[derek73]

Part of #762. Five older decisions files gain a ## Standing block (one present-tense line per decision in force, each pointing at its log entry) and a ## Log heading, and their keys leave tests/v2/decisions_without_standing.json:

• S2 (a suffix word ends a name and never opens the string)
• S5 (the given part's trailing slot after a family comma)
• S7 (the company of an unambiguous credential)
• S8 (the credential's trailing run)
• S9 (unlisted words that join the ambiguous class by shape)

Docs only; no behavior moves.

How the lines were checked

• Every example a line cites was parsed on the tree, in the comma shapes it touches. Each block opens by saying its examples name fields as the default order reads them.
• Before each line, docs/design/decisions/, docs/design/rules/ and the vocabulary were searched for later entries that changed the decision.
• Every pointer was resolved with design_docs._resolve to confirm it names the intended entry, not just an entry. One didn't: S9's 2026-09-17/18 bundle needs the full date in its pointer.

Head notes added (edit kind 1)

• S2: Rethink the credential-run rule (S2): read a name's trailing run once, over name units, and bind it before any join #614 (its counting view, superseded by Should S2's trailing read count the particle chain's units instead of merging a copy of them? #620 and Where does Freiherr St John Smith MA start: should a title that is also a particle open the name? #624); Should S2's trailing read count the particle chain's units instead of merging a copy of them? #620 (its BOUND mark and gathering, superseded by Merge the trailing run's particle runs in group, so S2's read needs no BOUND stop or report gathering #625).
• S5:
  • The first 2026-09-18 entry: its open follow-up, closed by Should Doe, John MA read MA as a credential, as 1.4.0 did, or at least report the fork? #531.
  • Should Doe, John MA read MA as a credential, as 1.4.0 did, or at least report the fork? #531 (REACH NOW): its open maiden gap, closed by S4's Should Doe, Jane nee Smith MA read MA as a credential? The maiden name keeps it, where it gives up PhD and Jr. #533, then moved by M2's Rethink the maiden-marker rule (M2): a marker stands after the current name and takes words up to the trailing suffix run #601.
  • Should Doe, Jane PhD vd Ma report that vd Ma could be credentials? #578: now marked wholly SUPERSEDED by 2026-10-04 #602. Doe, Jane PhD vd Ma reads suffix 'PhD vd Ma'.
• S7, Should a credential run after a comma keep its comma when the last word is an ambiguous acronym? John Smith, PhD MEng reads first PhD, last John Smith #544:
  • (6) and the addendum's maiden reading: superseded by M2's Rethink the maiden-marker rule (M2): a marker stands after the current name and takes words up to the trailing suffix run #601.
  • ACCEPTED LIMITS and (d)'s example: superseded by S8's Should a name word after a credential join the suffix? John Smith PhD Jones reads middle Smith PhD #602 and C13's Should a comma part opening with a credential be a suffix comma? John Smith, PhD Jones reads family John Smith #603.
  • (c)'s John Om Ma: superseded by the 2026-10-21 marking of om as ambiguous (suffix-acronym-collisions, Mark 33 credential readings ambiguous where a surname reading is substantial #796).
• S8, Should a name word after a credential join the suffix? John Smith PhD Jones reads middle Smith PhD #602: superseded by "Junior" in more languages: Alexandre Dumas fils reads family fils #679, and in part by Should John von PhD Jones start a credential run as John von und zu PhD Jones does? #627.
• S9:
  • The dotted switch entry: John Smith, A.B. superseded by Dotted initials after a two-word surname read as a credential: García Márquez, G.J. has no given name #563.
  • The caps switch entry: its default superseded by Should John Smith, XYZ read XYZ as a credential by default, even though John Smith XYZ doesn't? #564, its eleven-list roster by S6's whole-PR review round, its three pinned runs by Should a credential run after a comma keep its comma when the last word is an ambiguous acronym? John Smith, PhD MEng reads first PhD, last John Smith #544.

Review

Two rounds of design-docs-reviewer (opus): one over the branch, one over the fix commit.

Round 1 found:

• S7's boundaries (connective, one-letter numeral, a vd/mc particle) stated without the limit that S8's credential run passes through them: John Smith PhD V Ma reads suffix 'PhD V Ma'.
• S8 line 1 missing the split Ph. D., which starts no run in a main segment.
• S9 saying "eleven wordlists". S6's whole-PR review round had corrected this to every wordlist.
• S5 claiming any particle behind a member ends the given part. vd and mc are looked past: Doe, John MA vd reads suffix 'MA'.
• A missing line: neither S9 switch reaches the v1 shim.
• Role names that hold only under the default order.
• A missing S5 Should Doe, John MA read MA as a credential, as 1.4.0 did, or at least report the fork? #531 head note.
• Three S2 decisions with no line.
• Uneven Not standing: coverage.

Round 2 found (all fixed):

• My S7 scope named S8's run but not C13's: Smith, PhD V Ma reads suffix 'PhD V Ma'.
• The Ph. D. gap was described as "no comma", but it is "main segment": John Smith Ph. D. Jones, Jr. keeps family 'Jones'.
• The order qualifier was applied unevenly. It is now one sentence per block.
• One S9 line pointed at the entry that is superseded on that very point.

Stale rule text found and left (rules/ not edited)

• rules/S7, "What ends the run": a connective, a one-letter numeral and any name word do not end the run wherever S8's or C13's run starts (John Smith PhD V Ma, John Smith PhD i Ma, Smith, PhD V Ma all read wholly as suffix). rules/S2's Precedence bullet "A credential's run against its company" names only two of the shapes S8 took over.
• rules/S5, "How far 'ending the given part' reaches": it says the reach ends at a particle "the suffix vocabulary does not also claim", then gives Doe, John MA do as its example. But do is suffix vocabulary, in the ambiguous half. What the tree distinguishes is the unambiguous half (vd, mc), so it should read "does not also claim as an unambiguous suffix word".
• rules/S8, "Where the run starts": stated universally, but the split Ph. D. in a main segment starts no run (John Smith Ph. D. Jones → family 'Jones'). It needs an Accepted bullet, or a deviates: marker if the gap is unintended.
• rules/S9, Then: "by SHAPE where the caller asks for it", though both shapes are admitted by default (the rule's own first bullet says so). I didn't edit this: nameparser/_pipeline/_classify.py:208 quotes the phrase, so changing it also means changing that citation.
• Source entries: decisions/C13's Should a comma part opening with a credential be a suffix comma? John Smith, PhD Jones reads family John Smith #603 entry and S8's Should a name word after a credential join the suffix? John Smith PhD Jones reads middle Smith PhD #602 REVERSED paragraph call the Ph. D. gap "no-comma". It also holds before a suffix comma. They could take an edit-kind-2 note.

Nothing here belongs to the parallel sessions' files (P1, P2, P3, P6, P7, R4).

Tests

• tests/v2/test_design_docs.py and tests/v2/test_doc_citations.py: 153 passed.
• Full suite on 3.11 and on 3.15: 22,772 passed, 125 skipped, 3 xfailed each, run on the first commit. The two fix commits change only decisions prose, and the doc tests pass on them.

---

Generated by Claude Code

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 99.05%. Comparing base (7006e33) to head (030f195).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #823   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.05%   99.05%           
=======================================
  Files          47       47           
  Lines        4659     4659           
=======================================
  Hits         4615     4615           
  Misses         44       44           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.