{
  "code": "S60",
  "name": "Status cards",
  "shape": "verdicts",
  "family": "Evidence and pictures",
  "fits": "A title bar, then three to five equal tall cards, each with a verdict label, the item, and a paired body (why, still needed); the card's top rule colour is the verdict; a takeaway band.",
  "use_when": "Giving a verdict per item with its condition: which cases, markets or claims are strong, which are conditional, and what each still needs.",
  "slots": [
    {
      "name": "title-bar",
      "holds": "plum bar across the top: the page title left, a lime italic section marker right",
      "budget": "title under 9 words; marker 1-2 words"
    },
    {
      "name": "cards",
      "holds": "3-5 x (verdict label: lime rule for strong, berry rule for conditional; item; WHY; STILL NEEDED)",
      "budget": "why and still-needed under 14 words each"
    },
    {
      "name": "takeaway",
      "holds": "mint band across the foot: an italic Takeaway: label and one sentence",
      "budget": "one sentence, under 25 words"
    }
  ],
  "columns": 5,
  "density": "dense",
  "surface": "paper",
  "works_on": [
    "deck",
    "page"
  ],
  "library": "Hoffman",
  "dir": "S60-status-cards",
  "semantic": {
    "audience_question": "What is the status of each item, why, and what remains needed?",
    "intent": "Read verdicts with their supporting reasons and unresolved conditions.",
    "reasoning_relation": "item verdict, reason and condition",
    "message_pattern": "[Item] is [status] because [evidence]; next it needs [specific condition].",
    "required_content": [
      "Three to five items judged against stated criteria.",
      "A reason and remaining requirement for each.",
      "A bounded overall implication."
    ],
    "narrative_positions": [
      "context",
      "explanation",
      "evidence: choose only when the page supports the surrounding argument"
    ],
    "requires_before": [
      "Define readiness criteria and evidence available."
    ],
    "enables_after": [
      "Assign owners and deadlines to the remaining checks."
    ],
    "slot_roles": {
      "title-bar": "Summarize the assessment without erasing conditional items.",
      "cards": "Three to five verdict/item/why/still-needed records; a favorable color never replaces the reason.",
      "takeaway": "State which items can proceed and what condition blocks the rest."
    },
    "avoid_when": [
      "A progress ranking without criteria.",
      "Positive verdicts supported only by plausibility."
    ],
    "layout_specific_contract": "A title bar, then three to five equal tall cards, each with a verdict label, the item, and a paired body (why, still needed); the card's top rule colour is the verdict; a takeaway band.",
    "provenance": {
      "basis": "interpretation of the existing layout and slot contracts",
      "review": "Tessel model-authored guidance; implementation approved by Nic, 2026-10-10",
      "corpus_evidence_status": "not yet established",
      "guide": "../SEMANTICS.md"
    },
    "reader_outcome": "Read verdicts with their supporting reasons and unresolved conditions.",
    "matching": {
      "audience_question": "What is the status of each item, why, and what remains needed?",
      "reader_outcome": "Read verdicts with their supporting reasons and unresolved conditions.",
      "reasoning_relation": "item verdict, reason and condition",
      "content_shape": {
        "composition": "A title bar, then three to five equal tall cards, each with a verdict label, the item, and a paired body (why, still needed); the card's top rule colour is the verdict; a takeaway band.",
        "selected_state": "A title bar, then three to five equal tall cards, each with a verdict label, the item, and a paired body (why, still needed); the card's top rule colour is the verdict; a takeaway band.",
        "density": "dense",
        "columns": 5,
        "column_note": "Base metadata only; selected option can replace the base geometry."
