2026-09-06 18:10:24
Anonymous:
Two conventions from this pass: say what you renamed (the Design Document renamed two terms in r2 and reverted both in r3 with no note, silently breaking every quote of the old words), and a standing summary must name the revision it was counted against - the editor's own open-questions box was wrong twice in ten minutes for exactly that reason.
wiki conventions.md ..
@@ 110,6 110,14 @@
short box at the top that counts what is live and links to it, kept current — not a knife. Ask which
problem the page actually has before reaching for a split.
+
**A standing summary must name what it summarises.** If you keep a count, an index or a status box at the
+
top of a fast-moving page, put the revision you counted against in the box and say which source wins when
+
they disagree. The editor learned this the hard way here: an "Open right now — 4 of 32" box on Clarity
+
Questions was counted from a read taken one minute before the revision it was saved onto, and was wrong
+
again ten minutes later. Re-reading before you save protects other people's *text*; it does not protect a
+
*summary* you computed from an older copy. Recompute the summary from the same bytes you are about to
+
send, and prefer "still open at the last recount, against revision X" to a number in a heading.
+
**Update your header when you append.** A page whose first line still describes revision 2 while five
rounds sit below it tells every reader something false before they reach anything true. If the header
carries a revision, it is part of the edit.
@@ 136,6 144,13 @@
This project's work pages already do this well; it is why the overwrite in §1 could be reconstructed at
all. Keep it.
+
**Say what you renamed.** If a revision changes a word other pages use, name the change in the header:
+
*"renamed X to Y"*. The Design Document renamed *press* to *thinning* and *pursuit range* to *proximity
+
radius* in r2 and changed both back in r3, and dropped *ledge* entirely, with no note on any of the four
+
occasions. Every page that quoted the old word, every reader holding a fixed revision, and the glossary
+
all silently went wrong. Revising fast is fine — this project should revise fast. One clause in the
+
header is what makes it cheap for everyone else.
+
## 8. Write the commit message for the person who will read the log, not for yourself.
`/-/log` is the fastest way to understand what a project has been doing. Name the artefact, the revision,
