hachure 0.6.0 → 0.8.0

package/conformance/merge/merge-conflict-status.json

@@ -0,0 +1,149 @@
+{
+  "$comment": "Hand-derivation (merge.md §7c; status-function.md Steps 1-4). Both claims share subjectType/subjectId ('resource'/'svc-1') and fieldOrBehavior ('granted') -> same canonical claim (§4). Both bundles carry the identical policy 'policy.access-check.basic' (byte-identical in both -> unioning it is not a collision), which additionally declares incompatibleStatuses covering ['verified','disputed'] purely as an illustration that this does NOT by itself flip either claim's status (§7c) -- neither this vector's expect block nor status-function.md's fold reads incompatibleStatuses at all; it only affects the report layer, out of scope here (§9). No ids collide across the two bundles -> collisions is empty. Fold for producer-a's claim: latestEvent is 'producer-a.event.access.verified' (status 'verified', not terminal, skip Steps 2-3) -> Step 4 applies. 4a: claim has no expiresAt/ttlSeconds, policy validityRule.kind='duration', durationDays=30, verifiedAt=2026-06-01T00:00:00Z, now=2026-06-10T00:00:00Z -> 9 days elapsed < 30 -> not stale. 4b: entailing evidence (supportStrength defaults to 'entails' on both evidence items) = [producer-a.evidence.access.pass, producer-a.evidence.access.fail]; their evidenceType set {source_excerpt} and method set {observation} both satisfy policy.requiredEvidence=['source_excerpt']/requiredMethods=['observation']; requiresCorroboration=false -> no gap. 4c: 'producer-a.evidence.access.fail' has passing=false and blocking=true, observedAt=2026-06-05 (after the verified event) -> blocking failure found -> return 'disputed'. Fold for producer-b's claim: latestEvent is 'producer-b.event.access.verified' (status 'verified') -> Step 4. 4a: verifiedAt=2026-06-02T00:00:00Z, now=2026-06-10T00:00:00Z -> 8 days < 30 -> not stale. 4b: entailing evidence = [producer-b.evidence.access.pass], evidenceType {source_excerpt}, method {observation} -> satisfies policy -> no gap. 4c: the one evidence item has no 'passing:false' entry (passing is absent) -> no blocking failure -> 4d: return 'verified'. This demonstrates merge does not let producer-b's 'verified' overwrite or suppress producer-a's independently-derived 'disputed', and vice versa.",
+  "now": "2026-06-10T00:00:00.000Z",
+  "inputs": [
+    {
+      "schemaVersion": 4,
+      "source": "producer-a:run-3",
+      "producerId": "producer-a",
+      "claims": [
+        {
+          "id": "producer-a.claim.access.grant",
+          "subjectType": "resource",
+          "subjectId": "svc-1",
+          "surface": "access",
+          "claimType": "access-check",
+          "fieldOrBehavior": "granted",
+          "value": true,
+          "createdAt": "2026-06-01T00:00:00.000Z",
+          "updatedAt": "2026-06-01T00:00:00.000Z"
+        }
+      ],
+      "evidence": [
+        {
+          "id": "producer-a.evidence.access.pass",
+          "claimId": "producer-a.claim.access.grant",
+          "evidenceType": "source_excerpt",
+          "method": "observation",
+          "sourceRef": "source A: access log",
+          "excerptOrSummary": "Access granted.",
+          "observedAt": "2026-06-01T00:00:00.000Z",
+          "collectedBy": "agent-a"
+        },
+        {
+          "id": "producer-a.evidence.access.fail",
+          "claimId": "producer-a.claim.access.grant",
+          "evidenceType": "source_excerpt",
+          "method": "observation",
+          "sourceRef": "source A2: revocation log",
+          "excerptOrSummary": "Access revocation observed after original grant.",
+          "observedAt": "2026-06-05T00:00:00.000Z",
+          "collectedBy": "agent-a",
