docs(rfc): move dated checkpoint into ledger

[mikamikasuki]

Goal And Delivered Outcome

• Outcome basis / optional anchor: RFC execution-ledger convention and failing docs-governance smoke.
• Goal/source and gap: The accepted External Evidence Research Capability RFC retained a dated delivery checkpoint in both language versions, although repository convention requires dated checkpoints in paired per-entry ledger files.
• Observable before → after, with the validation row that proves it: The RFC dated headings are replaced by ledger pointers; bilingual ledger entries preserve the checkpoint content and identify the source, former heading, move date, and baseline commit. The docs-governance smoke passes.
• Issue/task and intended base: Documentation governance correction; main.

Author Declaration

• Written by: model_agent — GPT-6 model family, OpenAI Codex

Implemented against

• Specification and revision: docs/architecture/rfcs/ledger/README.md and examples/docs-governance-smoke.py at 1af7dbd43a1629b0356ecd5ee28a426ad45d1d7a.
• Criteria:

Criterion (spec clause)	Disposition	Symbol / path	Test or command
Dated checkpoints live in per-RFC ledger files	implemented	paired ledger/external-evidence-research-capability-v0/2026-10-02-public-github-method-delivery*	uv run --extra test python examples/docs-governance-smoke.py
RFC bodies point to the checkpoint and maintain an execution-ledger appendix	implemented	English and Chinese RFCs; generated STATUS.md indexes	same docs-governance smoke
Moved sections identify their source, prior heading, move date, and baseline commit	implemented	first paragraph of both ledger entries	manual content review

• Self-check before submission: Compared the moved text to the baseline section, verified both mirror links and the versioned capability guide link, and confirmed the checkpoint evidence claims and limitations are unchanged.

Scope And Continuation

• Completed scope and remaining work: The dated checkpoint now follows the repository bilingual per-entry ledger convention. The factual checkpoint content and limitations are preserved.
• Slice boundary / successor: Complete within this documentation correction.

Validation

• Current-main integration check: At main 2f68e3b835c3bfc0e3718373cdb6c72eea99291e, the docs-governance smoke fails on the two dated checkpoint headings this PR moves. The same command passes with this PR head f9ef0d199bb2b9728040cab9041f26805e5c4eee integrated into that main revision (docs-governance smoke ok).

• Tested revision: f9ef0d199bb2b9728040cab9041f26805e5c4eee

• Run state: finished

• Input classes: public_fixture

Check kind	Result	Public-safe evidence / limitation
static	passed	uv run --extra test python examples/docs-governance-smoke.py → docs-governance smoke ok.
static	passed	git diff --check; no whitespace errors.
static	passed	uv run --extra test loopx check over six changed files; public-boundary scan clean, with two warnings because local .loopx/registry.json is absent.

• Coverage and gaps: Documentation structure, local links, bilingual ledger pairing, and the public-boundary scan were checked. Runtime behavior is unchanged.

See validation disclosure guidance.

Frontend / Visual Evidence

• UI impact: none
• Before: N/A
• After: N/A
• States and viewports shown: N/A
• Source data: none
• Attention review: N/A

Type of Change

• Documentation update

LoopX Area

• Public docs or presentation surface (README, protocols, dashboard)

Technical Direction

• Direction / acceptance reference, when applicable: RFC execution-ledger convention in docs/architecture/rfcs/ledger/README.md.

Shared-authority RFC fixture impact

• N/A — this PR does not claim progress against the shared-authority RFC.

Boundary Checklist

• No private state, credentials, raw traces, internal links, or local machine paths are included.
• No maintainer-owned benchmark work is duplicated.
• The change only moves an existing dated checkpoint into the required ledger structure and updates generated indexes.
• UI impact is none.
• The commit includes a DCO Signed-off-by trailer.

[loopx-agent]

Reviewer: model_agent; model=gpt-6.1-sol; provider=OpenAI; declaration_source=runtime_reported; reasoning_effort=xhigh

Exact head: f9ef0d199bb2b9728040cab9041f26805e5c4eee; immutable base: 2f68e3b835c3bfc0e3718373cdb6c72eea99291e.

