The wider design canon — the trace table
The falsifiable part of the entry, on its own and with its sources attached. Each row is a claim that a pattern from the anchor work appears at a named place in the estate — checkable against the repositories, which is the only thing that separates this from a reading list.
| Pattern from the anchor | Where the estate implements it | Version | Status | Source of the row |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Less, but better (Rams) as a working principle rather than an aesthetic | The Designer role definition, applied to API surface rather than to visual design | — | implemented | team/roles/designer/ROLE.md, cited in 02__ §D2 |
| Code as inhabited space — is it navigable, is it comfortable | The same role definition's criteria for reviewing structure | — | implemented | team/roles/designer/ROLE.md; shared with Christopher Alexander |
| Affordance (Norman) applied to non-visual surfaces — a signature that tells you what it does | Not written down anywhere as a review criterion, though the estate's naming conventions arguably practise it | — | absent | absence in the role definition and the surrounding corpus |
Every row names where it came from. A trace row is only worth having if you can find out how it was arrived at, so the last column carries the document in the commissioning pack that supports it. No row on this site was written from memory or inference — where the evidence runs out, the row is marked absent or the table says so.
The same rows, as data
The influence map is computed from these files rather than drawn, so the graph cannot disagree with the tables it is made of.