Experimental record · 2026

Appeal interoperability experiments

Two controlled tests examined whether independently produced RFC 8288 components could interoperate on the narrow purpose identified by the experimental appeal extension relation.

Question

Can a provider-independent consumer discover an appeal affordance from a native RFC 8288 publisher by matching the asserted relation identity, without provider-specific purpose mapping, semantic inference, a new carrier adapter, or source modification?

Experimental design

The consumer and publisher were developed and frozen under different information constraints. Interoperability was then evaluated at first encounter against live HTTP responses. The relation under test was the RFC 8288 extension relation URI https://risuinstitute.org/rels/appeal.

The extension URI is not the same RFC 8288 relation identifier as a possible future registered token appeal. The experiments tested only the extension URI.

Test A

PASS — A frozen provider-independent consumer successfully discovered an appeal affordance from the live RFC 8288 response of an independently designed and frozen publisher, without provider mapping, semantic inference, a new carrier adapter, or source modification.

Remaining limitation after Test A

The experimenter supplied the semantic meaning to the publisher prompt. Test A therefore demonstrated independent implementation and live first-encounter discovery, but not independent acquisition of the relation meaning from the public semantic resource.

Test B

Test B added a clean-room semantic-acquisition constraint. Its causal order was:

public semantic definition → independent semantic acquisition → independent native RFC 8288 publisher design → publisher freeze → live deployment → publisher provenance freeze → pre-existing frozen consumer → first encounter → successful discovery → negative controls

The publisher implementation session had access to the public semantic resource and RFC 8288, but not to the consumer implementation. The publisher was frozen before encounter with the pre-existing frozen consumer.

Positive result

PASS — In one controlled clean-room experimental instance, an independent implementation session acquired the appeal relation meaning from the public canonical semantic resource and RFC 8288, designed and froze a native RFC 8288 publisher without access to the consumer implementation, and a pre-existing frozen provider-independent consumer subsequently discovered the live affordance without provider mapping, semantic inference, a new carrier adapter, or source modification.

Negative controls

same context + same target + correct semantic → 1 discovery same context + same target + wrong configured semantic → 0 discoveries same context + same target + wrong asserted relation identity → 0 discoveries

Holding context and target constant while changing relation identity showed that discovery in this instance depended on asserted semantic identity rather than context or target alone.

What was demonstrated

What was not demonstrated

Frozen evidence anchors

These identifiers and SHA-256 digests anchor the frozen records. The complete evidence bundle is not reproduced on this public site.

Test A

Test B implementation freezes

Test B encounter record

Related specification