Skip to main content

Unixification moved

Where should a builder go to turn the Unixification argument into a repeatable audit?

Unixification is no longer maintained as a Standards argument. The canonical WHY is Unixification. Standards remain the operating floor: naming, templates, benchmarks, protocols, and design-system rules.

Outcome​

Audit one consequential component or workflow and identify the first missing contract, authority boundary, proof receipt, or beneficiary handoff.

Steps​

  1. Open the nine-part Unixification checklist.
  2. Choose one real component or workflow.
  3. Fill its copyable component card from observed evidence.
  4. Trace its input, state change, authority, output, verifier, and beneficiary.
  5. Repair the first seam that has no stable contract or attributable receipt.

Output​

A completed component card and one evidence-backed repair decision.

Proof of done​

  • The chosen unit owns one useful state transformation.
  • Its input, output, dependencies, authority, state, and provenance are explicit.
  • Its focused proof exercises the named unit.
  • Its downstream handoff and intended beneficiary are named.
  • Missing evidence is reported as a gap rather than inferred.

Failure modes​

  • Auditing file size while hidden state and authority remain shared.
  • Treating a local test as beneficiary proof.
  • Rebuilding the old Standards argument instead of improving the WHY page.
  • Moving private enforcement details into /beliefs.

Context​

Changes my mind: the pointer should become a full operating page again if the public checklist cannot support a repeatable audit without private context.

Questions​

Next question: Which consequential component has the least visible state or authority?