{
  "code": "S69",
  "name": "Takeaways band",
  "shape": "takeaways",
  "family": "Lists and comparisons",
  "fits": "A summary of three takeaways: one headline statement, three columns of a label, a subhead and two labelled points, one picture, and a closing statement.",
  "use_when": "Closing a section or a research readout, when the reader should leave with one line, three supporting points and one sentence of consequence.",
  "slots": [
    {
      "name": "head",
      "holds": "what this page is",
      "budget": "2-5 words"
    },
    {
      "name": "statement",
      "holds": "the one line, in a band across the top of the card",
      "budget": "under 14 words"
    },
    {
      "name": "points",
      "holds": "3 x (label, subhead, two labelled points)",
      "budget": "subhead under 8 words, each point under 20 words"
    },
    {
      "name": "illustration",
      "holds": "one cut-out object on the right of the card",
      "budget": "1:1 cut-out"
    },
    {
      "name": "close",
      "holds": "closing statement in a band bled along the bottom",
      "budget": "two sentences, under 45 words"
    }
  ],
  "columns": 4,
  "density": "dense",
  "surface": "mint",
  "works_on": [
    "deck",
    "page"
  ],
  "library": "Hoffman",
  "dir": "S69-takeaways-band",
  "semantic": {
    "audience_question": "What three conclusions should I retain, and what follows from them?",
    "intent": "Carry out a structured synthesis supported by labelled details and a closing implication.",
    "reasoning_relation": "three-part synthesis and consequence",
    "message_pattern": "[Overall conclusion]. The important findings are [A], [B] and [C], each implying [action].",
    "required_content": [
      "A previously established argument.",
      "Three distinct conclusions with two supporting or explanatory points each.",
      "One bounded closing implication."
    ],
    "narrative_positions": [
      "section synthesis",
      "decision setup"
    ],
    "requires_before": [
      "Present the evidence and limits for each of the three conclusions."
    ],
    "enables_after": [
      "Propose the next pilot or ask for its scope decision."
    ],
    "slot_roles": {
      "head": "Name the summary moment.",
      "statement": "State the governing synthesis.",
      "points": "Three conclusions, each with a label, subhead and two explicitly related points such as observation/implication.",
      "illustration": "A contextual cutout that does not add an unsupported claim.",
      "close": "Explain what follows from all three conclusions together."
    },
    "avoid_when": [
      "Three new unproven claims introduced at the close.",
      "A recap that omits a qualification necessary to the decision."
    ],
    "layout_specific_contract": "A summary of three takeaways: one headline statement, three columns of a label, a subhead and two labelled points, one picture, and a closing statement.",
    "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"
    },
    "variation_rule": "Read the selected option’s actual markup, slot count and source record. Preserve this reasoning relationship only if the option still expresses it; flag a mismatch before adapting.",
    "reader_outcome": "Carry out a structured synthesis supported by labelled details and a closing implication.",
    "matching": {
      "audience_question": "What three conclusions should I retain, and what follows from them?",
      "reader_outcome": "Carry out a structured synthesis supported by labelled details and a closing implication.",
      "reasoning_relation": "three-part synthesis and consequence",
      "content_shape": {
        "composition": "A summary of three takeaways: one headline statement, three columns of a label, a subhead and two labelled points, one picture, and a closing statement.",
        "selected_state": "A summary of three takeaways: one headline statement, three columns of a label, a subhead and two labelled points, one picture, and a closing statement.",
        "density": "dense",
        "columns": 4,
        "column_note": "Base metadata only; selected option can replace the base geometry."
