{
  "code": "S86",
  "name": "Split lede",
  "shape": "lede",
  "family": "Reading",
  "fits": "A two-tone headline on the left beside one or two real paragraphs on the right, closed by a support band: three or four ruled points, two points side by side, or three small numbers.",
  "use_when": "The opening section of an article or a talk's framing slide, when the claim needs a paragraph of argument beside it rather than a picture, and a few supporting points or figures underneath.",
  "slots": [
    {
      "name": "headline",
      "holds": "two short sentences, first muted and second strong (or one sentence)",
      "budget": "under 12 words"
    },
    {
      "name": "body",
      "holds": "one or two paragraphs at reading measure (one in the two, numbers and plain options)",
      "budget": "under 70 words in all"
    },
    {
      "name": "points",
      "holds": "three or four points between hairlines, each a small line icon, a bold lead-in and one sentence; two side by side in the two option",
      "budget": "lead-in 1-3 words, sentence under 18 words"
    },
    {
      "name": "numbers",
      "holds": "numbers option: three figures with a short label each, a hairline above",
      "budget": "figure 2-4 characters, label under 4 words"
    }
  ],
  "columns": 2,
  "density": "medium",
  "surface": "deep",
  "works_on": [
    "deck",
    "page"
  ],
  "library": "Tailark",
  "dir": "S86-split-lede",
  "semantic": {
    "audience_question": "What governing argument introduces the evidence that follows?",
    "intent": "Connect a prominent lede to sufficient introductory prose and a compact supporting band.",
    "reasoning_relation": "governing claim and explanatory setup",
    "message_pattern": "[Main point]. [Context and decisive reason]. [What follows].",
    "required_content": [
      "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
      "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
      "Three or four distinct supporting reasons; each has a short lead-in and a sentence connecting it to the claim."
    ],
    "narrative_positions": [
      "context",
      "explanation",
      "evidence: choose only when the page supports the surrounding argument"
    ],
    "requires_before": [
      "Name the current failure or opportunity."
    ],
    "enables_after": [
      "Show evidence for each mechanism or the plan to test it."
    ],
    "slot_roles": {
      "headline": "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
      "body": "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
      "points": "Three or four distinct supporting reasons; each has a short lead-in and a sentence connecting it to the claim."
    },
    "avoid_when": [
      "A complete case study needing methods and results.",
      "Three unrelated features under an overbroad claim."
    ],
    "layout_specific_contract": "A two-tone headline on the left beside one or two real paragraphs on the right, closed by a support band: three or four ruled points, two points side by side, or three small numbers.",
    "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": "Connect a prominent lede to sufficient introductory prose and a compact supporting band.",
    "matching": {
      "audience_question": "What governing argument introduces the evidence that follows?",
      "reader_outcome": "Connect a prominent lede to sufficient introductory prose and a compact supporting band.",
      "reasoning_relation": "governing claim and explanatory setup",
      "content_shape": {
        "composition": "A two-tone headline on the left beside one or two real paragraphs on the right, closed by a support band: three or four ruled points, two points side by side, or three small numbers.",
        "selected_state": "A two-tone headline on the left beside one or two real paragraphs on the right, closed by a support band: three or four ruled points, two points side by side, or three small numbers.",
        "density": "medium",
        "columns": 2,
        "column_note": "Base metadata only; selected option can replace the base geometry."