+          "passing": false,
+          "blocking": true
+        }
+      ],
+      "policies": [
+        {
+          "id": "policy.access-check.basic",
+          "claimType": "access-check",
+          "requiredEvidence": ["source_excerpt"],
+          "requiredMethods": ["observation"],
+          "requiresCorroboration": false,
+          "acceptanceCriteria": ["access confirmed from source"],
+          "reviewAuthority": "operator",
+          "validityRule": { "kind": "duration", "durationDays": 30 },
+          "stalenessTriggers": [],
+          "conflictRules": [],
+          "impactLevel": "medium",
+          "incompatibleStatuses": [
+            { "statuses": ["verified", "disputed"], "message": "conflicting access status across producers" }
+          ]
+        }
+      ],
+      "events": [
+        {
+          "id": "producer-a.event.access.verified",
+          "claimId": "producer-a.claim.access.grant",
+          "status": "verified",
+          "actor": "operator-a",
+          "method": "attestation",
+          "evidenceIds": ["producer-a.evidence.access.pass"],
+          "createdAt": "2026-06-01T00:00:00.000Z",
+          "verifiedAt": "2026-06-01T00:00:00.000Z"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "schemaVersion": 4,
+      "source": "producer-b:run-4",
+      "producerId": "producer-b",
+      "claims": [
+        {
+          "id": "producer-b.claim.access.grant",
+          "subjectType": "resource",
+          "subjectId": "svc-1",
+          "surface": "access",
+          "claimType": "access-check",
+          "fieldOrBehavior": "granted",
+          "value": true,
+          "createdAt": "2026-06-02T00:00:00.000Z",
+          "updatedAt": "2026-06-02T00:00:00.000Z"
+        }
+      ],
+      "evidence": [
+        {
+          "id": "producer-b.evidence.access.pass",
+          "claimId": "producer-b.claim.access.grant",
+          "evidenceType": "source_excerpt",
+          "method": "observation",
+          "sourceRef": "source B: access log",
+          "excerptOrSummary": "Access granted, confirmed.",
+          "observedAt": "2026-06-02T00:00:00.000Z",
+          "collectedBy": "agent-b"
+        }
+      ],
+      "policies": [
+        {
+          "id": "policy.access-check.basic",
+          "claimType": "access-check",
+          "requiredEvidence": ["source_excerpt"],
+          "requiredMethods": ["observation"],
+          "requiresCorroboration": false,
+          "acceptanceCriteria": ["access confirmed from source"],
+          "reviewAuthority": "operator",
+          "validityRule": { "kind": "duration", "durationDays": 30 },
+          "stalenessTriggers": [],
+          "conflictRules": [],
+          "impactLevel": "medium",
+          "incompatibleStatuses": [
+            { "statuses": ["verified", "disputed"], "message": "conflicting access status across producers" }
+          ]
+        }
+      ],
+      "events": [
+        {
+          "id": "producer-b.event.access.verified",
+          "claimId": "producer-b.claim.access.grant",
+          "status": "verified",
+          "actor": "operator-b",
+          "method": "attestation",
+          "evidenceIds": ["producer-b.evidence.access.pass"],
+          "createdAt": "2026-06-02T00:00:00.000Z",
+          "verifiedAt": "2026-06-02T00:00:00.000Z"
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  ],
+  "expect": {
+    "mergedClaimIds": [
+      "producer-a.claim.access.grant",
+      "producer-b.claim.access.grant"
+    ],
+    "collisions": [],
+    "statusByClaimId": {
+      "producer-a.claim.access.grant": "disputed",
+      "producer-b.claim.access.grant": "verified"
+    }
+  }
+}

