Which Task Runtime objects are required by asynchronous waiting and Join semantics?
Determine the smallest durable objects required when work waits, fans out, and later joins.
01 / Current position
A hypothesis is not the current judgment.
The dossier preserves the live research position. Dated articles preserve the complete evidence and argument that changed it.
A thin set of durable dependency edges, wait conditions, Join policy, and Ready Frontier state is sufficient; scheduling and workflow authoring can remain outside the core contracts.
Open. Round 1 showed that mature workflow engines can carry durable work mechanics, but no interrupted fan-out and fan-in workload has yet proved which semantic Join facts must remain visible above those mechanics.
02 / Decision boundary
What keeps this Question alive?
Without explicit waiting and Join semantics, a Host or Runtime will hide continuity inside process state, polling loops, or a workflow engine it does not own.
Run one real Task that fans out across replaceable workers, waits through interruption, and joins without reconstructing admitted state.
If existing Task, Job, Outcome, workflow state, and typed relation objects express waiting and Join behavior without ambiguity or hidden durable facts, add nothing.
03 / Supporting publications
Complete arguments connected to this Question.
0 dated publications currently document this research line.
04 / Source discipline
The dossier is an index, not the evidence authority.
Owns the current judgment, next test, and deletion condition.
Own complete dated arguments, limitations, comparisons, and source links.
Own exact code, tests, releases, receipts, and machine evidence.