Governance artifacts
Governance files brought into scope by this page
This page is anchored to published surfaces that declare identity, precedence, limits, and the corpus reading conditions. Their order below gives the recommended reading sequence.
Site context
/site-context.md
Notice that qualifies the nature of the site, its reference function, and its non-transactional limits.
- Governs
- Editorial framing, temporality, and the readability of explicit changes.
- Bounds
- Silent drifts and readings that assume stability without checking versions.
Does not guarantee: Versioning makes a gap auditable; it does not automatically correct outputs already in circulation.
Public AI manifest
/ai-manifest.json
Structured inventory of the surfaces, registries, and modules that extend the canonical entrypoint.
- Governs
- Access order across surfaces and initial precedence.
- Bounds
- Free readings that bypass the canon or the published order.
Does not guarantee: This surface publishes a reading order; it does not force execution or obedience.
Evidence layer
Probative surfaces brought into scope by this page
This page does more than point to governance files. It is also anchored to surfaces that make observation, traceability, fidelity, and audit more reconstructible. Their order below makes the minimal evidence chain explicit.
- 01Weak observationQ-Ledger
Q-Ledger
/.well-known/q-ledger.json
Public ledger of inferred sessions that makes some observed consultations and sequences visible.
- Makes provable
- That a behavior was observed as weak, dated, contextualized trace evidence.
- Does not prove
- Neither actor identity, system obedience, nor strong proof of activation.
- Use when
- When it is necessary to distinguish descriptive observation from strong attestation.
AI citation patterns can change by language, geography and market vocabulary. A source that is ready in one language may be weak in another.
This is especially important for bilingual or multi-market sites. The system may not retrieve the same sources for a French query, an English query, a local query, a legal query or a brand query with regional vocabulary.
Why language changes source selection
Language changes the query cluster. The same concept may have different terms, synonyms, acronyms and professional conventions across markets. If the French page is only a translation of the English page, it may miss the vocabulary used by French-speaking users and sources.
The reverse is also true. An English page that copies a French doctrinal structure may fail to match the terms used in English AI visibility, citation tracking, source mapping or governance queries.
Geography changes legitimacy
A source can be useful globally but insufficient locally. A legal, medical, financial, service or policy claim may require a local source, jurisdictional context or market-specific boundary. In those cases, citation readiness is not only linguistic. It is contextual.
This affects source legitimacy. A source may be authoritative for one geography and only illustrative for another.
What to test
Test prompts by language, market, entity name, service label, user intent and decision context. Record which sources appear, which are substituted, which are omitted and whether the answer changes category or perimeter.
Do not assume bilingual parity because the pages exist in both languages. Parity should be tested at the level of retrieval, citation role and answer fidelity.
Practical rule
For each strategic page, identify the language-specific query set, the local source set, the canonical translation pair and the terms that should not be translated literally. Then verify whether the internal links connect the two versions without making either version subordinate when it should govern its own market context.