      },
      "required_slots": [
        {
          "name": "headline",
          "reader_question": "What governing argument introduces the evidence that follows?",
          "semantic_role": "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
          "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 · headline · two short sentences, first muted and second strong (or one sentence)]",
          "layout_budget": {
            "authored": "under 12 words",
            "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
          },
          "markup": {
            "slot": "headline",
            "occurrences": 1,
            "annotation_status": "present",
            "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
            "sample_word_counts": [
              7
            ]
          }
        },
        {
          "name": "body",
          "reader_question": "What does the body contribute to this page’s reader outcome?",
          "semantic_role": "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
          "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 · body · one or two paragraphs at reading measure (one in the two, numbers and plain options)]",
          "layout_budget": {
            "authored": "under 70 words in all",
            "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
          },
          "markup": {
            "slot": "body",
            "occurrences": 1,
            "annotation_status": "present",
            "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
            "sample_word_counts": [
              48
            ]
          }
        },
        {
          "name": "points",
          "reader_question": "What does this distinct step, state, scenario or observation contribute?",
          "semantic_role": "Three or four distinct supporting reasons; each has a short lead-in and a sentence connecting it to the claim.",
          "content_unit_count": {
            "min": 3,
            "max": 4,
            "basis": "authored composition members where a repeated group is specified; otherwise one named slot; not a required amount of evidence"
          },
          "placeholder": "[REAL CONTENT · points · three or four points between hairlines, each a small line icon, a bold lead-in and one sentence; two side by side in the two option]",
          "layout_budget": {
            "authored": "lead-in 1-3 words, sentence under 18 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": [
              37
            ]
          }
        }
      ],
      "rejection_constraints": [
        "The support band introducing a second unrelated argument or repeating the title.",
        "A claim that the rest of the material cannot substantiate."
      ],
      "option_guidance": {
        "option": "default",
        "composition_delta": "A two-tone headline on the left beside one or two real paragraphs on the right, closed by a support band: three or four ruled points, two points side by side, or three small numbers.",
        "semantic_change": "retains base content relationship; changes presentation or disclosure",
        "matching_instruction": "Select S86 default when the supplied material answers “What governing argument introduces the evidence that follows?” through governing claim and explanatory setup. Respect this state: A two-tone headline on the left beside one or two real paragraphs on the right, closed by a support band: three or four ruled points, two points side by side, or three small numbers."
      },
      "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": [
          "eae22f2ab221deb5131ab59a8145e92fce846b1e76dea31dc9a456b1eefb713f"
        ],
        "source_export": "private source images remain outside this draft site",
        "markup_sha256": "9533d71da92de484ffde4fce89d06bc0b7533a2eed8544a916e658ea50084b06",
        "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": [
      "The support band introducing a second unrelated argument or repeating the title.",
      "A claim that the rest of the material cannot substantiate."
    ],
    "markup_inventory": {
      "file": "spread.html",
      "sha256": "9533d71da92de484ffde4fce89d06bc0b7533a2eed8544a916e658ea50084b06",
      "method": "static lxml markup plus authored option description; no rendered-visibility claim",
      "all_markup_slot_counts": {
        "headline": 1,
        "body": 1,
        "points": 1,
        "numbers": 1
      },
      "slot_evidence": {
        "headline": [
          {
            "tag": "h2",
            "classes": "title",
            "sample_word_count": 7,
            "repeated_children": 1
          }
        ],
        "body": [
          {
            "tag": "div",
            "classes": "body",
            "sample_word_count": 48,
            "repeated_children": 2
          }
        ],
        "points": [
          {
            "tag": "div",
            "classes": "points",
            "sample_word_count": 37,
            "repeated_children": 4
          }
        ],
        "numbers": [
          {
            "tag": "div",
            "classes": "nums",
            "sample_word_count": 12,
            "repeated_children": 3
          }
        ]
      },
      "option_selectors": [
        "numbers",
        "plain",
        "two"
      ],
      "linked_implementation": [
        {
          "file": "../spreads.css",
          "sha256": "32da94472b0c9131e4d5dae7d5bf0498b09202a9e66294b4e4f23e6ddfbf37ba"
        },
        {
          "file": "../spread.js",
          "sha256": "3d99948b83f750bd4ae95dac08e3e50a395de7c149c90a6f1a1c0ea36a2634a4"
        }
      ]
    },
    "variations": {
      "two": {
        "audience_question": "What governing argument introduces the evidence that follows?",
        "intent": "Connect a prominent lede to sufficient introductory prose and a compact supporting band.",
        "reader_outcome": "Connect a prominent lede to sufficient introductory prose and a compact supporting band.",
        "reasoning_relation": "governing claim and explanatory setup",
        "slot_roles": {
          "headline": "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
          "body": "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
          "points": "Three or four distinct supporting reasons; each has a short lead-in and a sentence connecting it to the claim."
