**The design review's proposal, adopted.** The editor asked for the vault's proposed design to be
implemented, and this is it: `assets/site.css` is the proposal's stylesheet, and the generators now
emit the vocabulary it introduced. One value is corrected, and the correction is the interesting
part.

**THE ONE NUMBER THAT CHANGED, AND WHY.** The proposal sets `--measure: 34em` with the comment
"~66 chars at 18px" and `--measure-sm: 38em` at "~68 chars". Both are wrong, and the second kind of
wrong matters: it derives them from an average glyph width of **0.48em**, the usual figure for a
screen serif, where Newsreader — measured in Chromium on a canvas at the element's own computed
font with real Portuguese text — averages **0.405em**. About 18% narrower. Two consequences. The
problem was *worse* than the review reported: the 758px column held ≈104 characters, not 88, and
the 828px entity column ≈114, not 96. And 34em is 612px, which **measures 84 characters** — above
the 75 the review's own §4.4 sets as the ceiling, and wider than the 29em live since v0.9.0.
Adopting the proposal literally would have regressed the thing it exists to fix. The site stays at
29em, measured at **71** characters. The two tokens are the same value because an `em` measure is
size-independent: the font size cancels in `width ÷ (size × glyph)`, so 34em and 38em could not
have given 66 and 68 in the first place.

**THE BANDS, which are the structural half.** One ground for a whole page is why the sections ran
together: hairlines alone cannot separate blocks identical in tone and density. A newspaper varies
the *ground* as well as the rule, and a reader navigates by that before reading a word. `.band`
wraps a section and carries its own ground, with a `.folha` **inside** it so it can be full-bleed —
which meant `pagina()` had to learn `corpo_em_bandas`, because a page that bands itself opens and
closes its own sheets. The front page uses three grounds and not six: base for the lead, recessed
for «Em preparação», base for the rest. A page that alternates every block is as flat as one that
alternates none.

**The section opener, at three weights.** `.sect` alone is a label, not a door, and using it for
both is the other half of why the page read as one field. `.opener--major` gets a 3px ink rule, a
number and a title; `.opener` gets 1px; `.sect` stays the label for a block inside a section. This
is deliberately **not** a blanket replacement for the 104 `.rule` + `.sect` pairs across the
generators — the stylesheet's own note says to reach for the heaviest weight three or four times at
most, and a page where everything is a door has no doors. The front page uses it once.

**The provenance, demoted without being removed.** The chips sat directly under the lead headline,
where a newspaper puts the dek — three bordered 11px mono runs of character counts, turning a
well-written lead into a debug panel. Now a sentence in the paper's own voice leads — *"Assenta em
3 páginas congeladas hoje · 2 não devolveram texto"* — and the chips open behind a
`<details>`/`<summary>` disclosure. No JavaScript: it has to work with scripting off, and half this
site's readers are machines that take the chips from the markup regardless. The sentence is
**derived from the same dict the chips are built from**, so the two cannot disagree.

**The stat strip**, replacing a stack of label-plus-sentence rows where the counts — the thing an
eye goes looking for — were buried mid-prose. And it immediately caught me repeating myself: the
strip carried Oradores, Organizações, Fontes and Grafo, and the rows underneath said the same
numbers again in sentences. That is «content exists once» broken by the session that keeps quoting
it, and it made the rail run **406px** longer than the column beside it. The strip keeps the
numbers; the rows keep only what a number cannot say.

**The column hole, and where it went.** The review measured ~270px of blank paper at the foot of
the left column while the rail ran on. «Nesta edição» is a summary of the whole edition rather than
a third secondary story, so it moved under the lead: that filled the hole and took the same height
off the rail. The imbalance is now **341px the other way** — the lead column runs longer than the
rail, which is what a broadsheet front page looks like. `.g12 > .col { align-self: start }` means
the short column simply ends and its border stops with it, instead of a rule running down beside
nothing.

**Two more stacking bugs found by looking at the rendered page, not by reading the rules.** The
masthead band closed with 48px of its own and the lead band opened with another 48, stacking into
~120px of blank paper between the nav's double rule and the lead headline — on a front page, where
the lead is supposed to be the first thing under the nav. The nav's 3px double rule is already the
divider, so the first band's bottom padding goes to zero. And the lead grid still carried
`padding:34px 0 30px` inline, a second helping of the room the band now provides — which is exactly
the inline padding the review wants the scale to replace. Gap: **120px → 86px**.

**Measured after, in a browser:** 71 characters per line, 5 bands, 3 full-ink `.rule` divisions
(the stylesheet's target is ≤3), 1 major opener, and the mobile chrome above the masthead down from
~130px to **88px** — the review's target is ≤48px and its own proposal reached 96px, so this is
past the proposal and still short of the target, which needs the dateline abbreviated on small
screens and is a generator change for another release.

**Gate 29 learned to follow a token.** The stylesheet names the measure — `.std { max-width:
var(--measure) }` — which is right: the value lives in one place. But the gate looked for a literal
`em` and so reported that `.std` had no measure at all while the measure was correct. A gate that
cannot follow one level of indirection ends up forbidding the tidier code, which is the wrong way
round.

**What was NOT adopted, and it is the one thing the editor still owns.** The proposal's front page
de-duplicates the card grid, and this one does not. §4.5 decision 5 asks the editor to confirm that
a front page showing three stories instead of six — more honest, visibly emptier — is acceptable,
and says in as many words: *"Agents: do not pick these yourself."* The filter is written and
switched off. The other four decisions are likewise still open, on the editor's board.