1a9439d013
The real bottleneck is domain MODELLING. Phase B is organized as one program with sub-programs per domain, each run through the SAME 7-stage production line. No new runtime framework, no new module (ADR-009, Freeze v1.0) — only program data + a derived reporting view. - Customer enters by INDUSTRY, not regulation: Industry -> Domain Model -> Requirement Sources -> Requirements -> Capabilities -> ... -> Completeness. - 7-stage checklist identical for every domain (Domain Model / Requirement Sources / Capability Registry / Transition Patterns / Playbooks / Reference Scenarios / Completeness) with per-stage ownership. README generalized to the framework. - Each domain lists typical_requirement_sources + typical_certifications -> pre-onboarding capability HYPOTHESIS (the ETO insight; feeds Company 2A as inferred, never confirmed). - Backlog v1 (by customer value): 1 Industrial Automation, 2 Environmental, 3 Automotive, 4 Medical, 5 Energy. Five domain-definition shells (environmental restructured to the unified shape, law-first preserved). - Per-domain KPI is DERIVED from the real corpus (computed-not-stored; sources modelled / transition patterns / playbooks / reference scenarios), NOT a curated number. Reference suite renders maturity bars: Industrial Automation 43% (3/7 sources) leads, Environmental 0% (work ahead). Backlog (value) and KPI (corpus state) are deliberately separated. - ADR-009: Domain Knowledge Program framework. Honest known refinement: regulation-ID normalization (CRA vs Cyber Resilience Act) aliased in the KPI. 7 program-contract tests (backlog order + industry-first + derived-not-stored), check-loc 0. Knowledge data + ADR + reference harness = non-runtime -> no deploy (ADR-001). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>