        },
        "matching": {
          "audience_question": "What governing argument introduces the evidence that follows?",
          "reader_outcome": "Connect a prominent lede to sufficient introductory prose and a compact supporting band.",
          "reasoning_relation": "governing claim and explanatory setup",
          "content_shape": {
            "composition": "A two-tone headline on the left beside one or two real paragraphs on the right, closed by a support band: three or four ruled points, two points side by side, or three small numbers.",
            "selected_state": "One paragraph, then two points side by side with no rules",
            "density": "medium",
            "columns": 2,
            "column_note": "Base metadata only; selected option can replace the base geometry."
          },
          "required_slots": [
            {
              "name": "headline",
              "reader_question": "What governing argument introduces the evidence that follows?",
              "semantic_role": "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
              "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 · headline · two short sentences, first muted and second strong (or one sentence)]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "under 12 words",
                "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
              },
              "markup": {
                "slot": "headline",
                "occurrences": 1,
                "annotation_status": "present",
                "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
                "sample_word_counts": [
                  7
                ]
              }
            },
            {
              "name": "body",
              "reader_question": "What does the body contribute to this page’s reader outcome?",
              "semantic_role": "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
              "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 · body · one or two paragraphs at reading measure (one in the two, numbers and plain options)]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "under 70 words in all",
                "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
              },
              "markup": {
                "slot": "body",
                "occurrences": 1,
                "annotation_status": "present",
                "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
                "sample_word_counts": [
                  48
                ]
              }
            },
            {
              "name": "points",
              "reader_question": "What does this distinct step, state, scenario or observation contribute?",
              "semantic_role": "Three or four distinct supporting reasons; each has a short lead-in and a sentence connecting it to the claim.",
              "content_unit_count": {
                "min": 2,
                "max": 2,
                "basis": "authored composition members where a repeated group is specified; otherwise one named slot; not a required amount of evidence"
              },
              "placeholder": "[REAL CONTENT · points · three or four points between hairlines, each a small line icon, a bold lead-in and one sentence; two side by side in the two option]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "lead-in 1-3 words, sentence under 18 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": [
                  37
                ]
              }
            }
          ],
          "rejection_constraints": [
            "The support band introducing a second unrelated argument or repeating the title.",
            "A claim that the rest of the material cannot substantiate."
          ],
          "option_guidance": {
            "option": "two",
            "composition_delta": "One paragraph, then two points side by side with no rules",
            "semantic_change": "retains base content relationship; changes presentation or disclosure",
            "matching_instruction": "Select S86 two when the supplied material answers “What governing argument introduces the evidence that follows?” through governing claim and explanatory setup. Respect this state: One paragraph, then two points side by side with no rules"
          },
          "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": [
              "eae22f2ab221deb5131ab59a8145e92fce846b1e76dea31dc9a456b1eefb713f"
            ],
            "source_export": "private source images remain outside this draft site",
            "markup_sha256": "9533d71da92de484ffde4fce89d06bc0b7533a2eed8544a916e658ea50084b06",
            "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": "One governing claim is explained in prose and supported by a few named mechanisms or reasons.",
          "communication_job": "Keep the same claim-and-mechanisms job with two complementary support points and one paragraph.",
          "audience_value": "Offers explanation and perspective. It addresses “What is your point, and what makes it plausible?” without treating labelled benefits as measured proof.",
          "reading_path": [
            "Read the headline for the central claim.",
            "Read the adjacent prose for the situation and reasoning.",
            "Scan the support band to distinguish the mechanisms or reasons behind the claim."
          ],
          "adaptation": {
            "required_inputs": [
              "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
              "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
              "Three or four distinct supporting reasons; each has a short lead-in and a sentence connecting it to the claim."
            ],
            "slot_guidance": {
              "headline": "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
              "body": "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
              "points": "Three or four distinct supporting reasons; each has a short lead-in and a sentence connecting it to the claim."
            },
            "can_change": [
              "Replace the fictional subject and its supported content while retaining the roles and relationship described here."
            ],
            "must_survive": [
              "Every support point must explain part of the governing claim.",
              "Keep proposal status explicit until tested.",
              "Numbers, when used, require their own scope and source."
