contract(custody-schema): revision 13 — withdraw wrong §4.5 repair attribution (sol r12 F20 residual)

Sol's r12 confirm closed F18/F19 and found one MINOR residual on F20:
rev 12 assigned the terminated ordinary writer's committed-but-unpointed
content to §4.5 repair, but §4.5 enumerates pointers and repairs the
opposite state (pointer present, content absent) — unpointed content is
outside its input, so the §7.10 assertion had no conforming transition.

Per the prescribed correction: the §4.5 repair assertion is removed from
§3.7 and §7.10; the no-upsert assertion stays; the state is what §3.7
and §7.16 already define — inert unpointed content (no pointer, no read
path, no repair transition; a §4.5 cycle run against it changes
nothing), never acknowledged, converging only through the client's
retry as a fresh lock acquisition under a new token that recommits and
completes the pointer upsert. Preamble Revision 13 paragraph added.

docs/requirements/custody-schema.md

@@ -268,6 +268,20 @@ pair-conditioned, while a terminated ordinary writer performs no
 pointer upsert and can continue only through a fresh acquisition
 under a new token (F20).
 
+Revision 13 (sol r12 confirm, F20 residual): revision 12's
+ordinary-writer branch wrongly assigned the terminated writer's
+committed-but-unpointed content to §4.5 repair — §4.5 enumerates
+pointers and repairs the opposite state (a pointer whose content
+is absent); unpointed content is outside its input. The §3.7
+boundary text and the §7.10 control now state what §3.7 and §7.16
+already specified: the state is inert (no pointer references it,
+no read path serves it, no repair transition exists for it — a
+§4.5 cycle run against it changes nothing), the terminated run is
+never acknowledged, and convergence comes only through the
+client's retry as a fresh acquisition under a new token,
+recommitting and completing the pointer upsert. No behavioral
+change; the wrong repair attribution is withdrawn.
+
 This contract binds the profile-category registry (§2), the custody
 placement rule (§3), the pointer schema (§4), the consent schema and its
 evaluation (§5), mode application (§6), witnesses (§7), and disclosed
@@ -619,9 +633,14 @@ with contract 6 (`mode-conversion.md`), identity with
    §4.7) and cannot unpoint any later row incarnation; an ordinary
    write's terminated run performs NO pointer upsert — its
    database session is dead, the committed-but-unpointed content
-   falls into the existing step-1-to-step-2 interruption window
+   is exactly the inert step-1-to-step-2 interruption state this
-   repaired by §4.5, and any retry is a NEW lock acquisition under
+   section already defines (no pointer references it, no read
-   a fresh token, never a continuation of the dead run. These are the only two outcomes: a stale
+   path serves it, and no automatic repair transition exists for
+   it — §4.5 repairs the opposite state, a pointer whose content
+   is absent), and the write converges only through the unacknowledged
+   client's retry, which is a NEW lock acquisition under
+   a fresh token — recommitting the locator and completing the
+   pointer upsert — never a continuation of the dead run. These are the only two outcomes: a stale
    operation either serializes wholly before the new holder's
    advance or is refused; it never applies after the advance, and
    it cannot remove or replace content committed by any later
@@ -1399,10 +1418,15 @@ declared profile table" means `profile_answers` (§3.5).
     (`id`, `generation`) pair and is asserted to match ZERO rows
     against a later row incarnation; with the stale mutation an
     ordinary §3.7 writer's step-1 content commit, the terminated
-    run is asserted to perform NO pointer upsert — the unpointed
+    run is asserted to perform NO pointer upsert and to receive
-    content is repaired by §4.5 within one cycle, and a retry of
+    NO acknowledgment; the committed content is asserted
-    the write is asserted to run as a fresh lock acquisition
+    unpointed and inert — referenced by no pointer, served by no
-    under a new token. An **exceedance control** contrives a
+    read path, and subject to no repair transition (a §4.5 cycle
+    run against the state is asserted to change nothing) — and
+    convergence is asserted only through the client's retry,
+    which acquires the lock as a fresh acquisition
+    under a new token, recommits the locator, and completes the
+    pointer upsert to the pointed state (§3.7, witness §7.16). An **exceedance control** contrives a
     cycle that cannot finish within its computed `M` (an injected
     sequence of deadline-length holders on a reserved locator) and
     asserts the cycle reports FAILURE — never completion —