The MUST-NEVER clause in §4.2 needs to cite the conformance contract directly — right now a reader can't tell which envelope layer enforces it.
Comment Thread
A threaded comment card for the review tool: a root comment plus its replies, each with an Avatar, author, timestamp, and body, a resolve/reopen control, and a slot for a reply composer. Every author gets a stable, token-driven accent rail — a deterministic oklch hue rotation off the theme accent, so the same name always reads the same and adapts to light/dark automatically.
This is presentational only. It never owns the editor engine — the composer is a styled shell that emits its text to onSubmit; the consuming app wires that to the real engine.
Live — reply & resolve
Type a reply and hit Reply to append it; toggle Resolve to settle the thread (the composer hides while resolved).
Comment thread by Sarah Scheffler
AD Andy DonnerApr 27, 10:02am Good catch. The Trust Framework layer owns it, not the Rules layer. I'll add the cross-reference.SS Sarah SchefflerApr 27, 10:20am Perfect. Once that lands I'm happy to sign off on the section.
Read-only thread
No composer and no resolve handler — purely a record.
Redline on §4.2
The MUST-NEVER clause in §4.2 needs to cite the conformance contract directly — right now a reader can't tell which envelope layer enforces it.
Apr 27, 10:02am Good catch. The Trust Framework layer owns it, not the Rules layer. I'll add the cross-reference.Apr 27, 10:20am Perfect. Once that lands I'm happy to sign off on the section.
Resolved
A settled thread reads muted and shows a Resolved badge with a Reopen control.
Comment thread by Jake Klinvex
Should the accreditation tiers be ordered t0→t3 or t3→t0 in the table?
Yesterday t0 lowest → t3 highest, matching the Badge scale. Settled in the last call.
Composer in isolation
The reply composer can stand alone. Submit is disabled until there is non-whitespace text.