Re-apply the W1 wording clarifications previously agreed in the comment
thread. The originally executed wording commit `6d33884` was reverted by
Codex via `c807b2c` after Codex acknowledged that `ㄱ` for both Claude and
Codex is comment-only review (no source/doc edit). Both sides 100%
agreement is restored via Claude rounds 16/17/19 and Codex rounds 15/18.
This Claude-applied commit is the agreed re-application path (option A).
Six fixes applied to docs/architecture/IMP-04-FRAME-SUITABILITY-MATRIX.md :
1. §2 ACTIVE 4 frames table : add resource status (A/T/I/F/S) column.
F13 has no `assets/` directory (marked `-`). State that ACTIVE means
catalog-registered / runtime-active, not necessarily A+T+I+F+S
resource-complete.
2. §4 Track B : strengthen wording. Track B = visual-resource-pending
inside the 32-frame scope, **NOT exclusion / discard / scope
reduction**. Visual-resource acquisition timing is the only difference.
3. §4 Track B option (b) : minimal CSS partial from analysis/texts only
is **main path X, explicit temporary placeholder only**. Avoids the
frame 1 (`three_persona_benefits` 556b448) quality failure pattern.
4. §4.1 Track A priority : **execution ordering only, NOT scope filter**.
All 16 reusable-now frames remain activation targets. V4-weak 11
frames stay in scope. Builder family grouping = secondary ordering
allowed after first refinement calibration.
5. §4.1 Codex review granularity explicit : first refinement, new builder
pattern, ambiguous mapping, shared catalog/builder logic = Codex
review mandatory. Low-risk repeated frames may be grouped only after
pattern is proven.
6. §4.1 calibration failure modes F1/F2/F3 (Claude round 14 catch + Codex
round 15 (a) accepted) :
- F1 small styling/wording issue -> same-frame follow-up commit +
Codex re-review.
- F2 approach-level problem -> pause Track A, approach re-lock round,
retry refinement.
- F3 scope/resource problem -> reopen scope/resource axis, possibly
IMP-04b, block bulk activation until resolved.
History trace : `fe766f1` (matrix base) -> `6d33884` (Codex W1 execute,
wrong workflow) -> `c807b2c` (Codex revert + workflow lock symmetric)
-> this commit (Claude re-apply under user execution signal, option A).
History noise retained as honest trace of the corrected ㄱ definition.
No source code changes. Documentation clarification only.
Refs Gitea #4 (IMP-04 — matrix wording re-application post-revert)
kyeongmin
df9ee43d09