            ]
          },
          "worked_example": {
            "fictional": true,
            "scenario": "Fictional Cedar explains its proposed workshop operating method.",
            "slot_fills": {
              "headline": "A workshop becomes repeatable when its handoffs are teachable",
              "body": "Cedar’s fictional pilot proposes a common intake method so new volunteers can start safely. The method would preserve what experienced volunteers know, while review sessions would capture exceptions. This is a testable design proposal, not evidence that waiting has already fallen.",
              "points": [
                "Shared intake. New volunteers start with one safety method.",
                "Learning loop. Experienced volunteers turn exceptions into clearer guidance."
              ]
            },
            "reasoning": "The points are complementary mechanisms of repeatability, not three restatements of the claim.",
            "qualification": "Fictional teaching example. Replace invented details with authorised content and keep any source, scope, status or uncertainty that affects interpretation."
          },
          "narrative_fit": {
            "before": "Name the current failure or opportunity.",
            "after": "Show evidence for each mechanism or the plan to test it.",
            "good_uses": [
              "An argument opener with concise support."
            ],
            "poor_fits": [
              "A complete case study needing methods and results.",
              "Three unrelated features under an overbroad claim."
            ]
          },
          "evidence": {
            "observations": [
              "Viewed source: a two-tone headline faces explanatory prose and four ruled support points.",
              "Current two/numbers/plain states hide later body paragraphs; numbers replaces points with a three-member group.",
              "Current option markup/CSS: Keep the same claim-and-mechanisms job with two complementary support points and one paragraph."
            ],
            "interpretations": [
              "One governing claim is explained in prose and supported by a few named mechanisms or reasons. This is an interpretation of the inspected composition, not a verified claim of author intent."
            ],
            "not_verified": [
              "Original author intent, historical claims, persuasion and archive-wide frequency have not been independently verified."
            ],
            "references": [
              "02_product/spreads/S86-split-lede/source.webp",
              "02_product/spreads-semantics-2026-10-13/dist/S86-split-lede/spread.html",
              "02_product/spreads-semantics-2026-10-13/dist/S86-split-lede/spread.json",
              "https://oss.tailark.com/view/dusk-content-4?theme=light"
            ]
          },
          "review": {
            "status": "reviewed",
            "basis": "Viewed base source capture; inspected this option’s current markup, CSS and matching contract. No distinct option-source capture reviewed unless explicitly stated in observations."
          },
          "variation_relationship": "same-job"
        },
        "required_content": [
          "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
          "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
          "Three or four distinct supporting reasons; each has a short lead-in and a sentence connecting it to the claim."
        ],
        "requires_before": [
          "Name the current failure or opportunity."
        ],
        "enables_after": [
          "Show evidence for each mechanism or the plan to test it."
        ],
        "avoid_when": [
          "A complete case study needing methods and results.",
          "Three unrelated features under an overbroad claim."
        ]
      },
      "numbers": {
        "audience_question": "Which three short figures support this introductory argument?",
        "intent": "Read introductory prose with a compact qualified numeric band.",
        "reader_outcome": "Read introductory prose with a compact qualified numeric band.",
        "reasoning_relation": "introductory claim and three quantitative anchors",
        "slot_roles": {
          "headline": "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
          "body": "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
          "numbers": "One group of three short values with measure labels; give a common period and traceable source in the body or adjacent context."
        },
        "matching": {
          "audience_question": "Which three short figures support this introductory argument?",
          "reader_outcome": "Read introductory prose with a compact qualified numeric band.",
          "reasoning_relation": "introductory claim and three quantitative anchors",
          "content_shape": {
            "composition": "A two-tone headline on the left beside one or two real paragraphs on the right, closed by a support band: three or four ruled points, two points side by side, or three small numbers.",
            "selected_state": "A row of three small numbers with labels and top rules in place of the points",
            "density": "medium",
            "columns": 2,
            "column_note": "Base metadata only; selected option can replace the base geometry."