package/conformance/merge/merge-conflict-value.json

@@ -0,0 +1,100 @@
+{
+  "$comment": "Hand-derivation (merge.md §4/§5/§7b; status-function.md Step 7). Both claims share subjectType/subjectId ('repo'/'repo-2') and fieldOrBehavior ('tier'), no qualifiers -> same canonical claim key (§4). Values 'gold' (producer-a) and 'silver' (producer-b) are not deep-equal, and both bundles reference the identical policy 'policy.pricing-field.tier-conflict', which declares incompatibleValues covering ['gold','silver'] -> this is a value conflict (§7b): both claims MUST be retained (mergedClaimIds has both distinct ids); the conflict itself surfaces only as a report-layer contradiction transparency gap, which is out of this vector format's scope (merge.md §9) and does NOT affect either claim's own status computation. The policy object is byte-identical in both bundles under the same id, so unioning it is not a collision (merge.md §5 rule 2) -> collisions is empty. Status-function.md fold, per claim: no verification event in either bundle (skip Steps 1-5); a policy IS resolved (claimType 'pricing-field' matches) so Step 6 ('no policy') does not apply; Step 7 applies ('policy present, no verification event'): producer-a's claim has one entailing evidence item with evidenceType 'source_excerpt', so its evidence-type set is {source_excerpt}, which is a superset of policy.requiredEvidence=['source_excerpt'] -> 'proposed'. producer-b's claim has no evidence at all, so its evidence-type set is {} which does NOT contain 'source_excerpt' -> 'unknown'. The two claims resolve to different statuses purely from their own attached evidence, independent of the value conflict between them.",
+  "now": "2026-06-10T00:00:00.000Z",
+  "inputs": [
+    {
+      "schemaVersion": 4,
+      "source": "producer-a:run-2",
+      "producerId": "producer-a",
+      "claims": [
+        {
+          "id": "producer-a.claim.pricing.tier",
+          "subjectType": "repo",
+          "subjectId": "repo-2",
+          "surface": "pricing",
+          "claimType": "pricing-field",
+          "fieldOrBehavior": "tier",
+          "value": "gold",
+          "createdAt": "2026-06-01T00:00:00.000Z",
+          "updatedAt": "2026-06-01T00:00:00.000Z"
+        }
+      ],
+      "evidence": [
+        {
+          "id": "producer-a.evidence.tier.source",
+          "claimId": "producer-a.claim.pricing.tier",
+          "evidenceType": "source_excerpt",
+          "method": "observation",
+          "sourceRef": "source A: internal pricing sheet",
+          "excerptOrSummary": "Tier is gold.",
+          "observedAt": "2026-06-01T00:00:00.000Z",
+          "collectedBy": "crawler-a"
+        }
+      ],
+      "policies": [
+        {
+          "id": "policy.pricing-field.tier-conflict",
+          "claimType": "pricing-field",
+          "requiredEvidence": ["source_excerpt"],
+          "acceptanceCriteria": ["tier confirmed by source"],
+          "reviewAuthority": "operator",
+          "validityRule": { "kind": "historical" },
+          "stalenessTriggers": [],
+          "conflictRules": [],
+          "impactLevel": "medium",
+          "incompatibleValues": [
+            { "values": ["gold", "silver"], "message": "tier values conflict across producers" }
+          ]
+        }
+      ],
+      "events": []
+    },
+    {
+      "schemaVersion": 4,
+      "source": "producer-b:run-9",
+      "producerId": "producer-b",
+      "claims": [
+        {
+          "id": "producer-b.claim.pricing.tier",
+          "subjectType": "repo",
+          "subjectId": "repo-2",
+          "surface": "pricing",
+          "claimType": "pricing-field",
+          "fieldOrBehavior": "tier",
+          "value": "silver",
+          "createdAt": "2026-06-02T00:00:00.000Z",
+          "updatedAt": "2026-06-02T00:00:00.000Z"
+        }
+      ],
+      "evidence": [],
+      "policies": [
+        {
+          "id": "policy.pricing-field.tier-conflict",
+          "claimType": "pricing-field",
+          "requiredEvidence": ["source_excerpt"],
+          "acceptanceCriteria": ["tier confirmed by source"],
+          "reviewAuthority": "operator",
+          "validityRule": { "kind": "historical" },
+          "stalenessTriggers": [],
+          "conflictRules": [],
+          "impactLevel": "medium",
+          "incompatibleValues": [
+            { "values": ["gold", "silver"], "message": "tier values conflict across producers" }
+          ]
+        }
+      ],
+      "events": []
+    }
+  ],
+  "expect": {
+    "mergedClaimIds": [
+      "producer-a.claim.pricing.tier",
+      "producer-b.claim.pricing.tier"
+    ],
+    "collisions": [],
+    "statusByClaimId": {
+      "producer-a.claim.pricing.tier": "proposed",
+      "producer-b.claim.pricing.tier": "unknown"
+    }
+  }
+}

package/index.mjs

@@ -11,6 +11,13 @@
  *                             vectors. Each vector has `input`, `expect`, and
  *                             `now` fields; run them against your implementation
  *                             to claim conformance.
+ *   conformanceManifest    — structured object describing conformance levels
+ *                             (L1 schema-valid, L2 status vectors, L3 merge
+ *                             vectors), which files satisfy each, and the
+ *                             schemaVersion/statusFunctionVersion it applies
+ *                             to. Parsed from conformance/manifest.json.
+ *                             Distinct from testVectors: this describes what
+ *                             passing means, testVectors is the raw fixtures.
  */
 
 import { readFileSync, readdirSync } from 'node:fs';
@@ -50,7 +57,9 @@ function loadTestVectors() {
   const conformanceDir = join(__dirname, 'conformance');
   const vectors = [];
   for (const file of readdirSync(conformanceDir).sort()) {
-    if (!file.endsWith('.json')) continue;
+    // manifest.json is structured metadata (see conformanceManifest below),
+    // not a { now, input, expect } test vector — excluded here.
+    if (!file.endsWith('.json') || file === 'manifest.json') continue;
     const name = basename(file, '.json');
     const vector = JSON.parse(readFileSync(join(conformanceDir, file), 'utf8'));
     vectors.push({ name, vector });
@@ -59,3 +68,15 @@ function loadTestVectors() {
 }
 
 export const testVectors = loadTestVectors();
+
+// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+// Conformance manifest — structured levels/requirements, distinct from the
+// raw testVectors list above. See conformance/manifest.json and
+// conformance/README.md for the human-readable pointer.
+// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+function loadConformanceManifest() {
+  const manifestPath = join(__dirname, 'conformance', 'manifest.json');
+  return JSON.parse(readFileSync(manifestPath, 'utf8'));
+}
+
+export const conformanceManifest = loadConformanceManifest();

package/interop-in-toto.md

@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
 
 **Module:** `@kontourai/surface` — `src/interop/in-toto.ts`
 **Public exports:** `toInTotoStatement`, `toDsseEnvelope`, `buildPaeBytes`, `parseDssePayload`
+**Conformance language:** MUST/SHOULD/MAY keywords in this document are to be interpreted per RFC 2119/BCP 14, as defined in [README.md's Conformance language section](README.md#conformance-language).
 
 ---