feat: participation and RACI labels, written on the project page (#118)

Files changed:
- CHANGES.md
- VERSION
- instructions/gtd-weekly-review/SKILL.md
- instructions/link-taxonomy.md
- kb/entities/COLLECTION.md
- kb/gtd/COLLECTION.md
- types/project.md

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01SnAJ7Z3CpVD3PRbN73QtU2

instructions/link-taxonomy.md

@@ -59,9 +59,9 @@ edge merely to mirror the first one.** The inbound view is rendered from the gra
 `index rebuild` and `search`, so a reader landing on the target sees what points at it whether
 or not anyone wrote a second edge.
 
-That is why most labels below have no inverse. Only three pairs do, because in each the reverse
+That is why most labels below have no inverse. Only four pairs do, because in each the reverse
 direction is a genuine primary statement someone would write on its own: `depends-on` /
-`required-by`, `runs-on` / `hosts`, and `composition` / `part-of`.
+`required-by`, `runs-on` / `hosts`, `composition` / `part-of`, and `owns` / `owned-by`.
 
 **A self-dual label is still written once.** `alternative-to` is its own inverse - the sentence
 reads identically from either end - and that makes it the easiest label in the catalogue to
@@ -82,6 +82,15 @@ relationship the catalogue already had a word for. It is not a mirror: the paren
 lists its parts, the child's names the whole it belongs to, and a reader landing on the child
 needs the second one.
 
+The fourth came with the participation labels, and for the opposite reason: not a child reaching
+for a word, but a page whose reader asks the question from the other end. "Who answers for this
+initiative?" is asked on the initiative's page, and a page shows only the edges it carries itself -
+the inbound view lives in `search` and the index, not in the page's own links block. So the
+initiative writes `owned-by`, a person page may still write `owns`, and neither is a mirror of the
+other: each answers a reader who is standing where the edge is written. A new name for the same
+claim would have been the alternative, and the worse one - two words for one statement are a
+synonym no `lint` can tell apart, where an inverse pair is one statement read from either end.
+
 ## When to run
 
 Adding or changing a `related:` entry, authorising labels in a `COLLECTION.md`, or judging
@@ -128,8 +137,13 @@ entity to entity.
 | `produces` | — | emits the target as an artifact or data |
 | `consumes` | — | reads the target as an artifact or data |
 | `maintains` | — | carries the upkeep of the target |
-| `owns` | — | is accountable for the target's existence and decisions |
+| `owns` | `owned-by` | is accountable for the target's existence and decisions |
+| `owned-by` | `owns` | has in the target the one accountable for its existence and decisions |
 | `authored` | — | created the target as a one-time act |
+| `involves` | — | takes the target in as a participant, without naming its role |
+| `staffed-by` | — | is carried out, in part, by the target's work |
+| `consults` | — | draws on the target's judgment without the target carrying the work |
+| `informs` | — | keeps the target informed, without the target taking part |
 | `alternative-to` | itself | serves the same purpose as the target, so a reader choosing between them wants both |
 
 `uses` versus `depends-on` is the distinction worth keeping sharp: if removing the target breaks
@@ -141,6 +155,23 @@ says someone answers for this thing now - so it reads false about a person who i
 gone from the project, however plainly they made it. That is the case `authored` exists for, and
 picking `owns` for it is not a weaker edge but a wrong one.
 
+`involves`, `staffed-by`, `owned-by`, `consults` and `informs` are the participation labels, and
+they are written from the other end: on the initiative, codebase or system, pointing at whoever
+takes part - `[Initiative] consults [Anna Müller]`. That is where "who is involved?" gets asked,
+and a page's own links block shows only the edges it carries. The target may be a person or an
+organization; "staffed-by Contractor GmbH" reads as true as "staffed-by Anna Müller". Four of them
+are RACI read as sentences - `staffed-by` the R, `owned-by` the A, `consults` the C, `informs`
+the I - and `involves` is the one to take when the role is not worth stating or not known.
+It is the general label of the five and the weaker one: where a RACI label is true, take it
+instead (see Decision points). `owned-by` and `staffed-by` are the pair most easily confused - the
+one answers for the outcome, the other does the work, and a single person can be both, which is
+two edges, not a choice between them.
+
+A collection authorises whichever of the five its pages need. A household wiki may run on
+`involves` and `owned-by` alone; one tracking client projects may authorise the four RACI labels
+and drop `involves`. Someone only mentioned - neither working, consulted nor informed - takes no
+edge at all (step 1).
+
 `alternative-to` versus `contrasts` versus `compares-with`: `contrasts` asserts a *difference
 worth reading both for*, `alternative-to` asserts *substitutability* - two things a reader might
 pick between for the same job. `compares-with` weighs them on named dimensions, which in this