Canon

By what measure can we judge it?

Canon makes the terms of judgment explicit: criteria, constraints, a Rubric, and the evidence required to support a conclusion. The standards belong to a declared context, with a named baseline where comparison is required. Although the reader arrives here after Trial, the criteria must be available before Genesis and Trial begin. An outcome cannot supply its own definition of success.

For offline field notes, the requirements might include no silent loss, usable recovery, and a bounded burden on the person resolving conflicting edits. Each requires evidence suited to the claim. Judges may disagree about whether recovery is usable or the burden acceptable; their judgments preserve reasons and uncertainty, with human decision where required. Criteria can change, but a changed Rubric belongs to a new comparison. It does not retrospectively turn a failed result into a pass.

Leviticus provides a gentle echo through ordered practice, distinctions, and obligations. Here the concern is how declared commitments remain present in the way a candidate is made and judged.

Drift's Trial and Rubric contracts own the practical evaluation terms. Canon names this interpretive chapter; it adds no runtime entity or competing architectural law.

What do the observations disclose when held against those terms? Continue to Revelation.