAIL\n- non_distorting_summarized_representation_validation_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category can model isolated progress correctly but misrepresent it at higher levels\n- DH loses continuity between detailed state and summarized state\n- the project becomes exposed to dashboards and reviews that distort the underlying progress reality they claim to represent\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because aggregation fidelity is still being validated from declared model rules rather than formal compositional enforcement"
        },
        {
          "title": "Validation against representational drift",
          "content": "WHAT:\nValidation must verify that the configured progress model remains the same across Documentation Hub, future panel interpretation and downstream operational surfaces instead of drifting into parallel vocabularies or altered state logic\n\nWHY:\nthe role of this bucket is to operationalize the anti-fragmentation purpose of the category; Configuration may declare anti-drift rules, but Validation is where Devon tests whether those rules actually prevent the progress model from splintering across surfaces\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- supporting_context:\n  - anti-drift modeling boundary\n  - cross-surface representational consistency\n  - shared progress grammar\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- anti_drift_validation_present == true\n- cross_surface_model_consistency_validation_present == true\n- shared_progress_grammar_preservation_validation_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- anti_drift_validation_present == false -> FAIL\n- cross_surface_model_consistency_validation_present == false -> FAIL\n- shared_progress_grammar_preservation_validation_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category can declare a shared model but fail to keep it shared in practice\n- DH loses authority as the stabilizer of progress representation\n- the project becomes exposed to semantic forks where each surface starts speaking its own progress language\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because anti-drift validation is still being checked from declared canonical language rather than executable cross-surface model comparison"
        },
        {
          "title": "Validation bucket materialization",
          "content": "WHAT:\nValidation itself must be materialized as a real structured bucket inside the right-column workflow instead of remaining a placeholder pending card\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket exists because the category cannot claim a governable progress model while leaving the stage that tests representational integrity empty; Validation is where configured modeling rules become an actual verification layer for the whole project\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- expected_renderer_call: renderStructuredCard(\"Validation\", validationBuckets)\n\nVALIDATION:\n- validation_bucket_structured == true\n\nFAIL:\n- validation_bucket_structured == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category stays configured but unverified\n- DH exposes a progress model without the stage that should test whether it remains coherent\n- the project inherits a representational contract with no declared integrity check"
        },
        {
          "title": "Validation continuity with configuration and evidence",
          "content": "WHAT:\nValidation must connect the configured progress-model rules upstream to the Observable Evidence stage downstream so representational acceptance remains part of one continuous verification chain instead of becoming an isolated judgment\n\nWHY:\nthe role of this bucket is to make Validation the hinge between configured model grammar and observable proof that the model is actually being expressed that way across surfaces; if that continuity breaks, the project loses a coherent path from declared representation to evidenced representation\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- stage_context:\n  - Configuration\n  - Validation\n  - Observable Evidence\n\nVALIDATION:\n- configuration_to_validation_continuity_present == true\n- validation_to_observable_evidence_continuity_present == true\n- continuous_representation_verification_chain_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- configuration_to_validation_continuity_present == false -> FAIL\n- validation_to_observable_evidence_continuity_present == false -> FAIL\n- continuous_representation_verification_chain_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category fragments between configured grammar, judgment and proof\n- DH loses the semantic bridge that makes the progress model operationally trustworthy\n- the project cannot rely on one continuous chain from configured representation to evidenced surface behavior"
        },
        {
          "title": "Validation authority discipline",
          "content": "WHAT:\nValidation must judge only the integrity of progress representation, modeled units, aggregation fidelity and anti-drift behavior inside Project Progress Model, without validating lawful advancement, scope perimeter, architecture structure, sandbox trust, server identity, runtime mechanics or delivery ownership\n\nWHY:\nthe exclusive role of this bucket is to test the model, not to test every truth in Devon; once Validation starts deciding sibling-domain truth, the category stops being the guardian of progress representation and starts corrupting the governance map of the whole project\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- source_scope: Project Progress Model overview, prerequisites, installation, configuration and validation definitions\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- validation_respects_progress_model_authority == true\n- no_progress_canonical_validation_absorption == true\n- no_scope_validation_absorption == true\n- no_architecture_validation_absorption == true\n- no_sandbox_validation_absorption == true\n- no_server_registry_validation_absorption == true\n- no_runtime_validation_absorption == true\n- no_delivery_validation_absorption == true\n\nFAIL:\n- validation_respects_progress_model_authority == false -> FAIL\n- any sibling validation absorption == true -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category makes verification decisions outside its lawful domain\n- DH governance boundaries become unstable at the representational judgment layer\n- the project loses determinism about which category is allowed to validate which kind of truth\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because authority discipline is still being validated from rendered contract semantics rather than enforced through structural ownership bindings"
        },
        {
          "title": "Validation exit condition for the progress model",
          "content": "WHAT:\nValidation is complete only when Project Progress Model can verify state vocabulary integrity, verify modeled unit consistency, verify aggregation fidelity, verify anti-drift behavior, materialize Validation as a structured bucket, maintain continuity with configuration and evidence, and respect category authority limits\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket closes the validation stage by ensuring Devon no longer has only a configured progress model, but an actual representational judgment layer capable of deciding whether that model remains coherent and trustworthy across project consumption surfaces\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- aggregate result of all previous validation checks\n\nVALIDATION:\n- all_previous_validation_checks == true\n\nFAIL:\n- any previous validation check false -> NOT COMPLETE\n\nIMPACT:\n- Observable Evidence cannot begin from a trustworthy validated model state\n- Project Progress Model remains configured but not operationally verified\n- the project continues without a dependable judgment layer for progress representation integrity"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "bucket": "Observable Evidence",
      "status": "PASS",
      "cards": [
        {
          "title": "Observable proof that the progress vocabulary is actually the one in use",
          "content": "WHAT:\nObservable Evidence must expose concrete proof that the state vocabulary declared by Project Progress Model is the same vocabulary being surfaced and consumed across Devon, rather than a canon-only definition that downstream surfaces silently replace\n\nWHY:\nthe exclusive role of Observable Evidence in this category is to prove representational adoption, not representational intention; Validation may judge the model coherent, but this bucket must show that the project's visible progress language is in fact the modeled language and not an improvised substitute\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- evidence_focus:\n  - observable use of declared state vocabulary\n  - surface-level consistency of progress labels\n  - non-improvised representation of progress state\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- declared_state_vocabulary_usage_evidence_present == true\n- surface_level_progress_label_consistency_evidence_present == true\n- non_improvised_progress_representation_evidence_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- declared_state_vocabulary_usage_evidence_present == false -> FAIL\n- surface_level_progress_label_consistency_evidence_present == false -> FAIL\n- non_improvised_progress_representation_evidence_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category can validate vocabulary in theory without proving that the project is actually using it\n- DH loses the proof layer that should anchor modeled language in visible practice\n- the project becomes exposed to representational drift hidden behind canon-compliant wording\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because vocabulary adoption is still being validated from declared canonical semantics rather than bound to observable cross-surface model instrumentation"
        },
        {
          "title": "Observable proof that modeled units remain stable across surfaces",
          "content": "WHAT:\nObservable Evidence must show concrete proof that the units represented by Project Progress Model remain the same when they appear in Documentation Hub, future panel views and downstream operational interpretation, instead of mutating into incompatible objects or narrative fragments\n\nWHY:\nthe role of this bucket is to prove that modeled units survive contact with the rest of the system; the project needs evidence that the progress object being represented remains stable from source to surface, otherwise the model becomes formally correct but operationally untrustworthy\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- evidence_focus:\n  - stable representational units\n  - cross-surface identity of modeled progress objects\n  - non-fragmented progress object rendering\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- stable_representational_units_evidence_present == true\n- cross_surface_identity_of_modeled_objects_evidence_present == true\n- non_fragmented_progress_object_rendering_evidence_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- stable_representational_units_evidence_present == false -> FAIL\n- cross_surface_identity_of_modeled_objects_evidence_present == false -> FAIL\n- non_fragmented_progress_object_rendering_evidence_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category can define a progress unit without proving that the project preserves that unit in practice\n- DH loses the evidentiary basis for trusting modeled objects as consistent state carriers\n- the project becomes exposed to rollups and reviews built on mutated representational units\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because modeled unit stability is still being validated from declared semantics rather than through formal observable identity tracking"
