Feature documents are keyed on domain and name, discarding their scope

[goloroden]

What is this bug about?

A feature is about exactly one consistency unit - the given-when-then schema says so outright, and the variant discriminator inside its scope names that unit: an aggregate, a dynamic consistency boundary, a process manager, or a read model.

The resolver ignores all of that. Extension documents are keyed on domain/name, discarding the rest of the scope. Two features named happy-path about two different aggregates are consequently rejected as duplicates:

$ esdm lint
error: esdm/structure/duplicate-name
  at model.esdm.yaml:102:7
  duplicate feature "happy-path"
  note: first defined here (model.esdm.yaml:85:7)

Both features are lint-clean on their own, target different units, and occupy different positions. Nothing about them is duplicate except the truncated key. The practical effect is that the natural naming pattern - one happy-path per unit - is unavailable, and modelers have to disambiguate by hand (order-happy-path, invoice-happy-path).

esdm view truncates the same way: a feature is attached under the domain, as a sibling of subdomains and process managers, even though its scope names a unit two levels deeper.

This is the exact inverse of #19. There, two elements of different kinds at the same position are not recognized as a collision. Here, two elements of the same kind at different positions are merged into one. Both come from the same root cause: the position is not derived from the element's own scope.

domain-story is unaffected - it is genuinely domain-scoped, so domain/name is its correct position.

What needs to be done to fix this bug?

• Write a failing test: two features with the same name targeting different consistency units must both resolve, and must not produce a duplicate-name diagnostic.
• Derive the composite key for given-when-then documents from the full scope, including the variant's unit, instead of truncating to domain/name. Leave domain-storytelling documents keyed by domain, which is correct for them.
• Render a feature under the consistency unit its scope names, rather than under the domain, and move the feat counter from the domain's stats line to the unit's.
• Check the rules that resolve feature scopes against the model for the same truncation.

What else should we know?

• This widens what is accepted rather than narrowing it, so existing models stay valid. What changes visibly is where a feature appears in esdm view.
• Once fixed, a feature becomes addressable at its unit position, which matters for Provide a stable reference notation for model elements so external documents can link to them #8, and it joins commands and events as a kind that can sit at that position, which matters for the checklist in Reject two model elements at the same position that share a name #19.
• Found while investigating a comment on Reject two model elements at the same position that share a name #19. esdm view does not render entities and free-standing events #36 and Publisher resolution is rebuilt twice and wrong in both copies #37 are the other two findings from the same investigation; esdm view does not render entities and free-standing events #36 touches the same builder, so if both land close together they need coordinating.