      },
      "required_slots": [
        {
          "name": "head",
          "reader_question": "What three conclusions should I retain, and what follows from them?",
          "semantic_role": "Name the summary moment.",
          "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 · head · what this page is]",
          "layout_budget": {
            "authored": "2-5 words",
            "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
          },
          "markup": {
            "slot": "head",
            "occurrences": 1,
            "annotation_status": "present",
            "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
            "sample_word_counts": [
              4
            ]
          }
        },
        {
          "name": "statement",
          "reader_question": "What three conclusions should I retain, and what follows from them?",
          "semantic_role": "State the governing synthesis.",
          "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 · statement · the one line, in a band across the top of the card]",
          "layout_budget": {
            "authored": "under 14 words",
            "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
          },
          "markup": {
            "slot": "statement",
            "occurrences": 1,
            "annotation_status": "present",
            "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
            "sample_word_counts": [
              7
            ]
          }
        },
        {
          "name": "points",
          "reader_question": "What does this distinct step, state, scenario or observation contribute?",
          "semantic_role": "Three conclusions, each with a label, subhead and two explicitly related points such as observation/implication.",
          "content_unit_count": {
            "min": 3,
            "max": 3,
            "basis": "authored composition members where a repeated group is specified; otherwise one named slot; not a required amount of evidence"
          },
          "placeholder": "[REAL CONTENT · points · 3 x (label, subhead, two labelled points)]",
          "layout_budget": {
            "authored": "subhead under 8 words, each point under 20 words",
            "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
          },
          "markup": {
            "slot": "points",
            "occurrences": 1,
            "annotation_status": "present",
            "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
            "sample_word_counts": [
              103
            ]
          }
        },
        {
          "name": "illustration",
          "reader_question": "What subject, example or view must I inspect, and is it evidence or illustration?",
          "semantic_role": "A contextual cutout that does not add an unsupported claim.",
          "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": "[CLEARED IMAGE OR LABELLED ILLUSTRATION · illustration · one cut-out object on the right of the card]",
          "layout_budget": {
            "authored": "1:1 cut-out",
            "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
          },
          "markup": {
            "slot": "illustration",
            "occurrences": 1,
            "annotation_status": "present",
            "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
            "sample_word_counts": [
              0
            ]
          },
          "integrity": "Clear rights and provenance, retain meaningful alt text; generated scenes illustrate and cannot prove a historical event."
        },
        {
          "name": "close",
          "reader_question": "What does the close contribute to this page’s reader outcome?",
          "semantic_role": "Explain what follows from all three conclusions together.",
          "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 · close · closing statement in a band bled along the bottom]",
          "layout_budget": {
            "authored": "two sentences, under 45 words",
            "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
          },
          "markup": {
            "slot": "close",
            "occurrences": 1,
            "annotation_status": "present",
            "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
            "sample_word_counts": [
              38
            ]
          }
        }
      ],
      "rejection_constraints": [
        "Three fresh claims without prior support, or a close that repeats the opening without adding implication.",
        "Introducing new unsupported findings in the summary."
      ],
      "option_guidance": {
        "option": "default",
        "composition_delta": "A summary of three takeaways: one headline statement, three columns of a label, a subhead and two labelled points, one picture, and a closing statement.",
        "semantic_change": "retains base content relationship; changes presentation or disclosure",
        "matching_instruction": "Select S69 default when the supplied material answers “What three conclusions should I retain, and what follows from them?” through three-part synthesis and consequence. Respect this state: A summary of three takeaways: one headline statement, three columns of a label, a subhead and two labelled points, one picture, and a closing statement."
      },
      "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": [
          "199333240c67140f6c5e76fbb45bb8fc61bbd8f0c10ce39a546f60ce639dd76c"
        ],
        "source_export": "private source images remain outside this draft site",
        "markup_sha256": "36fd6765d2908da20f5f0f1b7a2d2a4d1ee9f31704e28ee0688696731b351668",
        "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": [
      "Three fresh claims without prior support, or a close that repeats the opening without adding implication.",
      "Introducing new unsupported findings in the summary."
