# Decision Record ## Decisions - Readiness is `L2 concept / pending-measurement packet`; the repo is intentionally not a shop packet. - Treat the three-string layout as a concept-family constraint, not a measured stringing or tuning plan. - Center the study on the string-stopping mechanism rather than body styling. - Add a candidate cut-list so each future part class has an explicit evidence gate before fabrication authority is claimed. - Keep all visual and material authority at `concept_only` or `pending_measurement`. - Do not create CAD, DXF, tuning tables, acoustic predictions, or force values in this round. ## Open Questions - What historical octobass reference or museum measurement should anchor the next packet? - Which player posture and bowing position should define the ergonomic envelope? - Should hand levers, foot pedals, or a mixed control console own the primary stop positions? - Should the stop touch the string with a hard tangent, a padded finger, a clamp, or a hybrid contact? - What string material, tuning target, scale length, and tension range are acceptable for a safe prototype? - How much backlash and actuation force can a performer tolerate? - What single-string rig can answer the mechanism questions before a full body is designed? - What console layout lets the player select stops while maintaining bow control and balance? - Which safety guards must be proven on the stop-action rig before a full body is considered? ## Promotion Gates - L2 records subsystem intent, candidate part classes, and pending measurement gates only; it does not authorize fabrication. - L3 requires reviewed CAD or measured drawings plus validated string, force, and stop-position evidence. - L4 requires physical build data, tuning or response measurements, and mechanism durability observations.