@@ -54,6 +54,15 @@
|
||||
- representation participation is best understood as one coherent decision model with layered exceptions
|
||||
- known consumer divergences and CRM compatibility behaviours are part of the current live contract
|
||||
- future technical adoption/expansion work should wait for business validation before changing behaviour or broadening policy boundaries
|
||||
- CRM Case Progress Display investigation has now been concluded as a technical characterization stream.
|
||||
- Current technical conclusion:
|
||||
- the Case Status tab is a portal-owned journey interpretation layer
|
||||
- active inputs are CRM `statuscode`, appeal type, and Rights of Way specialist-process routing only
|
||||
- `pinswg_casestage` is not a significant active input to status-tab lifecycle resolution
|
||||
- stage catalogues are not raw CRM lifecycle states and not business-policy decision models
|
||||
- stage catalogues are best understood as user-facing journey models plus appeal-type interpretation plus presentation-layer progress visualization
|
||||
- shared catalogue families (`PLANNING_S78`, `ENFORCEMENT`, `DNS/SIP`, Rights of Way specialist-process variants) reflect a mixture of shared journey semantics, presentation reuse, and historical consolidation
|
||||
- this area is not currently a candidate for a new business-policy domain boundary
|
||||
|
||||
## CI/CD and deployment artifacts
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user