Loomworks — reach-enforcement arc: GRANTHA correction note — v0.1

What survives, and why

CR-2026-157's mechanism survives essentially whole. Its credential is issued by an authority, scoped to one engagement and one action, carries expiry and revocation, and is claimed by binding a holder — that is a grant, not an access-control-list entry. The engine authorizer seam it builds is the interim implementation the integration strategy always intended to swap out; the swap target is GRANTHA rather than OVA, and the seam's design — callers unchanged at swap — absorbs the substitution without code consequence. The arc's central resolution (the membership predicate as the fence; contribution authorization for non-members as the build) is unaffected: it never depended on which protocol holds the seat.

The Step 0 evidence survives untouched — it describes the engine, which has no protocol-side authorization at all yet.

What was wrong, and where each correction lands

1. Naming throughout the arc ("OVA reach enforcement," "the Option E OVA contract"). Historical record; stands as written. Every future version bump of an arc document substitutes GRANTHA in the seat; new documents already do (the stack diagrams of 2026-07-28 carry the corrected seats).
2. Slices 2 and 3's access-control-list framing conflicts in substance with grant-as-sole-primitive. Both slices are deferred with no consumer, so the conflict is latent. Correction lands at their scoping time: the "declaration" and "reach enforcement proper" are re-derived from GRANTHA's grant model — restriction expressed as the presence and verification of grants, not as a readable list of the permitted. The scoping note's three-enforcement-paths consolidation constraint survives unchanged; it is about the engine's chokepoints, not the protocol's primitive.
3. Seed v0.12's sentence "an access-control list established through OVA" — stale since June, now carried as the third rider on the queued seed v0.13 (with the held-gate extension and the seam-is-posture finding).
4. Manifest entries 119–120 carry the OVA framing as trajectory; superseded-in-place markers ride the next manifest amendment rather than a dedicated bump.

The process lesson, recorded

The drift had one cause: a settled decision (J1) lived in the record and in past sessions but not in the drafting session's context, and nothing forced a check. The correction pattern that caught it — an unfamiliar term halting the work until searched — is the vocabulary-deference rule doing its job one arc too late. The durable fix is knowledge-base hygiene: the stack-diagram document and this note entering the project's context closes the specific gap; the general residue (project files predating June's protocol decisions) is named for the Operator's next knowledge-refresh pass.