    ],
    "markup_inventory": {
      "file": "spread.html",
      "sha256": "36fd6765d2908da20f5f0f1b7a2d2a4d1ee9f31704e28ee0688696731b351668",
      "method": "static lxml markup plus authored option description; no rendered-visibility claim",
      "all_markup_slot_counts": {
        "head": 1,
        "statement": 1,
        "points": 1,
        "illustration": 1,
        "close": 1
      },
      "slot_evidence": {
        "head": [
          {
            "tag": "h2",
            "classes": "title",
            "sample_word_count": 4,
            "repeated_children": 0
          }
        ],
        "statement": [
          {
            "tag": "p",
            "classes": "stmt",
            "sample_word_count": 7,
            "repeated_children": 1
          }
        ],
        "points": [
          {
            "tag": "div",
            "classes": "body",
            "sample_word_count": 103,
            "repeated_children": 4
          }
        ],
        "illustration": [
          {
            "tag": "figure",
            "classes": "ph cut r-1x1",
            "sample_word_count": 0,
            "repeated_children": 1
          }
        ],
        "close": [
          {
            "tag": "div",
            "classes": "close",
            "sample_word_count": 38,
            "repeated_children": 2
          }
        ]
      },
      "option_selectors": [
        "no-close",
        "no-picture"
      ],
      "linked_implementation": [
        {
          "file": "../spreads.css",
          "sha256": "32da94472b0c9131e4d5dae7d5bf0498b09202a9e66294b4e4f23e6ddfbf37ba"
        },
        {
          "file": "../spread.js",
          "sha256": "3d99948b83f750bd4ae95dac08e3e50a395de7c149c90a6f1a1c0ea36a2634a4"
        }
      ]
    },
    "variations": {
      "no-picture": {
        "audience_question": "What three conclusions should I retain, and what follows from them?",
        "intent": "Carry out a structured synthesis supported by labelled details and a closing implication.",
        "reader_outcome": "Carry out a structured synthesis supported by labelled details and a closing implication.",
        "reasoning_relation": "three-part synthesis and consequence",
        "slot_roles": {
          "head": "Name the summary moment.",
          "statement": "State the governing synthesis.",
          "points": "Three conclusions, each with a label, subhead and two explicitly related points such as observation/implication.",
          "close": "Explain what follows from all three conclusions together."
        },
        "matching": {
          "audience_question": "What three conclusions should I retain, and what follows from them?",
          "reader_outcome": "Carry out a structured synthesis supported by labelled details and a closing implication.",
          "reasoning_relation": "three-part synthesis and consequence",
          "content_shape": {
            "composition": "A summary of three takeaways: one headline statement, three columns of a label, a subhead and two labelled points, one picture, and a closing statement.",
            "selected_state": "Three columns only, no picture",
            "density": "dense",
            "columns": 4,
            "column_note": "Base metadata only; selected option can replace the base geometry."
          },
          "required_slots": [
            {
              "name": "head",
              "reader_question": "What three conclusions should I retain, and what follows from them?",
              "semantic_role": "Name the summary moment.",
              "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 · head · what this page is]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "2-5 words",
                "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
              },
              "markup": {
                "slot": "head",
                "occurrences": 1,
                "annotation_status": "present",
                "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
                "sample_word_counts": [
                  4
                ]
              }
            },
            {
              "name": "statement",
              "reader_question": "What three conclusions should I retain, and what follows from them?",
              "semantic_role": "State the governing synthesis.",
              "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 · statement · the one line, in a band across the top of the card]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "under 14 words",
                "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
              },
              "markup": {
                "slot": "statement",
                "occurrences": 1,
                "annotation_status": "present",
                "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
                "sample_word_counts": [
                  7
                ]
              }
            },
            {
              "name": "points",
              "reader_question": "What does this distinct step, state, scenario or observation contribute?",
              "semantic_role": "Three conclusions, each with a label, subhead and two explicitly related points such as observation/implication.",
              "content_unit_count": {
                "min": 3,
                "max": 3,
                "basis": "authored composition members where a repeated group is specified; otherwise one named slot; not a required amount of evidence"
              },
              "placeholder": "[REAL CONTENT · points · 3 x (label, subhead, two labelled points)]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "subhead under 8 words, each point under 20 words",
                "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
              },
              "markup": {
                "slot": "points",
                "occurrences": 1,
                "annotation_status": "present",
                "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
                "sample_word_counts": [
                  103
                ]
              }
            },
            {
              "name": "close",
              "reader_question": "What does the close contribute to this page’s reader outcome?",
              "semantic_role": "Explain what follows from all three conclusions together.",
              "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 · close · closing statement in a band bled along the bottom]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "two sentences, under 45 words",
                "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
              },
              "markup": {
                "slot": "close",
                "occurrences": 1,
                "annotation_status": "present",
                "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
                "sample_word_counts": [
                  38
                ]
              }
            }
          ],
          "rejection_constraints": [
            "Three fresh claims without prior support, or a close that repeats the opening without adding implication.",
            "Introducing new unsupported findings in the summary."
