🔧 Auto-commit from sysupdate on 2026-05-19 21:49

2026-05-19 21:49:14 +02:00
parent e9e772d69c
commit f83aae27c5
132 changed files with 14728 additions and 38 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+---
+name: ARC link treatment — one rule, two named exceptions
+description: Predictability principle for ARC link styling — single global treatment per spec §VII.c, with avatar-link and Reading Compass as the only exempt elements
+type: feedback
+originSessionId: 8d9ac240-47df-4578-aec1-a9dd32965027
+---
+ARC link treatment follows **one rule, two named exceptions** — captured by steward 2026-05-02 during the §VII.c link-spec drafting + SCSS migration session.
+
+> *"the avatar and reading compass are the only links that need special treatment. The rest should be predictable and crafted with care"*
+
+**Why:** Predictability is the principle. A reader's eye trained by reading one ARC piece should know what a link looks like in any other. Multiple competing link treatments across contexts (catalogue/wholeform variant, apparatus quiet-nav variant, button variant, etc.) fragment the reader's intuition and require re-learning per page. The discipline of one treatment is also the discipline of care — every link gets the same considered typography rather than ad-hoc per-context decisions.
+
+**How to apply:**
+
+- The TWO exceptions are documented in spec §VII.c "Exceptions" subsection:
+  1. **`.avatar-link`** — wordmark in page header; underline would compete with wordmark typography
+  2. **Reading Compass** (per §VI) — eight-sigil navigation; underline would be redundant beneath glyphs
+- Everything else (in-text, apparatus, catalogues, navigation) follows §VII.c (Pompeian-red hair-thin underline, body-color text, native `text-decoration` per Rutter / Bringhurst transferred).
+- When you encounter a context-specific link rule that diverges from §VII.c, the question is NOT *"is this a different valid pattern?"* but rather *"is this (a) legacy material destined for an archival collection where preservation overrides current-spec alignment, or (b) a cascade artifact to be reconciled?"* Don't propose new sub-spec sections for the divergence; reconcile it or archive it.
+- The earlier impulse (mine, 2026-05-02) to spec multiple sub-variants (§VII.c.ii catalogue, §VII.c.iii quiet-nav, §VII.c.iv button) was over-elaboration. Resist that pattern. The simpler frame — *one rule, two exceptions, everything else predictable* — is correct.
+
+**Related:** care-over-traffic (work answers to itself; quality + predictability + accountability matter even at low traffic); the broader "would Alexander do it like this?" discipline against unnecessary elaboration.