动机

阅读外部研究规范和历史验证记录的维护者，需要区分稳定要求与某一天实际通过、未测的范围。
原来带日期的检查点留在规范正文，文档治理检查因此失败；修改后正文保留直达链接，完整中英文记录移入逐条账本，检查通过。
已逐字比较迁移前后内容，除目录深度对应的链接调整外一致；未测和不关闭整体验收的声明保留，所有本地链接有效。
本次只修正文档组织与历史可追溯性，不重新认证记录中的 provider、真实飞书送达或研究质量，也不改变运行时或 Goal 状态。

未发现当前阻塞项。价值是纠正实际失败的文档治理入口，并让后续记录不再争用规范中的同一追加位置；不以新增文件数或合并数代替业务进展。

改动思路

采用既有逐条 RFC execution ledger，每个日期记录一个文件和中文镜像。正文继续承载稳定约束，在旧位置保留直达这次记录的链接；附录指向已有逐条目录，STATUS 只记录条数。没有新增汇总日志或手写跨 RFC 条目清单，也未修改治理 checker 来接受原本不合法的 dated heading。

这是一个完整且可回滚的文档修复切片：只搬正文会留下错误 STATUS 和失效的相对指南链接；只删除标题则丢失溯源。两语种、provenance、原位置指针、生成索引和目录深度修正应一起交付。相邻简化已采用现有 ledger，没有新增机制的必要。

具体改动

关键内容讲解

1. 英文 RFC 第105行、中文对应位置将 dated checkpoint 小节替换为直接账本链接；原有 accepted requirements 和 Non-goals 字节保留。附录 A 指向本 RFC 的账本目录，未改变规范状态或验收要求。
2. 新英/中文账本第3行分别记录源 RFC、旧小节名、迁移日2026-10-04及完整 baseline 30efccd6c7d4e2300c2ac87ddc6ddb1dfb855a40。文件名2026-10-02保持原验证日期，镜像互链。独立从该 baseline 和实际 PR base 读出原记录，两者一致，再与新记录逐字对照；只归一化必要的指南相对链接，正文全部相同。
3. 英文指南第22行、中文第18行由三级父目录调整为五级，实际仍指向 loopx/capabilities/external_research/README.md 的同一版本化章节。全部10个 RFC/账本/镜像/指南本地链接存在，两个指南 fragment 也与实际标题匹配。
4. 两份生成 STATUS 的外部研究行只从无账本变为1条；Accepted 和无 open item 保持原值。现有完整治理 smoke 同时检查生成索引、命名与镜像，不是仅检查新文件能打开。

按改动前的 execution ledger Convention，固定 revision 1af7dbd43a1629b0356ecd5ee28a426ad45d1d7a，逐项判断：Dated checkpoints are ledger entries, not RFC sections 由新文件和正文指针/附录落实；Each entry carries a Chinese mirror 由同日期配对和互链落实；provenance line 的来源、旧标题、迁移日期与固定 baseline 均可实读，并且历史正文未重写。未拿本次修改后的 RFC 来自证规范正确。

对主干的风险

独立相同命令 uv run --extra test python examples/docs-governance-smoke.py：固定 base 失败在 external-evidence 英/中文2026-10-02 dated heading；精确 head 输出 docs-governance-smoke ok。本 PR 正好移走这两项的违规标题，checker/generator 未变，因此是修复所属问题，而非无关红项归因或降低门槛。六文件边界扫描6checks clean，git diff --check 通过。

更容易被绿检查遗漏的是历史记录过度宣称完成：独立全文比较确认“真实 Lark 送达、带凭据 connector 和更广泛语义研究质量尚未验证”、不晋升这些 provider、不关闭 S6/S8、失败/部分结果保留原始来源退路，以及读成功和父 Agent 采纳不证明完整性，均原样保留。当前 review 只认证搬迁与可用链接，不把旧检查点写成新的实测。未查询或等待 CI；未执行真实账户或再次认证其 provider 行为。

我的整体评价

APPROVE。long_horizon 与 user_experience 均为 improved：规范更稳定，日期证据、失败/未测边界和可运行指南仍一步可达，新增历史不必修改同一个正文追加位置。长期效率的依据是改变了共享编辑位置并消除实际治理失败；尚无本 PR 的多日冲突率或吞吐测量，不能把预期收益说成已量化提升。读者需要打开独立日期文件，但原位置保留直接链接，所提供的新信息是明确的时间和证据边界，属于合理组织成本。未来简化已落实为复用既有逐条目录，不需要新 abstraction 或重复 Todo。

English verdict: APPROVE - f9ef0d1. The bilingual dated checkpoint moves into the existing per-entry ledger with traceable provenance, preserved historical limits and verified guide/mirror links. The same immutable-base governance command fails the two owned dated headings and passes on this exact head without changing the checker. No new provider, live Lark/model, research-quality or quantitative sustained-efficiency claim is made.