          ],
          "option_guidance": {
            "option": "no-picture",
            "composition_delta": "Three columns only, no picture",
            "semantic_change": "retains base content relationship; changes presentation or disclosure",
            "matching_instruction": "Select S69 no-picture when the supplied material answers “What three conclusions should I retain, and what follows from them?” through three-part synthesis and consequence. Respect this state: Three columns only, no picture"
          },
          "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": [
              "199333240c67140f6c5e76fbb45bb8fc61bbd8f0c10ce39a546f60ce639dd76c"
            ],
            "source_export": "private source images remain outside this draft site",
            "markup_sha256": "36fd6765d2908da20f5f0f1b7a2d2a4d1ee9f31704e28ee0688696731b351668",
            "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."
          ]
        },
        "narrative_profile": {
          "central_point": "Three supported conclusions combine into one larger interpretation and a next implication.",
          "communication_job": "Same communication job as default. The cutout disappears, leaving the same three conclusions and closing band.",
          "audience_value": "Synthesis: compresses the reasoning without discarding the distinction between what happened and what it means.",
          "reading_path": [
            "The cutout disappears, leaving the same three conclusions and closing band.",
            "Read the framing statement.",
            "Read the three conclusions across, each with its paired explanation and consequence.",
            "Use the closing band to connect the set to the next decision; the object is a mnemonic only."
          ],
          "adaptation": {
            "required_inputs": [
              "A previously established argument.",
              "Three distinct conclusions with two supporting or explanatory points each.",
              "One bounded closing implication."
            ],
            "slot_guidance": {
              "head": "Name the summary moment.",
              "statement": "State the governing synthesis.",
              "points": "Three conclusions, each with a label, subhead and two explicitly related points such as observation/implication.",
              "close": "Explain what follows from all three conclusions together."
            },
            "can_change": [
              "Subject, names and wording within the active slot roles.",
              "Illustrations or supporting values where present, with their provenance and limits."
            ],
            "must_survive": [
              "Conclusions are distinct and supported earlier.",
              "The closing implication follows from the set.",
              "Summary does not turn hypotheses into findings."
            ]
          },
          "worked_example": {
            "fictional": true,
            "scenario": "A fictional repair-pilot review turns three observations into a next-step recommendation.",
            "slot_fills": {
              "head": "What the pilot taught",
              "statement": "A repair service needs continuity, not just tools.",
              "points": [
                "Access · A door is only a start. Observation: three fictional sessions made assessment available. Implication: access still depends on staffed opening times.",
                "Learning · Advice must travel home. Observation: visitors received written next steps. Implication: handover quality deserves a separate check.",
                "Limits · Referral is part of service. Observation: excluded jobs were referred onward. Implication: the pilot needs a maintained specialist list."
              ],
              "close": "The next pilot should test the whole handover, from booking to advice or referral. More tools alone would not address the identified continuity gaps."
            },
            "reasoning": "Each column links an observation to an implication; the closing statement synthesizes them into a testable next move.",
            "qualification": "All observations are fictional for this worked example; a real summary must point back to actual evidence."
          },
          "narrative_fit": {
            "before": "Present the evidence and limits for each of the three conclusions.",
            "after": "Propose the next pilot or ask for its scope decision.",
            "good_uses": [
              "A section or pitch synthesis."
            ],
            "poor_fits": [
              "Three new unproven claims introduced at the close.",
              "A recap that omits a qualification necessary to the decision."
            ]
          },
          "evidence": {
            "observations": [
              "Current layout has a top statement, three columns with paired text roles, optional cutout and closing band.",
              "Viewed source capture is blurred; only arrangement is observable."