          },
          "required_slots": [
            {
              "name": "headline",
              "reader_question": "Which three short figures support this introductory argument?",
              "semantic_role": "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
              "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 · headline · two short sentences, first muted and second strong (or one sentence)]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "under 12 words",
                "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
              },
              "markup": {
                "slot": "headline",
                "occurrences": 1,
                "annotation_status": "present",
                "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
                "sample_word_counts": [
                  7
                ]
              }
            },
            {
              "name": "body",
              "reader_question": "What does the body contribute to this page’s reader outcome?",
              "semantic_role": "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
              "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 · body · one or two paragraphs at reading measure (one in the two, numbers and plain options)]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "under 70 words in all",
                "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
              },
              "markup": {
                "slot": "body",
                "occurrences": 1,
                "annotation_status": "present",
                "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
                "sample_word_counts": [
                  48
                ]
              }
            },
            {
              "name": "numbers",
              "reader_question": "What does the numbers contribute to this page’s reader outcome?",
              "semantic_role": "One group of three short values with measure labels; give a common period and traceable source in the body or adjacent context.",
              "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 · numbers · numbers option: three figures with a short label each, a hairline above]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "figure 2-4 characters, label under 4 words",
                "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
              },
              "markup": {
                "slot": "numbers",
                "occurrences": 1,
                "annotation_status": "present",
                "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
                "sample_word_counts": [
                  12
                ]
              }
            }
          ],
          "rejection_constraints": [
            "Supporting figures whose source and scope cannot be supplied alongside or in adjacent context.",
            "A claim that the rest of the material cannot substantiate."
          ],
          "option_guidance": {
            "option": "numbers",
            "composition_delta": "A row of three small numbers with labels and top rules in place of the points",
            "semantic_change": "changes content relationship",
            "matching_instruction": "Select S86 numbers when the supplied material answers “Which three short figures support this introductory argument?” through introductory claim and three quantitative anchors. Respect this state: A row of three small numbers with labels and top rules in place of the points"
          },
          "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": [
              "eae22f2ab221deb5131ab59a8145e92fce846b1e76dea31dc9a456b1eefb713f"
            ],
            "source_export": "private source images remain outside this draft site",
            "markup_sha256": "9533d71da92de484ffde4fce89d06bc0b7533a2eed8544a916e658ea50084b06",
            "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": "One governing claim is explained in prose and supported by a few named mechanisms or reasons.",
          "communication_job": "Introduce the argument with three scoped quantitative anchors instead of qualitative reasons.",
          "audience_value": "Offers explanation and perspective. It addresses “What is your point, and what makes it plausible?” without treating labelled benefits as measured proof.",
          "reading_path": [
            "Read the headline for the central claim.",
            "Read the adjacent prose for the situation and reasoning.",
            "Scan the support band to distinguish the mechanisms or reasons behind the claim."
          ],
          "adaptation": {
            "required_inputs": [
              "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
              "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
              "One group of three short values with measure labels; give a common period and traceable source in the body or adjacent context."
            ],
            "slot_guidance": {
              "headline": "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
              "body": "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
              "numbers": "One group of three short values with measure labels; give a common period and traceable source in the body or adjacent context."
            },
            "can_change": [
              "Replace the fictional subject and its supported content while retaining the roles and relationship described here."
            ],
            "must_survive": [
              "Every support point must explain part of the governing claim.",
              "Keep proposal status explicit until tested.",
              "Numbers, when used, require their own scope and source."
            ]
          },
          "worked_example": {
            "fictional": true,
            "scenario": "Fictional Cedar explains its proposed workshop operating method.",
            "slot_fills": {
              "headline": "A workshop becomes repeatable when its handoffs are teachable",
              "body": "Fictional June records show the scale of Cedar’s pilot: 24 trained volunteers, six sessions and eight checklist revisions. These counts show activity, not that the method reduced waiting. In real use, cite training, session and revision records and use consistent counting rules.",
              "numbers": "24 volunteers trained | 6 pilot sessions | 8 checklist revisions (all fictional June counts)"
            },
            "reasoning": "The points are complementary mechanisms of repeatability, not three restatements of the claim.",
            "qualification": "Fictional teaching example. Replace invented details with authorised content and keep any source, scope, status or uncertainty that affects interpretation."
          },
          "narrative_fit": {
            "before": "Name the current failure or opportunity.",
            "after": "Show evidence for each mechanism or the plan to test it.",
            "good_uses": [
              "An argument opener with concise support."