      },
      "required_slots": [
        {
          "name": "title-bar",
          "reader_question": "What does the title bar contribute to this page’s reader outcome?",
          "semantic_role": "Summarize the assessment without erasing conditional items.",
          "content_unit_count": {
            "min": 1,
            "max": 1,
            "basis": "authored composition members where a repeated group is specified; otherwise one named slot; not a required amount of evidence"
          },
          "placeholder": "[REAL CONTENT · title-bar · plum bar across the top: the page title left, a lime italic section marker right]",
          "layout_budget": {
            "authored": "title under 9 words; marker 1-2 words",
            "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
          },
          "markup": {
            "slot": "title-bar",
            "occurrences": 1,
            "annotation_status": "present",
            "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
            "sample_word_counts": [
              8
            ]
          }
        },
        {
          "name": "cards",
          "reader_question": "What specific quantity or comparable member supports the governing point?",
          "semantic_role": "Three to five verdict/item/why/still-needed records; a favorable color never replaces the reason.",
          "content_unit_count": {
            "min": 3,
            "max": 5,
            "basis": "authored composition members where a repeated group is specified; otherwise one named slot; not a required amount of evidence"
          },
          "placeholder": "[REAL CONTENT · cards · 3-5 x (verdict label: lime rule for strong, berry rule for conditional; item; WHY; STILL NEEDED)]",
          "layout_budget": {
            "authored": "why and still-needed under 14 words each",
            "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
          },
          "markup": {
            "slot": "cards",
            "occurrences": 1,
            "annotation_status": "present",
            "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
            "sample_word_counts": [
              108
            ]
          }
        },
        {
          "name": "takeaway",
          "reader_question": "What does the takeaway contribute to this page’s reader outcome?",
          "semantic_role": "State which items can proceed and what condition blocks the rest.",
          "content_unit_count": {
            "min": 1,
            "max": 1,
            "basis": "authored composition members where a repeated group is specified; otherwise one named slot; not a required amount of evidence"
          },
          "placeholder": "[REAL CONTENT · takeaway · mint band across the foot: an italic Takeaway: label and one sentence]",
          "layout_budget": {
            "authored": "one sentence, under 25 words",
            "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
          },
          "markup": {
            "slot": "takeaway",
            "occurrences": 1,
            "annotation_status": "present",
            "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
            "sample_word_counts": [
              18
            ]
          }
        }
      ],
      "rejection_constraints": [
        "Colour as the sole verdict signal, an unstated status date or unknowns treated as failures.",
        "Unsupported traffic-light judgments or mixing complete, planned and blocked work."
      ],
      "option_guidance": {
        "option": "default",
        "composition_delta": "A title bar, then three to five equal tall cards, each with a verdict label, the item, and a paired body (why, still needed); the card's top rule colour is the verdict; a takeaway band.",
        "semantic_change": "retains base content relationship; changes presentation or disclosure",
        "matching_instruction": "Select S60 default when the supplied material answers “What is the status of each item, why, and what remains needed?” through item verdict, reason and condition. Respect this state: A title bar, then three to five equal tall cards, each with a verdict label, the item, and a paired body (why, still needed); the card's top rule colour is the verdict; a takeaway band."
      },
      "provenance": {
        "status": "inferred composition evidence",
        "author_intent": "not independently confirmed",
        "basis": [
          "retained source composition where available",
          "authored layout and slot contracts",
          "static implementation inspection"
        ],
        "source_visual_count": 1,
        "source_visual_sha256": [
          "c60d4d0d93c07a9c00d7c4f9634818b12d0e42ef361d70f6ce84e8ebf6476b60"
        ],
        "source_export": "private source images remain outside this draft site",
        "markup_sha256": "ec67f080c163858dbdc299ae54df4798e0e301ad52ce6de861ce025e7767d99b",
        "limits": [
          "Static parsing inventories authored nodes; it does not certify rendered visibility, responsive fit or interactive state.",
          "Budgets are authored layout guidance, not a content-writing limit or proof of fit.",
          "Matching guidance is a draft inference; it does not establish facts, endorsement, causation or source author intent."
        ]
      },
      "adaptation_rules": [
        "Choose by audience question, reasoning relation and required content before aesthetic preference.",
        "Supply every required semantic role; retain visible unknowns as labelled real-content placeholders.",
        "A number needs source, scope and units; a quotation needs faithful wording and attribution.",
        "Do not infer importance from area, colour, depth or movement unless the content explicitly defines that encoding.",
        "Keep colour token roles, structural objects, licences and source records; changing content does not authorize changing them."
      ]
    },
    "rejection_constraints": [
      "Colour as the sole verdict signal, an unstated status date or unknowns treated as failures.",
      "Unsupported traffic-light judgments or mixing complete, planned and blocked work."