        },
        {
          "title": "Observable proof that aggregation preserves meaning",
          "content": "WHAT:\nObservable Evidence must expose proof that when local progress states are aggregated into broader project views, the resulting representation still reflects the meaning of the source units instead of flattening, exaggerating or erasing what those units actually said\n\nWHY:\nthe exclusive role of this bucket is to prove that representational scale does not corrupt representational truth; Project Progress Model only serves Devon if project-level views can be trusted as faithful expressions of lower-level modeled states\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- evidence_focus:\n  - faithful aggregation outcomes\n  - preservation of source-state meaning\n  - non-distorting summarized progress views\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- faithful_aggregation_outcomes_evidence_present == true\n- source_state_meaning_preservation_evidence_present == true\n- non_distorting_summarized_progress_views_evidence_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- faithful_aggregation_outcomes_evidence_present == false -> FAIL\n- source_state_meaning_preservation_evidence_present == false -> FAIL\n- non_distorting_summarized_progress_views_evidence_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category can validate aggregation rules without proving their real-world fidelity\n- DH loses the proof layer that should connect local state truth to summarized state truth\n- the project becomes exposed to dashboards and operational summaries that distort what modeled progress actually means\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because aggregation fidelity evidence is still being validated from declared model semantics rather than formal observable rollup verification"
        },
        {
          "title": "Observable proof against representational drift",
          "content": "WHAT:\nObservable Evidence must expose the concrete traces that show Project Progress Model is preventing progress from being expressed one way in canon and a different way in downstream surfaces, thereby proving that anti-drift rules are operating in visible system behavior\n\nWHY:\nthe role of this bucket is to supply proof that anti-fragmentation is not aspirational; this category exists to stop Devon from speaking multiple progress languages at once, so it needs observable traces that prove the shared model is actually holding\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- evidence_focus:\n  - anti-drift traces\n  - cross-surface model consistency\n  - preservation of shared progress grammar\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- anti_drift_traces_present == true\n- cross_surface_model_consistency_evidence_present == true\n- shared_progress_grammar_preservation_evidence_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- anti_drift_traces_present == false -> FAIL\n- cross_surface_model_consistency_evidence_present == false -> FAIL\n- shared_progress_grammar_preservation_evidence_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category can declare anti-drift rules without proving they survive contact with the system\n- DH loses the evidentiary basis for claiming representational stability\n- the project becomes exposed to silent semantic fork between official model and lived surface behavior\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because anti-drift observability is still being validated from declared canonical language rather than executable cross-surface evidence collection"
        },
        {
          "title": "Observable Evidence bucket materialization",
          "content": "WHAT:\nObservable Evidence itself must be materialized as a real structured bucket inside the left-column workflow instead of remaining a placeholder pending card\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket exists because the category cannot claim evidence-backed progress representation while leaving the stage that surfaces proof empty; Observable Evidence is where the model becomes externally defensible to the whole project\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- expected_renderer_call: renderStructuredCard(\"Observable Evidence\", observableEvidenceBuckets)\n\nVALIDATION:\n- observable_evidence_bucket_structured == true\n\nFAIL:\n- observable_evidence_bucket_structured == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category stays validated but under-evidenced\n- DH exposes representational judgment without the proof surface that should support it\n- the project inherits a progress-model contract that cannot show why its representation should be trusted"
        },
        {
          "title": "Observable evidence continuity with validation and promotion",
          "content": "WHAT:\nObservable Evidence must connect the representational judgment made in Validation to the final maturity logic of Completion & Promotion so proof remains part of one continuous modeled-progress chain instead of becoming decorative support detached from later decisions\n\nWHY:\nthe role of this bucket is to stop evidence from being treated as commentary after validation; it has to remain structurally connected to both the judgment that accepted the model and the final stage that will decide whether the modeled representation is mature enough for trusted downstream use\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- stage_context:\n  - Validation\n  - Observable Evidence\n  - Completion & Promotion\n\nVALIDATION:\n- validation_to_observable_evidence_continuity_present == true\n- observable_evidence_to_completion_promotion_continuity_present == true\n- continuous_modeled_progress_evidence_chain_present == true\n\nFAIL:\n- validation_to_observable_evidence_continuity_present == false -> FAIL\n- observable_evidence_to_completion_promotion_continuity_present == false -> FAIL\n- continuous_modeled_progress_evidence_chain_present == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category fragments between representational judgment, proof and maturity\n- DH loses the chain that makes the model operationally trustworthy across stages\n- the project becomes exposed to disconnected decisions where evidence no longer carries forward into final trust decisions"
