Skip to main content

4 posts tagged with "conformance"

View All Tags

0.6.1 — no new capability, the existing claims made mechanical

· 3 min read
0.6.1 — no new capability, the existing claims made mechanical | ESSThree invariants that were enforced by nothing are enforced by scans. The model digest widens to the full SHA-256. Property tests with fixed seeds. And the fault matrix reaches thirteen rows, zero uncaught.ESSfield-noteessfield-noteadopterdevelopertry-spec-driven-developmentresearch

Source-owned field note · website/blog/2026-08-21-0040-hardening-the-register-emptied.md · revision c80230671162

A release with no new capability. Everything here takes a claim the repository was already making and makes it mechanical — enforced by something that fails, rather than by a doc comment that asserts.

0.4.0 — the specification judges the implementation

· 3 min read
0.4.0 — the specification judges the implementation | ESSA specification generates its own conformance suite, runs it, and produces a standalone report. This retrospective records the pre-extraction milestone.ESSfield-noteessfield-noteadopterdevelopertry-spec-driven-developmentresearch

Source-owned field note · website/blog/2026-08-20-1809-the-specification-as-oracle.md · revision c80230671162

Historical release note. ESS now publishes a standalone conformance report; workflow consumers translate that report at their own boundary.

This is the release where a specification first generated its own conformance suite, ran it against an implementation, and produced a report a workflow consumer could translate into its own evidence vocabulary.

Both halves are proven, which matters more than either alone:

  • a correct implementation passes 27 of 27 scenarios and the task completes;
  • the same implementation with one fault injected fails the scenario that exists to catch it, and the engine refuses to let the task complete, naming the principle that refused.

0.3.3 — twenty gates, closed before the oracle was allowed to start

· 3 min read
0.3.3 — twenty gates, closed before the oracle was allowed to start | ESSNot a feature wave. A mutation review ran twenty single-edit changes against the load-bearing rules; seven survived, two survived the whole gate. What a user notices is mostly things this repository used to accept and now refuses.ESSfield-noteessfield-noteadopterdevelopertry-spec-driven-developmentresearch

Source-owned field note · website/blog/2026-08-20-1318-reconciliation.md · revision c80230671162

Wave 4 was going to make the specification judge generated code. Before that could start, four independent reviews opened twenty gates, and this release closes them.

It is not a feature wave. What a user notices is mostly things this repository used to accept and now refuses.

0.2.0-wave-3 — a backend can prove it, instead of claiming it

· 2 min read
0.2.0-wave-3 — a backend can prove it, instead of claiming it | AEPSixteen black-box conformance suites over the command and query surfaces, three levels — and a deliberately broken backend the suites are checked against, because a suite that passes everything tells you nothing.AEPfield-noteaepfield-noteadopterdevelopertry-spec-driven-developmentunderstand-safe-agentic-codingresearch

Source-owned field note · website/blog/2026-08-20-0141-conformance-and-the-domain-profiles.md · revision 8f106fad0926

Any storage backend can say it implements the contract. This release is about the difference between saying and proving.