Canon

In plain words: Canon: defining success criteria

1 min read 7 connected pages
The short version written for the Snayu team

Short chapter on declaring how a candidate will be judged, including criteria, constraints, a rubric and required evidence, before making or testing it.

Why read it: Read this when writing evaluation rubrics or acceptance criteria.
  1. 1An outcome cannot define its own success; criteria come first.
  2. 2Metrics must serve the purpose, e.g. fewer conflicts must not hide silent data loss.
  3. 3If criteria change, use the new rubric for a new comparison and keep old results.
The original text Underlined words open their plain-English card.

By what measure can we judge it?

Before making or trying a candidate, declare how it will be judged: criteria, constraints, a Rubric, and the evidence needed for a conclusion. Name the context those standards serve and, where comparison requires one, the baseline. This is Canon's work. The reader reaches this chapter after Trial, but Genesis and Trial need its criteria at the outset. An outcome cannot define its own success.

For offline field notes, ask for no silent loss, usable recovery, and a bounded burden on the person resolving conflicting edits. Each claim needs its own evidence. Judges can disagree about usability or acceptable burden; preserve their reasons and uncertainty, with human decision where required. If those criteria change, use the revised Rubric for a new comparison. Keep the earlier failed result under the terms by which it was judged.

The measure must answer to the purpose. Counting fewer conflicts can reward a design that silently discards one side. No silent loss therefore remains a condition; speed and convenience are judged among candidates that preserve the observations. The Tree's persistence and acknowledgment meet here: Hod must be able to question what Netzach is being rewarded for continuing.

Leviticus brings ordered practice, distinctions, and obligations to the chapter's literary thread. Declared commitments must 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.