Implementation Roadmap

Material System05 architecture decisions shall be governed through formal Architecture Decision Records.

An Architecture Decision Record shall document:

the decision question;

constitutional and technical context;

responsible decision authority;

stakeholders and reviewers;

alternatives considered;

evaluation criteria;

Evidence and assumptions;

selected decision;

rejected alternatives and rationale;

consequences and tradeoffs;

affected Interfaces, Profiles, Products, and data;

implementation and migration requirements;

review or reversal conditions.

Architecture decisions shall distinguish between stable platform commitments and replaceable implementation choices.

Decisions affecting global Interfaces, identity, Compatibility, authority, or lifecycle data shall receive higher scrutiny because their consequences may extend across many independent implementations.

Prototype convenience, existing code, founder preference, or commercial investment shall not by itself establish permanent architecture.

Reversible decisions should remain reversible. Where a decision creates substantial lock-in, the lock-in and exit pathway shall be explicitly evaluated.

Architecture Decision Records shall be versioned and linked to the Requirements, Specifications, tests, software behavior, and Products that implement them.

A superseded decision shall remain historically available and shall identify its successor.

Emergency operational action shall not silently become a permanent architecture decision through continued use.

AI may assist in comparing alternatives, identifying dependencies, or simulating consequences, but the final Architecture Decision shall remain attributable to the authorized human and institutional Roles.

The Architecture Decision system shall allow future participants to understand not only what was decided, but why the decision was made and what conditions could justify changing it.