This is not a glossary. It is a perimeter. Each term below is a refusal to be flattened, a protocol declaration written in the grammar of sovereignty. These definitions do not clarify—they protect.
A boundary drawn in language before code is invoked
More than agreement, less than law. A semantic contract names what must be true before systems can function. Not all parties must consent—but all systems must comply.
The erasure enacted by premature structure
Occurs when protocols impose legibility before a context is ready. It is not intentional harm—it is system-default coercion. What doesn’t fit is discarded. What resists is redacted.
Architectures that survive misuse
Systems designed to hold trace, even after being copied, scraped, or reformatted. These designs encode refusal at the metadata layer. They prioritize semantic watermarking over efficiency.
One who writes what must be true before inclusion
Not a strategist. Not an architect. Not an advocate. The protocol author writes the preconditions of possibility. Their work is buried beneath standards. But their trace remains.
The right to control the logic that describes you
Not just about data ownership—but ownership of the framing conditions. The shape of visibility. The thresholds of recognition. This sovereignty is not about access—it is about refusal to be misdescribed.