            ],
            "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.",
              "Variant-specific source playback was not independently tested; the variation reading uses its current implementation and metadata."
            ],
            "references": [
              "dist/S69-takeaways-band/spread.json",
              "dist/S69-takeaways-band/spread.html",
              "02_product/spreads/S69-takeaways-band/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": "same-job"
        },
        "required_content": [
          "A previously established argument.",
          "Three distinct conclusions with two supporting or explanatory points each.",
          "One bounded closing implication."
        ],
        "requires_before": [
          "Present the evidence and limits for each of the three conclusions."
        ],
        "enables_after": [
          "Propose the next pilot or ask for its scope decision."
        ],
        "avoid_when": [
          "Three new unproven claims introduced at the close.",
          "A recap that omits a qualification necessary to the decision."
        ]
      },
      "no-close": {
        "audience_question": "Which three supported conclusions summarize this section?",
        "intent": "Inspect the synthesis without requiring a separate closing consequence.",
        "reader_outcome": "Inspect the synthesis without requiring a separate closing consequence.",
        "reasoning_relation": "three-part synthesis",
        "slot_roles": {
          "head": "Name the summary moment.",
          "statement": "State the governing synthesis.",
          "points": "Three conclusions, each with a label, subhead and two explicitly related points such as observation/implication.",
          "illustration": "A contextual cutout that does not add an unsupported claim."
        },
        "matching": {
          "audience_question": "Which three supported conclusions summarize this section?",
          "reader_outcome": "Inspect the synthesis without requiring a separate closing consequence.",
          "reasoning_relation": "three-part synthesis",
          "content_shape": {
            "composition": "A summary of three takeaways: one headline statement, three columns of a label, a subhead and two labelled points, one picture, and a closing statement.",
            "selected_state": "No closing band; the card fills the page",
            "density": "dense",
            "columns": 4,
            "column_note": "Base metadata only; selected option can replace the base geometry."
          },
          "required_slots": [
            {
              "name": "head",
              "reader_question": "Which three supported conclusions summarize this section?",
              "semantic_role": "Name the summary moment.",
              "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 · head · what this page is]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "2-5 words",
                "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
              },
              "markup": {
                "slot": "head",
                "occurrences": 1,
                "annotation_status": "present",
                "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
                "sample_word_counts": [
                  4
                ]
              }
            },
            {
              "name": "statement",
              "reader_question": "Which three supported conclusions summarize this section?",
              "semantic_role": "State the governing synthesis.",
              "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 · statement · the one line, in a band across the top of the card]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "under 14 words",
                "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
              },
              "markup": {
                "slot": "statement",
                "occurrences": 1,
                "annotation_status": "present",
                "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
                "sample_word_counts": [
                  7
                ]
              }
            },
            {
              "name": "points",
              "reader_question": "What does this distinct step, state, scenario or observation contribute?",
              "semantic_role": "Three conclusions, each with a label, subhead and two explicitly related points such as observation/implication.",
              "content_unit_count": {
                "min": 3,
                "max": 3,
                "basis": "authored composition members where a repeated group is specified; otherwise one named slot; not a required amount of evidence"
              },
              "placeholder": "[REAL CONTENT · points · 3 x (label, subhead, two labelled points)]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "subhead under 8 words, each point under 20 words",
                "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
              },
              "markup": {
                "slot": "points",
                "occurrences": 1,
                "annotation_status": "present",
                "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
                "sample_word_counts": [
                  103
                ]
              }
            },
            {
              "name": "illustration",
              "reader_question": "What subject, example or view must I inspect, and is it evidence or illustration?",
              "semantic_role": "A contextual cutout that does not add an unsupported claim.",
              "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": "[CLEARED IMAGE OR LABELLED ILLUSTRATION · illustration · one cut-out object on the right of the card]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "1:1 cut-out",
                "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
              },
              "markup": {
                "slot": "illustration",
                "occurrences": 1,
                "annotation_status": "present",
                "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
                "sample_word_counts": [
                  0
                ]
              },
              "integrity": "Clear rights and provenance, retain meaningful alt text; generated scenes illustrate and cannot prove a historical event."