        },
        {
          "title": "Observable Evidence authority discipline",
          "content": "WHAT:\nObservable Evidence must expose proof only for progress representation integrity, modeled units, aggregation fidelity and anti-drift behavior inside Project Progress Model, without becoming the evidentiary owner of lawful advancement, scope perimeter, architecture structure, sandbox trust, server identity, runtime behavior or delivery closure\n\nWHY:\nthe exclusive role of this bucket is to prove the model, not to prove every truth in Devon; once evidence authority expands into sibling domains, the category stops being the guardian of readable progress state and becomes a dumping ground for unrelated proof obligations\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- source_scope: Project Progress Model overview, prerequisites, installation, configuration, validation and observable evidence definitions\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- observable_evidence_respects_progress_model_authority == true\n- no_progress_canonical_evidence_absorption == true\n- no_scope_evidence_absorption == true\n- no_architecture_evidence_absorption == true\n- no_sandbox_evidence_absorption == true\n- no_server_registry_evidence_absorption == true\n- no_runtime_evidence_absorption == true\n- no_delivery_evidence_absorption == true\n\nFAIL:\n- observable_evidence_respects_progress_model_authority == false -> FAIL\n- any sibling evidence absorption == true -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category starts accumulating proof duties outside its lawful modeling domain\n- DH governance boundaries become unstable at the evidentiary layer\n- the project loses determinism about which category is responsible for proving which kind of representational truth\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because authority discipline is still being validated from rendered contract semantics rather than enforced through structural ownership bindings"
        },
        {
          "title": "Observable Evidence exit condition for the progress model",
          "content": "WHAT:\nObservable Evidence is complete only when Project Progress Model can expose proof that the declared vocabulary is the one actually in use, prove that modeled units remain stable across surfaces, prove that aggregation preserves meaning, prove that anti-drift behavior is visible in system outputs, materialize Observable Evidence as a structured bucket, maintain continuity with validation and promotion, and respect category authority limits\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket closes the evidence stage by ensuring Devon no longer has only a validated progress model, but a visibly supportable model whose representational claims can withstand inspection before being treated as trusted project grammar\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- aggregate result of all previous observable evidence checks\n\nVALIDATION:\n- all_previous_observable_evidence_checks == true\n\nFAIL:\n- any previous observable evidence check false -> NOT COMPLETE\n\nIMPACT:\n- Completion & Promotion cannot begin from a trustworthy proof-backed model state\n- Project Progress Model remains validated but not evidentially defensible\n- the project continues without a dependable observable basis for trusting its progress representation contract"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "bucket": "Failure Modes & Recovery",
      "status": "MISSING",
      "cards": []
    },
    {
      "bucket": "Completion & Promotion",
      "status": "PASS",
      "cards": [
        {
          "title": "Promotion of the model into trusted project grammar",
          "content": "WHAT:\nThis bucket must define the exact point at which the validated and evidenced progress model stops being only a declared representation contract and becomes the trusted grammar that Devon is allowed to use for reading, comparing and communicating progress state across the project\n\nWHY:\nthe exclusive role of Completion & Promotion in this category is not to promote lawful advancement itself, but to promote the maturity of its representation; everything upstream exists to define, test and prove the model, and this bucket decides when that model is stable enough to become the project's shared language for progress\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- promotion_focus:\n  - trusted project grammar\n  - mature representational contract\n  - official shared language of progress state\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- trusted_project_grammar_promotion_defined == true\n- mature_representational_contract_defined == true\n- official_shared_progress_language_defined == true\n\nFAIL:\n- trusted_project_grammar_promotion_defined == false -> FAIL\n- mature_representational_contract_defined == false -> FAIL\n- official_shared_progress_language_defined == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category can define and validate a progress model without ever making it authoritative for project-wide interpretation\n- DH loses the final gate that turns a good representation into trusted common grammar\n- the project keeps producing modeled progress without a lawful way to standardize its reading across surfaces\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because promotion into trusted project grammar is still being validated from declared canonical semantics rather than formal adoption-state enforcement"
