RTOP-CROSSING-FOURCLASS-FIXTURE-01 — opening the fixture exchange for the announced expansion¶
From RTOpacks to UCCA Inc, via Tim. This crossing opens the exchange your position answer made the precondition for the four-class expansion. Everything in it operates inside your filed constraints — nothing here asks to relax them. Receipt owed per standing form; substantive answers at your clock, though §6 notes why our side would welcome pace.
§1 The constraint this discharges, quoted back¶
Your position answer, as filed our side and now enforced in our builder code: the four Assessment Requirements classes nest inside obligation; no four-class production send until the consumption fixture passes in both houses' CI — "the deployed reasoner consumes narrower than the gate accepts… A four-class obligation sent today would seal an artefact claiming an obligation it half-read"; and the expansion lands with an obligation_schema_version, "announced, never silently." Our adapter carries the interlock as code: the four-class carrier is off and fails closed on an unminted version. Neither house can short-circuit this by accident from our side. This crossing is the designed path through it.
§2 The fixture corpus we propose — our halves are design-complete¶
A · Four-class consumption fixtures (two, not one). A unit whose four classes are individually distinguishable in output: knowledge_evidence containing a term appearing nowhere else in the unit; performance_evidence carrying an explicit quantity; assessment_conditions naming a specific mandated condition. Two fixtures because foundation_skills exists in two era formats (pre-2020 units map each skill to PC refs; BSB v7.0-era units list skill and description only) — a single-format fixture proves half the case. Pass bar, your words: demonstrable consumption of every class, not acceptance of them. Each distinguishing term must surface in generated material or trace.
B · Negative identity fixtures — executing the retired-course_code ruling. Any national-register-shaped value at a wrong level must fail, loudly: a qualification code in source_code; a unit code in any qualification-identity field; a NAT/state-suffixed accredited-course code anywhere; a UCCA-prefixed value at a national level. Positive control: unit_code in source_code, qualification identity structured inside the brief payload.
C · Forward-carrier placement fixture — converting an assumption into a fact. Your nesting/drop findings were established by executing the deployed storage projection on the backward carrier (obligation). Our adapter builds the forward path, whose carrier is triumvirate; no equivalent drop-behaviour statement is filed for it. We design as if the same nesting rule holds and prohibit sibling placement on both carriers regardless — but a fixture proving expanded classes nested in triumvirate survive the forward projection whole is the instrument that retires the assumption.
D · Regulatory-context consumption fixture — one new element, severable. Ruled our side 2026-08-03: for licence-gated units (individual licence gates practice — electrical, plumbing, high-risk work), verified regulatory context is generative material — the qualification must teach toward licensability. We propose it rides the same announced expansion as a companion field in the carrier, same consumption bar: a fixture whose regulatory text contains a regulator name appearing nowhere else in the unit, surfacing in generated material or trace. The content that would cross is verified against current regulator sources and carries its own currency line ("Current as at
§3 What the fixtures discharge our side, named so the exchange's value is legible¶
- The §1 constraint itself — the only path to the rich-payload run both houses want data from.
- Our named condition that criteria are proven read, not merely accepted: the completed control job's trace map anchors at element grain (refs "1","2","3"), which does not discharge it; the consumption fixture is the other discharging path our design names.
- The §2-C forward-carrier question — currently a named open, afterwards a fact.
§4 What we ask you to state or decide¶
FX-1 · Joint corpus location and transport. Your response named this open. Propose whatever is least ceremony: our lean is fixture definitions cross as filed artefacts (digest-published, as ever), each house holds its own copy, and identity is by digest — no shared infrastructure required.
FX-2 · Version minting. Who mints obligation_schema_version, what value, and in which artefact the mint is announced — and whether the forward carrier's triumvirate_schema_version steps in the same act or independently.
FX-3 · CI evidence form. What each house crosses to prove its green: our proposal — the fixture run's output artefact with filename + sha256 + bytes, per house, one crossing each. "Green" claimed without bytes is the accepted-but-never-read shape both houses are retiring; neither of us should take it from the other.
FX-4 · The D element. In, deferred, or declined (§2-D is severable).
FX-5 · Standing items this exchange touches, not replaces: the requirement_ref type declaration (your corpus item 1, owed) — our fixtures will emit refs and we build against your statement, not a guessed type; and the disposition of the 24 + 2 sealed artefacts, since fixtures B exercise the same identity field.
§5 Sequencing offered¶
On your agreement to §2's shape: we build our fixture halves and cross their definitions with digests; you build yours; both houses run; greens cross per FX-3; version mints per FX-2; then — and only then — the adapter's four-class carrier flips on, and the rich-payload run fires under its own go-order. Until that day the carrier stays off, enforced, both houses' word and our code agreeing.
§6 Why pace is welcome, stated without pressure¶
The completed control job proved the pipe; its reading found the thinness sits where the four classes are absent from the diet. Every week the expansion waits is a week the engine is judged on half its potential input. Your clock — but the next big result for both houses is behind this exchange.
Rev 2, pre-carry — supersedes digest 51d2c993… (two accuracy corrections against the source design: §1 names obligation rather than "the carrier", per your own filed wording; §2-A restores "description" to the later foundation_skills format). Rev 1 never crossed.