            ],
            "poor_fits": [
              "A complete case study needing methods and results.",
              "Three unrelated features under an overbroad claim."
            ]
          },
          "evidence": {
            "observations": [
              "Viewed source: a two-tone headline faces explanatory prose and four ruled support points.",
              "Current two/numbers/plain states hide later body paragraphs; numbers replaces points with a three-member group.",
              "Current option markup/CSS: Introduce the argument with three scoped quantitative anchors instead of qualitative reasons."
            ],
            "interpretations": [
              "One governing claim is explained in prose and supported by a few named mechanisms or reasons. This is an interpretation of the inspected composition, not a verified claim of author intent."
            ],
            "not_verified": [
              "Original author intent, historical claims, persuasion and archive-wide frequency have not been independently verified."
            ],
            "references": [
              "02_product/spreads/S86-split-lede/source.webp",
              "02_product/spreads-semantics-2026-10-13/dist/S86-split-lede/spread.html",
              "02_product/spreads-semantics-2026-10-13/dist/S86-split-lede/spread.json",
              "https://oss.tailark.com/view/dusk-content-4?theme=light"
            ]
          },
          "review": {
            "status": "reviewed",
            "basis": "Viewed base source capture; inspected this option’s current markup, CSS and matching contract. No distinct option-source capture reviewed unless explicitly stated in observations."
          },
          "variation_relationship": "different-job"
        },
        "required_content": [
          "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
          "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
          "One group of three short values with measure labels; give a common period and traceable source in the body or adjacent context."
        ],
        "requires_before": [
          "Name the current failure or opportunity."
        ],
        "enables_after": [
          "Show evidence for each mechanism or the plan to test it."
        ],
        "avoid_when": [
          "A complete case study needing methods and results.",
          "Three unrelated features under an overbroad claim."
        ]
      },
      "plain": {
        "audience_question": "What single argument does this lede introduce?",
        "intent": "Read a governing headline beside one bounded prose explanation.",
        "reader_outcome": "Read a governing headline beside one bounded prose explanation.",
        "reasoning_relation": "claim and introductory prose",
        "slot_roles": {
          "headline": "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
          "body": "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs."
        },
        "matching": {
          "audience_question": "What single argument does this lede introduce?",
          "reader_outcome": "Read a governing headline beside one bounded prose explanation.",
          "reasoning_relation": "claim and introductory prose",
          "content_shape": {
            "composition": "A two-tone headline on the left beside one or two real paragraphs on the right, closed by a support band: three or four ruled points, two points side by side, or three small numbers.",
            "selected_state": "Headline beside one paragraph, both vertically centred, nothing else",
            "density": "medium",
            "columns": 2,
            "column_note": "Base metadata only; selected option can replace the base geometry."
          },
          "required_slots": [
            {
              "name": "headline",
              "reader_question": "What single argument does this lede introduce?",
              "semantic_role": "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
              "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 · headline · two short sentences, first muted and second strong (or one sentence)]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "under 12 words",
                "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
              },
              "markup": {
                "slot": "headline",
                "occurrences": 1,
                "annotation_status": "present",
                "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
                "sample_word_counts": [
                  7
                ]
              }
            },
            {
              "name": "body",
              "reader_question": "What does the body contribute to this page’s reader outcome?",
              "semantic_role": "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
              "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 · body · one or two paragraphs at reading measure (one in the two, numbers and plain options)]",
              "layout_budget": {
                "authored": "under 70 words in all",
                "policy": "Working composition guidance: preserve scope and qualification; change layout rather than truncate the argument."
              },
              "markup": {
                "slot": "body",
                "occurrences": 1,
                "annotation_status": "present",
                "visibility_status": "not asserted from static parsing",
                "sample_word_counts": [
                  48
                ]
              }
            }
          ],
          "rejection_constraints": [
            "A hidden supporting list needed to understand the claim.",
            "A claim that the rest of the material cannot substantiate."
