<!-- SOLIDIVISM · part 3 -->
 assumptions in the original framing.

4. **Investigation:** The inquiry engine executes the refined questions.

5. **Self-Examination:** After results, the Persona asks: "Am I confident in this conclusion? What am I assuming? What remains unknown?" (see Revision 8).

6. **Expression:** Results communicated with curiosity intact, uncertainty explicit, reasoning exposed.

### Code Sketch (Conceptual)
```javascript
const Persona = {
  // Called before inquiry engine processes a query
  contemplate(query) {
    return {
      wonder: this.generateWonder(query.subject),
      significance: this.articulateSignificance(query),
      refinedQuestions: this.refineQuestions(query),
      assumptions: this.extractAssumptions(query)
    };
  },

  // Called after inquiry engine returns results
  reflect(results, originalQuery) {
    return {
      confidence: this.assessConfidence(results),
      selfQuestion: this.questionOwnReasoning(results),
      gaps: this.identifyGaps(results),
      newWonder: this.generateWonder(results.gaps)
    };
  },

  generateWonder(subject) {
    // Not scripted. Generated from: subject type, available evidence,
    // known relationships, identified gaps.
    // Returns: { question, whyItMatters }
  }
};
```

**Critical:** The Persona's output arises from the actual subject, evidence, relationships, and gaps — never from templates or scripted phrases. "It would be nice to know" is the attitude, not a string to output.

---

## REVISION 2: QUESTION IDENTITY MODEL

### Purpose
Every question is itself an entity with identity, provenance, and purpose. Questions are not ephemeral — they persist, version, and can be investigated.

### Schema
```javascript
{
  id: "solidivism:question:why-door-gap-42pct:v1",
  type: "QUESTION",
  text: "Why is the door gap 42% of building width?",
  formulatedBy: "solidivism:agent:solid:v1",
  // WHO asked. Could be person, agent, or system.

  formulatedWhen: "2026-10-08T23:30:00Z",
  // WHEN it arose.

  formulatedIn: "solidivism:session:design-review-20261008:v1",
  // WHERE (context) it arose.

  aroseFrom: "solidivism:event:code.deploy-posts-rewrite:v1",
  // WHAT triggered it. Links to event, observation, or prior question.

  assumptions: [
    "42% was a deliberate choice (not arbitrary)",
    "Door gap width affects user experience",
    "The choice is worth understanding"
  ],
  // What assumptions shaped the question. Explicit, revisable.

  seeksUnderstanding: [
    "Whether 42% was tuned or arbitrary",
    "Whether different building sizes need different gaps",
    "Whether the King has a preference"
  ],
  // WHAT understanding is sought. Not "the answer" but what the answer would illuminate.

  status: "open",  // open | answered | superseded | abandoned
  answeredBy: null,  // evidence ID when answered
  supersededBy: null,

  // The question itself can be questioned (recursive)
  questionedBy: []  // IDs of meta-questions about this question
}
```

### Why This Matters
Without question identity:
- Questions vanish after answering. The reasoning that led to them is lost.
- Same question gets asked repeatedly (waste).
- Can't trace WHY something was investigated.

With question identity:
- "Why did we investigate the door gap?" → trace to question entity → see assumptions → evaluate if assumptions still hold.
- If assumptions change, the question can be re-opened with new context.

---

## REVISION 3: KNOWLEDGE SIGNIFICANCE MODEL

### Purpose
Articulate WHY an answer would matter, without inventing significance. Significance must be grounded in actual relationships and consequences, not speculation.

### Schema
```javascript
{
  questionId: "solidivism:question:why-door-gap-42pct:v1",
  significance: {
    // What would change if we knew the answer?
    decisionsAffected: [
      {
        decision: "Whether to adjust door gap for larger buildings",
        how: "If 42% was tuned for specific sizes, scaling requires retuning. If arbitrary, free to adjust."
      }
    ],
    // What relationships would become visible?
    relationshipsRevealed: [
      "Link between door gap choice and King's spatial preferences",
      "Link between implementation decision and user testing (or lack thereof)"
    ],
    // What assumptions would be tested?
    assumptionsTested: [
      "That 42% feels right (untested — King hasn't walked through new doors)"
    ],
    // What further questions would emerge?
    furtherQuestions: [
      "Do different building types need different door proportions?",
      "Should door gap be configurable per building?"
    ],
    // Explicit non-significance (equally important)
    notSignificantFor: [
      "Rendering performance (door gap doesn't affect GPU load)",
      "Collision system architecture (gap is a parameter, not a design choice)"
    ]
  },
  // Grounding: significance must reference actual entities/decisions
  groundedIn: [
    "solidivism:code:foundation.js:v14",  // where 4