A constitution as a record
A record with no code in it at all: an assistant’s operating instructions decomposed into a typed ontology, beside the document it decomposes.
| scheme | render | what it holds |
|---|---|---|
VALUE | document | claims that would still mean something to an assistant with none of this one’s tools. Read whole, in order. |
PRACTICE | index | situated rules, one per document, each grounded in a value and tagged with the surface it applies to |
BOUNDARY | index | constraints that override, each naming what it overrides |
Precedence is a checked reference, not a font size. A constitution written
as prose signals precedence by escalation — IMPORTANT, ALWAYS, you MUST —
which is unfalsifiable: nothing verifies that the emphatic rule wins, and
nothing notices when the rule it was meant to beat is deleted. Declaring
overrides as a typed reference makes it an edge the lint resolves and the
site draws. It names a practice or another boundary — a carve-out that beats a
prohibition is one relation whichever kind of rule it beats, so the field lists
both schemes rather than splitting into two. grounds does the same job
downward, so no rule stands on its own authority: a practice with no value
behind it is a habit.
The source is here too, and the record is checked against it. A test
asserts that every document in force accounts for some part of it — the schema
checks PRACTICE → VALUE, but nothing else would check document → the text it was drawn from, which is the direction a record like this drifts in.
The configuration is luria.yaml; the documents are
under record/. Start with the source
constitution, annotated section by section with what
accounts for it, then the values,
the practices,
the boundaries, and
the session log.
LURIA_ROOT=$PWD luria index
LURIA_ROOT=$PWD luria lint