Macro-4 Staging Workbench Naming Convention — R2-B2 (2026-06-19)

Date: 2026-06-19 · Workstream: R2-B2-MACRO-4-STAGING-WORKBENCH-IO-CONTRACT-TD-ENTRY-GATE-2026-06-19 (Deliverable 9 of 90) · Editorial revision: rev1 Class: draft object naming convention · READ-ONLY · NON-ENACTING · NON-AUTHORIZING · CONVENTION-ONLY (no DDL) · NO write performed.

Metadata convention. Editorial revision (rev1) only. Storage revision/content_length authoritative at read time.

Convention, not schema. This proposes a naming discipline for disposable draft objects so they are unmistakable and never confused with production. It defines no table/column, writes no DDL, and creates no object.

---

0. Status and non-authorization

STATUS: PASS — engineering / design-only. A naming discipline that makes draft objects self-identifying and disposable-by-name. Engineering PASS ≠ authority PASS. Default: HOLD.

1. Purpose

Answer macro question 3 (in part) — how draft objects are named so a delete-fast can find and remove all of them, and nothing leaks into production.

2. Sources / evidence read

Pilot-slice staging IO contract §7 (distinct identity/tagging); FRESH existing object names (iu_core.iu_staging_*, unit_edit_draft) to avoid collision; operating-rules ("không hardcode"). Main process, no reader-agents.

3. Accepted baseline (carried)

Candidate results carry a clear STAGING marker (a staging run id + a "candidate" designation) so they can never be queried as, or read into, the production certification path; the exact mechanism is FUTURE_TECHNICAL_DESIGN_REQUIRED.

4. Evidence / analysis — proposed convention (conceptual)

Element	Convention (proposed, not enacted)	Why
Surface prefix	a distinct disposable namespace/prefix (e.g. b2draft_* / a dedicated draft schema) never birth_registry, iu_core.*, public.unit_edit_draft	unmistakable, collision-free vs FRESH production names
Run id	every draft run carries a unique staging run id	scopes the delete-fast unit
Candidate column tag	candidate inspect_* clearly marked "candidate"	never confusable with production inspect_*
Evidence tag	staging evidence tagged STAGING	never read into a production decision

5. Contract / requirement / matrix / result

The convention must guarantee: (a) one query can enumerate all objects of a draft run for disposal; (b) no draft name shadows or aliases a production object; (c) names are derived from a run id, not hardcoded. This is a requirement on a future build, not a built scheme.

6. Owner-gated future work

Choosing and applying the naming/tagging scheme is part of the staging build — Owner-gated future TD; forbidden now.

7. What remains unresolved

The concrete prefix/schema choice is FUTURE_TECHNICAL_DESIGN_REQUIRED; this file sets the properties, not the strings.

8. Ready for GPT/Codex review

Yes — Codex should confirm no proposed name collides with a FRESH production object and that no DDL is written.