---
doc_revision: 4
reader_reintern: "Reader-only: re-intern if doc_revision changed since you last read this doc."
doc_id: out_1
"doc_role": "hypothesis"
doc_scope:
  - repo
  - governance
  - research
  - documentation
doc_authority: informative
doc_requires:
  - POLICY_SEED.md
  - glossary.md
  - CONTRIBUTING.md
  - README.md
doc_reviewed_as_of:
  POLICY_SEED.md: 28
  glossary.md: 13
  CONTRIBUTING.md: 69
  README.md: 58
doc_change_protocol: "POLICY_SEED.md §6"
doc_erasure:
  - formatting
  - typos
doc_owner: maintainer
---

# Outbox Hypothesis: What `out/` Is

## 0. Thesis
`out/` is the **semantic outbox** for this repository. It is where ideas are
recast into **structured, reviewable, and communicable form**. If `in/` is the
ontological inbox, then `out/` is the place where those inputs are made
legible, testable, and publishable.

This is not just a dump folder for “notes.” It is a deliberate layer in the
repo’s governance loop: a place where meaning is stabilized and exported.

## 1. Roles of `out/`

### 1.1 Interpretation Layer
`out/` records how the project **interprets** its own constraints. It provides
explanations that are faithful to the normative sources (`POLICY_SEED.md`,
`glossary.md`) while remaining readable by humans.

### 1.2 Reviewable Evidence
`out/` entries are **reviewable artifacts**. They should be concise, grounded,
and stable under refactor. They can be cited in PRs, issues, and release notes.

### 1.3 Narrative Surface (Dev‑Blog Segment)
`out/` doubles as a **developer‑facing narrative surface**. It is a place where
internal reasoning is turned into external explanation. It should remain precise
without being purely technical; the goal is intelligibility rather than exhaustiveness.

## 2. Boundaries

### 2.1 What `out/` Is Not
- Not a policy source of truth (that lives in `POLICY_SEED.md`).
- Not a glossary (that lives in `glossary.md`).
- Not a dump of raw ideas (that lives in `in/`).

### 2.2 What Belongs in `out/`
- Formalized hypotheses derived from `in/`.
- Explanations of why a constraint exists.
- Architecture notes that must be **publicly defensible**.
- “Exportable” summaries suitable for a dev blog or design review.

## 3. Relation to `in/`

`in/` accepts chaos. `out/` requires coherence.

- `in/` is freeform and exploratory.
- `out/` is structured and accountable.

The transition from `in/` to `out/` should be deliberate. It implies that the
idea has been tested against the repo’s invariants and found to commute.

## 4. Galois Connection (Directional Only)

For now, treat the relationship between `in/` and `out/` as **directional**:

- `in/` → `out/`: a refinement into structure.
- `out/` → `in/`: a condensation into seed ideas.

If the Galois framing becomes formal (posets + adjunction), it belongs in a
separate note. This entry is about the *purpose* of the outbox, not the proof.

## 5. Criteria for Writing in `out/`
- It must be **grounded** in the repo’s norms.
- It must be **reviewable** by others.
- It must be **durable** under refactor.
- It should be **publishable** with minimal editing.

## 6. Questions
- Should `out/` entries be indexed or tagged?
- Do we want a minimum template (e.g., thesis, evidence, risks)?
- Should `out/` entries be cited from `README.md` or release notes?