            }
          ],
          "rejection_constraints": [
            "Inserting an unearned new recommendation into an omitted closing band.",
            "Introducing new unsupported findings in the summary."
          ],
          "option_guidance": {
            "option": "no-close",
            "composition_delta": "No closing band; the card fills the page",
            "semantic_change": "changes content relationship",
            "matching_instruction": "Select S69 no-close when the supplied material answers “Which three supported conclusions summarize this section?” through three-part synthesis. Respect this state: No closing band; the card fills the page"
          },
          "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": [
              "199333240c67140f6c5e76fbb45bb8fc61bbd8f0c10ce39a546f60ce639dd76c"
            ],
            "source_export": "private source images remain outside this draft site",
            "markup_sha256": "36fd6765d2908da20f5f0f1b7a2d2a4d1ee9f31704e28ee0688696731b351668",
            "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."
          ]
        },
        "narrative_profile": {
          "central_point": "Three supported conclusions combine into one larger interpretation and a next implication.",
          "communication_job": "Same communication job as default. The closing band disappears and the three-conclusion card fills the page.",
          "audience_value": "Synthesis: compresses the reasoning without discarding the distinction between what happened and what it means.",
          "reading_path": [
            "The closing band disappears and the three-conclusion card fills the page.",
            "Read the framing statement.",
            "Read the three conclusions across, each with its paired explanation and consequence.",
            "Use the closing band to connect the set to the next decision; the object is a mnemonic only."
          ],
          "adaptation": {
            "required_inputs": [
              "A previously established argument.",
              "Three distinct conclusions with two supporting or explanatory points each.",
              "One bounded closing implication."
            ],
            "slot_guidance": {
              "head": "Name the summary moment.",
              "statement": "State the governing synthesis.",
              "points": "Three conclusions, each with a label, subhead and two explicitly related points such as observation/implication.",
              "illustration": "A contextual cutout that does not add an unsupported claim."
            },
            "can_change": [
              "Subject, names and wording within the active slot roles.",
              "Illustrations or supporting values where present, with their provenance and limits."
            ],
            "must_survive": [
              "Conclusions are distinct and supported earlier.",
              "The closing implication follows from the set.",
              "Summary does not turn hypotheses into findings.",
              "The hidden closing text cannot carry an essential decision in this option."
            ]
          },
          "worked_example": {
            "fictional": true,
            "scenario": "A fictional repair-pilot review turns three observations into a next-step recommendation.",
            "slot_fills": {
              "head": "What the pilot taught",
              "statement": "A repair service needs continuity, not just tools.",
              "points": [
                "Access · A door is only a start. Observation: three fictional sessions made assessment available. Implication: access still depends on staffed opening times.",
                "Learning · Advice must travel home. Observation: visitors received written next steps. Implication: handover quality deserves a separate check.",
                "Limits · Referral is part of service. Observation: excluded jobs were referred onward. Implication: the pilot needs a maintained specialist list."
              ],
              "illustration": "A fictional toolbox beside a repair notebook, clearly illustrative."
            },
            "reasoning": "Each column links an observation to an implication; the closing statement synthesizes them into a testable next move.",
            "qualification": "All observations are fictional for this worked example; a real summary must point back to actual evidence."
          },
          "narrative_fit": {
            "before": "Present the evidence and limits for each of the three conclusions.",
            "after": "Use the following page or section to state the implication and decision; do not leave it only in the hidden close.",
            "good_uses": [
              "A section or pitch synthesis."
            ],
            "poor_fits": [
              "Three new unproven claims introduced at the close.",
              "A recap that omits a qualification necessary to the decision."
            ]
          },
          "evidence": {
            "observations": [
              "Current layout has a top statement, three columns with paired text roles, optional cutout and closing band.",
              "Viewed source capture is blurred; only arrangement is observable."
            ],
            "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.",
              "Variant-specific source playback was not independently tested; the variation reading uses its current implementation and metadata."