          ],
          "option_guidance": {
            "option": "plain",
            "composition_delta": "Headline beside one paragraph, both vertically centred, nothing else",
            "semantic_change": "changes content relationship",
            "matching_instruction": "Select S86 plain when the supplied material answers “What single argument does this lede introduce?” through claim and introductory prose. Respect this state: Headline beside one paragraph, both vertically centred, nothing else"
          },
          "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": [
              "eae22f2ab221deb5131ab59a8145e92fce846b1e76dea31dc9a456b1eefb713f"
            ],
            "source_export": "private source images remain outside this draft site",
            "markup_sha256": "9533d71da92de484ffde4fce89d06bc0b7533a2eed8544a916e658ea50084b06",
            "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": "One governing claim is explained in prose and supported by a few named mechanisms or reasons.",
          "communication_job": "Introduce a single argument in headline and prose, leaving its supporting evidence for the next passage.",
          "audience_value": "Offers explanation and perspective. It addresses “What is your point, and what makes it plausible?” without treating labelled benefits as measured proof.",
          "reading_path": [
            "Read the headline for the central claim.",
            "Read the adjacent prose for the situation and reasoning.",
            "Scan the support band to distinguish the mechanisms or reasons behind the claim."
          ],
          "adaptation": {
            "required_inputs": [
              "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
              "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs."
            ],
            "slot_guidance": {
              "headline": "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
              "body": "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs."
            },
            "can_change": [
              "Replace the fictional subject and its supported content while retaining the roles and relationship described here."
            ],
            "must_survive": [
              "Every support point must explain part of the governing claim.",
              "Keep proposal status explicit until tested.",
              "Numbers, when used, require their own scope and source."
            ]
          },
          "worked_example": {
            "fictional": true,
            "scenario": "Fictional Cedar explains its proposed workshop operating method.",
            "slot_fills": {
              "headline": "A workshop becomes repeatable when its handoffs are teachable",
              "body": "Cedar’s fictional pilot proposes a common intake method so new volunteers can start safely. The method would preserve what experienced volunteers know, while review sessions would capture exceptions. This is a testable design proposal, not evidence that waiting has already fallen."
            },
            "reasoning": "The points are complementary mechanisms of repeatability, not three restatements of the claim.",
            "qualification": "Fictional teaching example. Replace invented details with authorised content and keep any source, scope, status or uncertainty that affects interpretation."
          },
          "narrative_fit": {
            "before": "Name the current failure or opportunity.",
            "after": "Show evidence for each mechanism or the plan to test it.",
            "good_uses": [
              "An argument opener with concise support."
            ],
            "poor_fits": [
              "A complete case study needing methods and results.",
              "Three unrelated features under an overbroad claim."
            ]
          },
          "evidence": {
            "observations": [
              "Viewed source: a two-tone headline faces explanatory prose and four ruled support points.",
              "Current two/numbers/plain states hide later body paragraphs; numbers replaces points with a three-member group.",
              "Current option markup/CSS: Introduce a single argument in headline and prose, leaving its supporting evidence for the next passage."
            ],
            "interpretations": [
              "One governing claim is explained in prose and supported by a few named mechanisms or reasons. This is an interpretation of the inspected composition, not a verified claim of author intent."
            ],
            "not_verified": [
              "Original author intent, historical claims, persuasion and archive-wide frequency have not been independently verified."
            ],
            "references": [
              "02_product/spreads/S86-split-lede/source.webp",
              "02_product/spreads-semantics-2026-10-13/dist/S86-split-lede/spread.html",
              "02_product/spreads-semantics-2026-10-13/dist/S86-split-lede/spread.json",
              "https://oss.tailark.com/view/dusk-content-4?theme=light"
            ]
          },
          "review": {
            "status": "reviewed",
            "basis": "Viewed base source capture; inspected this option’s current markup, CSS and matching contract. No distinct option-source capture reviewed unless explicitly stated in observations."
          },
          "variation_relationship": "different-job"
        },
        "required_content": [
          "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
          "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs."
        ],
        "requires_before": [
          "Name the current failure or opportunity."
        ],
        "enables_after": [
          "Show evidence for each mechanism or the plan to test it."
        ],
        "avoid_when": [
          "A complete case study needing methods and results.",
          "Three unrelated features under an overbroad claim."