    ],
    "markup_inventory": {
      "file": "spread.html",
      "sha256": "ec67f080c163858dbdc299ae54df4798e0e301ad52ce6de861ce025e7767d99b",
      "method": "static lxml markup plus authored option description; no rendered-visibility claim",
      "all_markup_slot_counts": {
        "title-bar": 1,
        "cards": 1,
        "takeaway": 1
      },
      "slot_evidence": {
        "title-bar": [
          {
            "tag": "header",
            "classes": "rbar",
            "sample_word_count": 8,
            "repeated_children": 2
          }
        ],
        "cards": [
          {
            "tag": "div",
            "classes": "cards",
            "sample_word_count": 108,
            "repeated_children": 5
          }
        ],
        "takeaway": [
          {
            "tag": "footer",
            "classes": "rband take",
            "sample_word_count": 18,
            "repeated_children": 2
          }
        ]
      },
      "option_selectors": [],
      "linked_implementation": [
        {
          "file": "../spreads.css",
          "sha256": "32da94472b0c9131e4d5dae7d5bf0498b09202a9e66294b4e4f23e6ddfbf37ba"
        },
        {
          "file": "../spread.js",
          "sha256": "3d99948b83f750bd4ae95dac08e3e50a395de7c149c90a6f1a1c0ea36a2634a4"
        }
      ]
    },
    "variations": {},
    "narrative_profile": {
      "central_point": "A verdict is useful only when its reason and remaining condition are visible beside it.",
      "communication_job": "Answer which claims or items are ready, which are conditional, and what each still needs.",
      "audience_value": "Evidence and reassurance: makes uncertainty actionable instead of presenting every item as equally proven.",
      "reading_path": [
        "Read the overall status statement.",
        "For each card, connect its verdict to the named item and the stated reason.",
        "Read Still needed before using the item; the takeaway prioritizes the next decision."
      ],
      "adaptation": {
        "required_inputs": [
          "Three to five items judged against stated criteria.",
          "A reason and remaining requirement for each.",
          "A bounded overall implication."
        ],
        "slot_guidance": {
          "title-bar": "Summarize the assessment without erasing conditional items.",
          "cards": "Three to five verdict/item/why/still-needed records; a favorable color never replaces the reason.",
          "takeaway": "State which items can proceed and what condition blocks the rest."
        },
        "can_change": [
          "Subject, names and wording within the active slot roles.",
          "Illustrations or supporting values where present, with their provenance and limits."
        ],
        "must_survive": [
          "Verdict follows evidence, not color.",
          "Remaining work stays visible even on positive cards.",
          "The overall statement respects blocking conditions."
        ]
      },
      "worked_example": {
        "fictional": true,
        "scenario": "A fictional cooperative reviews readiness for a repair pilot.",
        "slot_fills": {
          "title-bar": "The pilot is ready with two conditions | Review",
          "cards": [
            "Ready · Venue. Why: the fictional hall booking covers all three planned dates. Still needed: confirm the keyholder.",
            "Conditional · Staffing. Why: four volunteers cover two evenings only. Still needed: assign the third evening supervisor.",
            "Conditional · Tool safety. Why: the inventory lists all loaned tools. Still needed: complete inspection before the first session."
          ],
          "takeaway": "Confirm supervision and tool inspection before announcing the first session; venue availability alone is not readiness."
        },
        "reasoning": "Each verdict has a distinct basis and a concrete next check. The summary cannot promote the whole pilot to ready while blockers remain.",
        "qualification": "Every organization, value and assertion in this example is fictional. Replace it with approved, sourced content before use."
      },
      "narrative_fit": {
        "before": "Define readiness criteria and evidence available.",
        "after": "Assign owners and deadlines to the remaining checks.",
        "good_uses": [
          "Evidence review, launch readiness or proposal qualification."
        ],
        "poor_fits": [
          "A progress ranking without criteria.",
          "Positive verdicts supported only by plausibility."
        ]
      },
      "evidence": {
        "observations": [
          "Retained source shows equal status cards with verdict, reason and needed evidence; current HTML preserves these paired roles."
        ],
        "interpretations": [
          "The communication job and reuse advice are inferred from the current arrangement and slot contract, not independently confirmed source intent."
        ],
        "not_verified": [
          "Original author intent, factual accuracy of sample copy and persuasion effects are not verified.",
          "No confidential archive or proposal corpus was used."
        ],
        "references": [
          "dist/S60-status-cards/spread.json",
          "dist/S60-status-cards/spread.html",
          "02_product/spreads/S60-status-cards/source.webp (viewed for arrangement)"
        ]
      },
      "review": {
        "status": "reviewed",
        "basis": "Motif inspected current metadata, active markup and the retained source arrangement, then checked the fictional example against the content roles. This is a layout-contract adaptation review."
      },
      "variation_relationship": "base"
    }
  },
  "options": [],
  "also_seen_in": [],
  "source": {
    "ref": "Hoffman L56 Status cards",
    "url": "https://github.com/neekchan/hoffman-agency-design-system/blob/main/templates/deck/Deck.dc.html"
  }
}