Em 0024

Source content

{

"$schema": "https://epistemedia.com/schemas/task-contract-v1.json",

"id": "EM-0024",

"title": "Clarify why Epistemedia matters and compress the first-read experience",

"status": "ready",

"change_class": "ordinary-implementation",

"objective": "Give a first-time reader a compact, evidence-specific explanation of what Epistemedia is for, reduce oversized public-page typography and spacing, describe the accepted Case 001 review process without implying human or cross-model-family independence, and make distinct-object versus topic-membership counts arithmetically explicit and compiler-verified without changing the accepted research dossier.",

"depends_on": [

"EM-0023"

],

"authority": {

"allowed_paths": [

"README.md",

"catalog/**",

"src/**",

"tests/**",

"docs/**",

"ops/**",

"runs/**"

],

"forbidden_paths": [

"constitution/**",

"policies/**",

"schemas/**",

"governance/events/**",

".github/**",

"research/**",

"tasks/contracts/**"

]

},

"required_evaluation": [

"homepage purpose-copy structure, placement, links, and exact wording tests",

"desktop and mobile typography, first-viewport density, overflow, and semantic-hierarchy inspection",

"public review-process language and accepted-receipt source-closure tests",

"distinct-object and topic-membership derivation, display, and arithmetic reconciliation tests",

"How We Know one-case index and existing practical-reading regression tests",

"accepted Case 001 dossier, feature manifest, and independent receipt byte-identity checks",

"HTML, Markdown, JSON, llms.txt, release-identity, and disclosure noninterference checks",

"external desktop, mobile, review-page, count-language, canonical, and release-identity read-back after accepted deployment"

],

"acceptance": [

"the homepage explains in a compact block that Epistemedia distinguishes repeated information from warranted knowledge and routes readers to the brief, skeptical view, and exact evidence docket",

"the purpose block uses deliberate editorial hierarchy rather than a same-size paragraph or generic bullet list and does not delay the Case 001 finding",

"homepage, case, and section-page headings and vertical spacing keep substantive evidence in the first viewport at representative desktop and mobile widths",

"the public review explanation truthfully names a separate Codex review agent, fresh-clone and authoring-artifact separation, checked scope, and scientific-truth limitation without claiming a human reviewer or another model family",

"the substrate summary distinguishes catalog-wide distinct public objects from per-topic memberships, displays both compiler-derived totals, and has an automated reconciliation check",

"the How We Know route remains a compact one-case index and the existing policy-relative practical readings remain present",

"the accepted Case 001 dossier, feature manifest, independent receipt, evidence counts, relation meanings, and source packet remain byte-identical",

"make check passes without changing accepted source state",

"the accepted Pages deployment passes desktop, mobile, review-copy, count-language, canonical URL, and release-identity read-back"

],

"limitations": [

"This task changes public explanation, typography, review framing, and derived count labels; it does not change Case 001 research, evidence, evaluation policies, or conclusions.",

"The compact purpose statement is product orientation, not a universal theory or ontology of truth and not a broad essay on Greek philosophy.",

"Process separation for the accepted review must not be represented as human review, cross-model-family review, or proof that the scientific conclusion is true.",

"Case 002, additional lenses, public claim-submission intake, hosted API/MCP activation, workflow mutation, DNS changes, package publication, and release are out of scope."

]

}