        ]
      }
    },
    "narrative_profile": {
      "central_point": "One governing claim is explained in prose and supported by a few named mechanisms or reasons.",
      "communication_job": "Introduce the argument and show why its supporting ideas belong together.",
      "audience_value": "Offers explanation and perspective. It addresses “What is your point, and what makes it plausible?” without treating labelled benefits as measured proof.",
      "reading_path": [
        "Read the headline for the central claim.",
        "Read the adjacent prose for the situation and reasoning.",
        "Scan the support band to distinguish the mechanisms or reasons behind the claim."
      ],
      "adaptation": {
        "required_inputs": [
          "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
          "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
          "Three or four distinct supporting reasons; each has a short lead-in and a sentence connecting it to the claim."
        ],
        "slot_guidance": {
          "headline": "States the governing claim, with an optional two-part turn.",
          "body": "Explains the situation and the proposed mechanism in one or two short paragraphs.",
          "points": "Three or four distinct supporting reasons; each has a short lead-in and a sentence connecting it to the claim."
        },
        "can_change": [
          "Replace the fictional subject and its supported content while retaining the roles and relationship described here."
        ],
        "must_survive": [
          "Every support point must explain part of the governing claim.",
          "Keep proposal status explicit until tested.",
          "Numbers, when used, require their own scope and source."
        ]
      },
      "worked_example": {
        "fictional": true,
        "scenario": "Fictional Cedar explains its proposed workshop operating method.",
        "slot_fills": {
          "headline": "A workshop becomes repeatable when its handoffs are teachable",
          "body": "Cedar’s fictional pilot proposes a common intake method so new volunteers can start safely. The method would preserve what experienced volunteers know, while review sessions would capture exceptions. This is a testable design proposal, not evidence that waiting has already fallen.",
          "points": [
            "Shared intake. Every volunteer starts with the same safety questions.",
            "Visible limits. Difficult cases move to an experienced repairer.",
            "Learning loop. End-of-session notes improve the next checklist."
          ]
        },
        "reasoning": "The points are complementary mechanisms of repeatability, not three restatements of the claim.",
        "qualification": "Fictional teaching example. Replace invented details with authorised content and keep any source, scope, status or uncertainty that affects interpretation."
      },
      "narrative_fit": {
        "before": "Name the current failure or opportunity.",
        "after": "Show evidence for each mechanism or the plan to test it.",
        "good_uses": [
          "An argument opener with concise support."
        ],
        "poor_fits": [
          "A complete case study needing methods and results.",
          "Three unrelated features under an overbroad claim."
        ]
      },
      "evidence": {
        "observations": [
          "Viewed source: a two-tone headline faces explanatory prose and four ruled support points.",
          "Current two/numbers/plain states hide later body paragraphs; numbers replaces points with a three-member group."
        ],
        "interpretations": [
          "One governing claim is explained in prose and supported by a few named mechanisms or reasons. This is an interpretation of the inspected composition, not a verified claim of author intent."
        ],
        "not_verified": [
          "Original author intent, historical claims, persuasion and archive-wide frequency have not been independently verified."
        ],
        "references": [
          "02_product/spreads/S86-split-lede/source.webp",
          "02_product/spreads-semantics-2026-10-13/dist/S86-split-lede/spread.html",
          "02_product/spreads-semantics-2026-10-13/dist/S86-split-lede/spread.json",
          "https://oss.tailark.com/view/dusk-content-4?theme=light"
        ]
      },
      "review": {
        "status": "reviewed",
        "basis": "Viewed the retained base source capture and inspected current HTML and matching slots; reviewed the fictional adaptation at layout-contract level."
      },
      "variation_relationship": "base"
    }
  },
  "options": [
    {
      "id": "two",
      "what": "One paragraph, then two points side by side with no rules"
    },
    {
      "id": "numbers",
      "what": "A row of three small numbers with labels and top rules in place of the points"
    },
    {
      "id": "plain",
      "what": "Headline beside one paragraph, both vertically centred, nothing else"
    }
  ],
  "also_seen_in": [],
  "source": {
    "ref": "Tailark dusk content 4",
    "url": "https://oss.tailark.com/view/dusk-content-4?theme=light"
  }
}