DongHyeonkaandClaude Opus 5
bdee07a93b
Carries eight template commits: the provider sandbox actually running, release
admission to a named environment, the product feature manifest with its runtime
kill switch, architecture and documentation rules that match what is enforced,
the removability fixtures, and the browser, visual and performance evidence.
Product identity is unchanged. `package.json` keeps `tech-log-frontend` and the
catalog keeps the Tech Log naming; the home page was not in the delta. The
visual baselines are this product's own — the template's were excluded from the
transplant and these were regenerated here, where the only difference is the
platform overview's new product-feature section.
What this repository gains operationally: `config/runtime/{local,development,
staging,production}.json` with `FE-GATE-027` refusing an artifact whose runtime
document does not match the environment it is being admitted to, and
`FEATURE_OVERRIDES` for taking an installed feature out of service without a
rebuild.
Verified here: eight gates green, build green, visual 5/5, and 1,858 of 1,859
tests in the suites that do not need a sandbox — the one failure passes in
isolation and is a jsdom lazy-chunk timeout under parallel load. The provider
suites cannot run on this machine at all: `kernel.apparmor_restrict_unprivileged
_userns=1` makes `bwrap --unshare-net` fail, reproducible without any code from
either repository.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2.4 KiB
Manual accessibility review checklist
Automated axe checks do not establish WCAG conformance. A human reviewer must
review all ten route records in artifacts/tests/a11y-manual/ against one
release candidate and sign them. The required scope is derived from the route
registry: APP_HOME, EXAMPLES_PLATFORM, EXAMPLES_UI, EXAMPLES_STATES,
EXAMPLES_AUTH, NOT_FOUND, REFERENCE_RESOURCE_LIST,
REFERENCE_RESOURCE_DETAIL, REFERENCE_RESOURCE_FORM and
REFERENCE_RESOURCE_STATUS. Copy the template fields exactly; the gate rejects
blank identity/timestamp/signature fields, pending verdicts, mismatched release
IDs, or missing routes.
This list is not maintained by hand: verify:documentation compares it against
the installed route registry and fails when a registered route is absent. It
said six routes while ten were registered, which put the platform overview and
the three reference-resource screens outside the declared manual review scope
without anyone deciding they should be.
Allowed item verdicts:
passnot-applicable (<specific reason>)
Required record:
Status: reviewed
Route ID: APP_HOME
Release ID: <immutable release ID>
Reviewer: <human reviewer identity>
Reviewed at: <RFC 3339 timestamp>
Signature: <reviewer identity or approved signature reference>
Attestation: accepted
M1 Keyboard: pass
M2 Visible focus: pass
M3 Route focus: pass
M4 Modal focus: not-applicable (no modal on this route)
M5 Error association: not-applicable (no form error on this route)
M6 Color signal: pass
M7 Reduced motion: pass
Screen reader: pass
Notes: <observations and linked defect IDs>
The reviewer must verify:
- M1: every action works without a pointing device
- M2: every focused element has a visible indicator
- M3: route transitions move focus to a deterministic target
- M4: modal focus is trapped and restored, when a modal exists
- M5: errors are programmatically associated with their controls, when present
- M6: state never relies on color alone
- M7: non-essential motion is suppressed with reduced-motion preference
- Screen reader: headings, live regions, errors, and actions are announced once
EXAMPLES_UI requires real M4 modal and M5 field-error review; those items must
not be marked not-applicable on that route. Passing automated evidence means
only that tested pages had no critical or serious axe findings under the
recorded Chromium, Firefox, and WebKit runs.