Schema / binding backlog — post-v1.0.0 #

Findings surfaced by the cross-language conformance reconciliation (conformance/, run via conformance/tooling/crosscheck.mjs). The schema is frozen at v1.0.0; nothing here is a change to the v1.0.0 schema. These are items to weigh for a future v1.1.0.

B-1 — TS binding lacks a MoneyBreakdown checker (binding parity, NOT a schema gap) — ✅ RESOLVED #

Resolved. @warp-lang/commerce-types now ships validateMoneyBreakdown(breakdown) (money.ts, throwing — the twin of Python’s validate_money_breakdown) plus the violations-returning checkI1MoneyBreakdownSum (invariants.ts, aliased verifyMoneyBreakdown), both enforcing the identical canonical money_breakdown_sum rule (single-currency clause + components-sum-to-total within minor-unit tolerance, Discounts negative). The conformance cross-check (crosscheck-ts.mjs) now runs the four money-breakdown fixtures in TS instead of marking them n/a:

Cross-check agreement went from 41/41 to 45/45 runnable-in-both, 0 disagreements (remaining 6 n/a are the structural state-catalog fixtures, covered by the runner + JSON Schema). The original analysis is retained below for the record.

What. The canonical schema fully specifies the money_breakdown_sum rule as an expression of Invariant I-1 (schema/behavior/invariants.json → I-1 → rule.expressions[id=money_breakdown_sum]), and the structure (schema/structure/money.schema.json → MoneyBreakdown / MoneyComponent).

• Python (warp-commerce-types) implements it: money.validate_money_breakdown enforces single-currency + components-sum-to-total (minor-unit tolerance).
• TypeScript (@warp-lang/commerce-types) does not expose any standalone MoneyBreakdown checker. checkI1ValueConservation only checks commitment-subject currency mixing (the no_currency_mixing expression of I-1), not the money_breakdown_sum expression.

Evidence (conformance cross-check). The four money-breakdown fixtures are runnable in Python (correct verdicts) but n/a in TS (no API):

All 19 fixtures runnable in both bindings agree exactly (0 disagreements). This is the one parity gap.

Why it is not a schema gap. The schema is complete and unambiguous; only one binding implements the specified rule. The fix is in the TS package, not the schema.

Proposed v1.1 action. Add to @warp-lang/commerce-types a validateMoneyBreakdown(breakdown) (and surface it from auditCommerce when a MoneyValue.breakdown is present), mirroring Python’s validate_money_breakdown and the money_breakdown_sum expression. Then the four money-breakdown fixtures become runnable-in-both and the cross-check covers them on both sides.

Until then. The conformance runner (conformance/runner/run.mjs) enforces money_breakdown_sum against the canonical schema directly, and Python enforces it at runtime, so the rule is still gated by the suite — just not yet by TS.

Context: domain case-study reconciliation (Agent D, PR #1) #

Agent D’s 22-domain adversarial corpus was re-pointed at the canonical schema in reconcile-case-studies (fixtures under conformance/case-studies/, generator conformance/case-studies/_generate.mjs, auxiliary-record check conformance/case-studies/validate-aux.mjs). All 22 domains validate + audit clean as canonical scene fixtures (node conformance/runner/run.mjs), and the auxiliary records validate against the canonical schema (node conformance/case-studies/validate-aux.mjs).

Record correction — D’s “pending-v1.1” list does NOT apply to the canonical schema. D flagged ScoredSelection, the CommitmentCondition layer (FinancingContingency / PrescriptionRequired / ThresholdActivation / ComplianceDocumentation / NoReturnPolicy / EventCancellationPolicy / …), CascadeCancellation, AwardProtest, and the v0.3 Evidence / DeliveryMethod / PaymentTiming / AccessModel variants as “unrepresentable in schema v1.0.0”. Those flags were against D’s bespoke minimal schema (superseded). The canonical schema v1.0.0 expresses every one of them — verified by the re-authored fixtures (which carry these constructs in terms) and by validate-aux.mjs (ScoredSelection + AwardProtest). Net: 0 of D’s listed constructs is a real v1.1 gap. Two genuinely new items did surface:

B-2 — ValueState has no digital-access lifecycle (schema gap, candidate v1.1) #

What. Canonical schema/structure/value.schema.json → ValueState is the oneOf { Available, Reserved, UnderAuction, Committed, InTransit, Transferred, Returned, Retired }. The spec’s Primitive 2 also describes an access lifecycle for non-exclusive digital goods — AccessGranted / AccessSuspended / AccessRevoked / AccessExpired — which the canonical v1.0.0 ValueState does not implement.

Evidence (case studies). streaming (a failed-payment access suspension) and saas (license revocation) cannot put that state on the Value. Both are modelled at the Commitment level instead — streaming uses a GracePeriod condition + the subscription Active/Cancelled states; the Value stays Available/Transferred. The domain is still conformant (the lifecycle is expressible at the Commitment level); only the fine-grained value-state of “access suspended” is not first-class.

Proposed v1.1 action. Either add AccessGranted / AccessSuspended / AccessRevoked / AccessExpired to ValueState for non-exclusive DigitalGood, or document explicitly that digital-access lifecycle is intentionally a Commitment-level concern (and not a Value state) so implementers stop reaching for it. No schema change is made here; the schema stays frozen at v1.0.0.

B-3 — Conformance runner has no kind for standalone auxiliary records (coverage, NOT a schema gap) #

What. The shipped runner (conformance/runner/run.mjs) judges the fixture kinds scene / state-catalog / transition-sequence / money-breakdown / money-roundtrip. It has no kind that validates a standalone auxiliary record — AuctionProcess (incl. the v0.3 ScoredSelection mechanism), AwardProtest, ResolutionProcess, EntitlementConsumption — even though all four are fully defined in schema/structure/auxiliary.schema.json and validate against it.

Evidence. conformance/case-studies/validate-aux.mjs validates representative instances of all four against the canonical schema (5/5 valid), covering the auction-family, government-procurement, gifting, and api-metering domains. This is a supplement to the main runner, run separately.

Why it is not a schema gap. The schema is complete; the runner simply has no fixture kind to exercise these records inside node conformance/runner/run.mjs.

Proposed v1.1 action. Add an object fixture kind to the runner that validateRefs a payload against any index.schema.json $def, then fold the validate-aux.mjs instances into conformance/manifest.json so auxiliary records run in the single canonical command. (Optionally fold the case-study scene generator into conformance/tooling/build.mjs so the case-study manifest entries are regenerated + canonical-cross-checked alongside the core suite, rather than appended by _generate.mjs.)