FABRIC-3.6.md: open the execution log; FABRIC-3.5.md §XLII records the split

Agreed to move the punchlist to its own document, on the series' own
rule rather than preference. FABRIC-1 closed at 4,420 lines because "the
still-open work [was] hard to find" among hundreds of resolved ones;
FABRIC-3.5 stands at 4,452 with 40+ open items in the same shape.
Annotating 25 tasks there, commit by commit, would bury the design record
it exists to be.

The split is strict and stated firmly, because §XXXI found this series'
documents losing track of each other. 3.5 holds the design record and
stays authoritative on conflict; 3.6 holds the work. Rulings are cited in
3.6, never restated, since duplication is how two documents begin to
disagree -- and a task that proves a ruling wrong is recorded as a
finding there and amended here, never silently diverged.

3.6 restores the checkbox convention. §XXXI.2 found the carry-forward
discipline was mechanically auditable through FABRIC-2 and broke at
FABRIC-3, which has no checkboxes, after which "is anything still open"
stopped being a grep and became a reading exercise -- which is how six
design items went quiet without anyone deciding to drop them. The next
document in the series does not repeat the defect the gap analysis found
in it.

§XLI stays in 3.5 as the source 3.6 instantiates: the phase structure,
why Phase 2 sits early, and the three Phase 3 blockers with their
justification. What moved is the checklist, not the argument. 3.6 also
carries an explicit out-of-scope section so deliberately excluded work is
not absorbed by an executing session.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01VkM1zHGvBerLF6aqkHPweP

FABRIC-3.5.md

@@ -4450,3 +4450,68 @@ and that is a feature — but it means arriving at a working, audited, inert all
 cutover still undesigned. **Better to settle §XXXII.5.1's hand-off before Phase 2 finishes**, so
 Phase 3 starts with momentum rather than a pause. It is the last real design question, and it is
 the natural next iteration.
+
+---
+
+## XLII. The punchlist moves to `FABRIC-3.6.md` (2026-09-19)
+
+**Captain Bob:** "If the punchlist is sufficiently long, maybe it goes to a 3.6 document to work
+from and annotate as we work." **Agreed, and not on preference — this series has a stated rule
+and this document has just met it.**
+
+### XLII.1 — The threshold is the series' own, and it was crossed while writing §XLI
+
+`FABRIC-1.md`'s close header gives the rule verbatim:
+
+> **"At ~4,400 lines and 51 open items** scattered among hundreds of resolved ones, continuing
+> to append here **made the still-open work hard to find** — the same reasoning `FABRIC-0.md`
+> itself was closed for at 7,595 lines."
+
+**This document stands at 4,452 lines with 40+ open punch items** scattered among hundreds of
+settled rulings. **Same threshold, same shape, same reason.** Annotating §XLI's 25 tasks here,
+commit by commit, would bury the design record this document exists to be.
+
+### XLII.2 — The split, and why it is stated so firmly
+
+| | `FABRIC-3.5.md` (this) | `FABRIC-3.6.md` |
+|---|---|---|
+| Holds | The design record — rulings, reasoning, evidence | The work — tasks, results, dates, commits |
+| State | Design phase closed; archival close at `v2.1.0` (§XXVI.5) | Living until the work is done |
+| On conflict | **Authoritative** | Defers, and records the discrepancy |
+
+**Design rulings are never restated in `FABRIC-3.6.md`, only cited.** That is deliberate: §XXXI
+found this series' documents losing track of each other, and duplication is how two documents
+begin to disagree. **If executing a task proves a ruling wrong, `FABRIC-3.6.md` records the
+finding and this document is amended** — never a silent divergence.
+
+### XLII.3 — The split repairs the defect §XXXI.2 found, in the successor
+
+§XXXI.2's central finding was that the carry-forward discipline was **mechanically auditable**
+(`grep -c '\- \[ \]'`) through `FABRIC-2.md`, and **broke at `FABRIC-3.md`, which has no
+checkboxes at all** — after which "is anything still open?" stopped being a `grep` and became a
+reading exercise. That is how §XXXI.3's six design items went quiet without anyone deciding to
+drop them.
+
+**`FABRIC-3.6.md` restores the checkbox convention.** Every task, every blocker, every close-out
+step is a `- [ ]`. **The gap analysis found a structural defect in how this series tracks work,
+and the next document in it does not repeat that defect** — which is a better outcome than the
+findings list alone.
+
+### XLII.4 — What did not move
+
+**§XLI stays here**, as the source §XXXVI.6 instantiates: the phase structure, the reasoning for
+Phase 2's early placement, and the three Phase 3 blockers with their justification. **What moved
+is the checklist, not the argument.**
+
+`FABRIC-3.6.md` also carries an explicit **out-of-scope** section — item 43, §XXXI's items
+23–26, and `src/*.c.bak` — so that work recorded here as deliberately excluded is not quietly
+absorbed by an executing session. §XXXI.3's six orphans are exactly what happens when that is
+left implicit.
+
+### XLII.5 — Punch list
+
+- ✅ **`FABRIC-3.6.md` opened** — execution log, checkbox convention, Phases 0–5, findings log,
+  out-of-scope carry.
+- ⬜ **B1/B2/B3 (items 27, 32, §XXXII.5.1)** — the Phase 3 blockers, tracked in both documents.
+  **§XXXII.5.1, the delivery hand-off, is the last genuine design question in the reshuffle.**
+- Design work continues **here**; execution is tracked **there**.