            ],
            "references": [
              "dist/S69-takeaways-band/spread.json",
              "dist/S69-takeaways-band/spread.html",
              "02_product/spreads/S69-takeaways-band/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": "same-job"
        },
        "required_content": [
          "A previously established argument.",
          "Three distinct conclusions with two supporting or explanatory points each.",
          "One bounded closing implication."
        ],
        "requires_before": [
          "Present the evidence and limits for each of the three conclusions."
        ],
        "enables_after": [
          "Use the following page or section to state the implication and decision; do not leave it only in the hidden close."
        ],
        "avoid_when": [
          "Three new unproven claims introduced at the close.",
          "A recap that omits a qualification necessary to the decision."
        ]
      }
    },
    "narrative_profile": {
      "central_point": "Three supported conclusions combine into one larger interpretation and a next implication.",
      "communication_job": "Answer what to retain from the preceding argument and why it matters beyond this page.",
      "audience_value": "Synthesis: compresses the reasoning without discarding the distinction between what happened and what it means.",
      "reading_path": [
        "Read the framing statement.",
        "Read the three conclusions across, each with its paired explanation and consequence.",
        "Use the closing band to connect the set to the next decision; the object is a mnemonic only."
      ],
      "adaptation": {
        "required_inputs": [
          "A previously established argument.",
          "Three distinct conclusions with two supporting or explanatory points each.",
          "One bounded closing implication."
        ],
        "slot_guidance": {
          "head": "Name the summary moment.",
          "statement": "State the governing synthesis.",
          "points": "Three conclusions, each with a label, subhead and two explicitly related points such as observation/implication.",
          "illustration": "A contextual cutout that does not add an unsupported claim.",
          "close": "Explain what follows from all three conclusions together."
        },
        "can_change": [
          "Subject, names and wording within the active slot roles.",
          "Illustrations or supporting values where present, with their provenance and limits."
        ],
        "must_survive": [
          "Conclusions are distinct and supported earlier.",
          "The closing implication follows from the set.",
          "Summary does not turn hypotheses into findings."
        ]
      },
      "worked_example": {
        "fictional": true,
        "scenario": "A fictional repair-pilot review turns three observations into a next-step recommendation.",
        "slot_fills": {
          "head": "What the pilot taught",
          "statement": "A repair service needs continuity, not just tools.",
          "points": [
            "Access · A door is only a start. Observation: three fictional sessions made assessment available. Implication: access still depends on staffed opening times.",
            "Learning · Advice must travel home. Observation: visitors received written next steps. Implication: handover quality deserves a separate check.",
            "Limits · Referral is part of service. Observation: excluded jobs were referred onward. Implication: the pilot needs a maintained specialist list."
          ],
          "illustration": "A fictional toolbox beside a repair notebook, clearly illustrative.",
          "close": "The next pilot should test the whole handover, from booking to advice or referral. More tools alone would not address the identified continuity gaps."
        },
        "reasoning": "Each column links an observation to an implication; the closing statement synthesizes them into a testable next move.",
        "qualification": "All observations are fictional for this worked example; a real summary must point back to actual evidence."
      },
      "narrative_fit": {
        "before": "Present the evidence and limits for each of the three conclusions.",
        "after": "Propose the next pilot or ask for its scope decision.",
        "good_uses": [
          "A section or pitch synthesis."
        ],
        "poor_fits": [
          "Three new unproven claims introduced at the close.",
          "A recap that omits a qualification necessary to the decision."
        ]
      },
      "evidence": {
        "observations": [
          "Current layout has a top statement, three columns with paired text roles, optional cutout and closing band.",
          "Viewed source capture is blurred; only arrangement is observable."
        ],
        "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/S69-takeaways-band/spread.json",
          "dist/S69-takeaways-band/spread.html",
          "02_product/spreads/S69-takeaways-band/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": [
    {
      "id": "no-picture",
      "what": "Three columns only, no picture"
    },
    {
      "id": "no-close",
      "what": "No closing band; the card fills the page"
    }
  ],
  "also_seen_in": [],
  "source": {
    "ref": "Private deck reference; original evidence retained in the private Spreads library."
  }
}