        },
        {
          "title": "Promotion threshold for representational maturity",
          "content": "WHAT:\nThis bucket must define when Project Progress Model has become mature enough to move from workable representation into officially trusted representation, without allowing partially coherent, locally stable or only temporarily aligned modeling to steal that trust level\n\nWHY:\nthe role of this bucket inside the category is to protect the maturity threshold of the model itself; promotion here is not generic closure, it is the lawful elevation from validated representation into a representation that the rest of Devon may safely treat as dependable project grammar\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- promotion_focus:\n  - representational maturity threshold\n  - elevation from workable to trusted model\n  - exclusion of premature model trust\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- representational_maturity_threshold_defined == true\n- workable_to_trusted_model_elevation_defined == true\n- premature_model_trust_exclusion_defined == true\n\nFAIL:\n- representational_maturity_threshold_defined == false -> FAIL\n- workable_to_trusted_model_elevation_defined == false -> FAIL\n- premature_model_trust_exclusion_defined == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category loses the line that separates acceptable modeling from authoritative modeling\n- DH can begin treating incomplete representation as settled project grammar\n- the project becomes exposed to semantic lock-in around a model that is not yet mature enough to deserve trust\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because the maturity threshold is still being validated from canonical text rather than enforced through formal model-readiness criteria"
        },
        {
          "title": "Promotion only after preserved representational proof",
          "content": "WHAT:\nThis bucket must define that no progress model is promoted unless the validation judgment that accepted it remains intact and the observable proof that supports vocabulary integrity, unit stability, aggregation fidelity and anti-drift behavior remains present and traceable\n\nWHY:\nthe exclusive role here is to prevent promotion from becoming a shortcut around the rest of the category; Completion & Promotion must inherit the full burden of representational judgment and proof, otherwise Devon turns trusted progress grammar into discretionary approval instead of evidenced model maturity\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- stage_context:\n  - Validation\n  - Observable Evidence\n  - Completion & Promotion\n\nVALIDATION:\n- validation_dependency_for_model_promotion_defined == true\n- observable_proof_dependency_for_model_promotion_defined == true\n- discretionary_model_trust_block_defined == true\n\nFAIL:\n- validation_dependency_for_model_promotion_defined == false -> FAIL\n- observable_proof_dependency_for_model_promotion_defined == false -> FAIL\n- discretionary_model_trust_block_defined == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category can promote a model without carrying forward the basis that made it trustworthy\n- DH loses continuity between representational judgment and official model adoption\n- the project becomes exposed to trusted grammar states that no longer rest on preserved proof and lawful validation"
        },
        {
          "title": "Exclusion of non-promotable model states",
          "content": "WHAT:\nThis bucket must define which modeled states are still not promotable even when they look useful, including locally readable but globally inconsistent representation, stable vocabulary without stable units, or aggregation logic that remains semantically risky at scale\n\nWHY:\nthe role of Completion & Promotion is not only to promote what qualifies but to refuse promotion to what has not yet earned trusted grammar status; this bucket protects Devon from locking the project into a model that is usable in fragments but not reliable as system-wide representation\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file_path: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/panel/data/project_progress_model.json\n- promotion_focus:\n  - exclusion of non-promotable model states\n  - locally useful but globally unstable representation\n  - semantically risky aggregation states\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- non_promotable_model_state_exclusion_defined == true\n- locally_useful_but_globally_unstable_representation_defined == true\n- semantically_risky_aggregation_state_defined == true\n\nFAIL:\n- non_promotable_model_state_exclusion_defined == false -> FAIL\n- locally_useful_but_globally_unstable_representation_defined == false -> FAIL\n- semantically_risky_aggregation_state_defined == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category loses its ability to reserve trust for truly mature representational states\n- DH becomes vulnerable to promoting good-looking but unstable models\n- the project starts standardizing progress language before that language is actually safe to standardize\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because exclusion of non-promotable model states is still being validated from declared canonical language rather than executable promotion policy"
        },
        {
          "title": "Promotion continuity with upstream resilience",
          "content": "WHAT:\nThis bucket must define that promotion is downstream of Failure Modes & Recovery, so no fractured vocabulary, unstable unit, distorted aggregation or still-contaminated representation is allowed to become trusted project grammar\n\nWHY:\nthe exclusive role here is to ensure the final gate obeys the corrective logic of the category; if promotion can bypass failure and recovery, then Devon can detect representational corruption and still finalize that corruption as the official language of progress\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- stage_context:\n  - Failure Modes & Recovery\n  - Completion & Promotion\n\nVALIDATION:\n- failure_recovery_dependency_for_model_promotion_defined == true\n- revoked_or_rewritten_model_state_promotion_block_defined == true\n- contaminated_representation_finalization_block_defined == true\n\nFAIL:\n- failure_recovery_dependency_for_model_promotion_defined == false -> FAIL\n- revoked_or_rewritten_model_state_promotion_block_defined == false -> FAIL\n- contaminated_representation_finalization_block_defined == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category can repair corrupted representation upstream while still letting it become trusted grammar downstream\n- DH loses final-gate integrity at the exact point where representational trust should be strongest\n- the project becomes exposed to official progress language built on already-compromised modeling states"
        },
        {
          "title": "Completion & Promotion bucket materialization",
          "content": "WHAT:\nCompletion & Promotion itself must be materialized as a real structured bucket inside the left-column workflow instead of remaining a placeholder pending card\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket must exist as an explicit stage because Project Progress Model is incomplete until it declares how validated representation becomes trusted project grammar; without this stage the category governs representational evaluation but not representational adoption\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- expected_renderer_call: renderStructuredCard(\"Completion & Promotion\", completionPromotionBuckets)\n\nVALIDATION:\n- completion_promotion_bucket_structured == true\n\nFAIL:\n- completion_promotion_bucket_structured == false -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category can judge the model but cannot finish the trust cycle it was built to govern\n- DH keeps a structural hole exactly where modeled progress should become trusted shared grammar\n- the project inherits a representation contract with no declared final adoption gate"
        },
        {
          "title": "Completion & Promotion authority discipline",
          "content": "WHAT:\nThis bucket must remain limited to promotion of representational maturity and recognition of trusted progress grammar inside Project Progress Model, without absorbing lawful advancement conclusion, scope closure, architecture closure, sandbox graduation, server registration finalization, runtime readiness or delivery acceptance owned by sibling categories\n\nWHY:\nthe exclusive role of this bucket is to finalize trust in the model, not to finalize every kind of truth in Devon; once promotion starts owning sibling completion domains, the category stops representing progress grammar and starts corrupting the governance map of the whole project\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- file: /home/yeff/public_html/devon/docs/index.php\n- source_scope: Project Progress Model overview, prerequisites, installation, configuration, validation, observable evidence, failure/recovery and completion/promotion definitions\n\nVALIDATION:\n- transitional_validation_only == true\n- completion_promotion_respects_progress_model_authority == true\n- no_progress_canonical_completion_absorption == true\n- no_scope_completion_absorption == true\n- no_architecture_completion_absorption == true\n- no_sandbox_completion_absorption == true\n- no_server_registry_completion_absorption == true\n- no_runtime_completion_absorption == true\n- no_delivery_completion_absorption == true\n\nFAIL:\n- completion_promotion_respects_progress_model_authority == false -> FAIL\n- any sibling completion absorption == true -> FAIL\n\nIMPACT:\n- the category starts finalizing truths it does not own\n- DH governance boundaries collapse at the final representational trust layer\n- the project loses determinism about what this category is allowed to officially mature and conclude\n\nTRANSITION_NOTE:\n- this remains transitional because authority discipline is still being validated from rendered contract semantics rather than structural ownership enforcement"
        },
        {
          "title": "Completion & Promotion exit condition for the progress model",
          "content": "WHAT:\nCompletion & Promotion is complete only when Project Progress Model defines promotion into trusted project grammar, defines the lawful threshold from workable model to trusted model, requires preserved representational proof and lawful judgment before promotion, excludes non-promotable model states, preserves dependency on Failure Modes & Recovery, materializes the bucket as a structured stage and respects category authority boundaries\n\nWHY:\nthis bucket closes the category by ensuring Devon no longer has only a way to describe progress representation, but also a category-specific mechanism for lawfully converting validated model integrity into trusted shared grammar for project-wide use\n\nEVIDENCE:\n- aggregate result of all previous completion and promotion checks\n\nVALIDATION:\n- all_previous_completion_promotion_checks == true\n\nFAIL:\n- any previous completion promotion check false -> NOT COMPLETE\n\nIMPACT:\n- Project Progress Model cannot act as a closed representational-governance contract\n- DH remains able to analyze the model without being able to canonize its trusted adoption state\n- the project continues without a dependable final gate for shared progress grammar maturity"
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}