S-19a · ACL writes the RegisterRecord to Objecten on approval (closes #149) (#151)

Closes #149.

**Outcome:** approving a registration now writes the canonical register record to the **Objecten** API as a `RegisterRecord` object, alongside the ZGW eindstatus. OpenZaak holds the process, Objecten holds the register (ADR-0028). The write goes through the ACL (§8.1) and is idempotent on the zaak id, so a replayed approval updates the existing object rather than creating a second one.

S-19 (#20) was split first (CLAUDE.md §13) — it bundled this with re-sourcing the read projection, which is now #150.

### What landed

- `IRegisterRecordGateway` + `RegisterRecord` in `Acl.Application`; `ObjectenGateway` in `Acl.Infrastructure` (static Token auth, CRS headers, objecttype resolved by name to its highest **published** version).
- `AclService.ApproveZaakAsync` writes the record after the eindstatus, keyed on the zaak UUID with the zaak's identificatie as reference.
- Compose wiring for both stacks; `ADR-0028`; demo note; PRD §15 out-of-scope line retired.

### Three things only a live stack found

Running the gateway against a real Objecten + Objecttypen pair while writing this turned up blockers CI would have hit after the fact:

1. **Objecten rejects an objecttype it has not been configured with**, by UUID — assigned at seed time by a one-shot that runs *after* Objecten's static setup_configuration. The UUID is now pinned on both sides.
2. **Objecten 500s on every write when its Notificaties config is absent** (`notifications_api_common` raises rather than skipping). Objecten → NRC has no broker, worker, kanaal or abonnement, so notifications are **disabled** rather than wired to drop every message; #150 turns them on for real.
3. **Objecttypen echoes the request Host into the objecttype `url`**, and Objecten only accepts the one matching its configured `api_root` — so the ACL must read Objecttypen at `http://objecttypen:8000`. This is why the new integration test only passes inside the compose network.

All three are recorded in ADR-0028.

### Verification

- `ObjectenGatewayIntegrationTests` (verify-acl, in-network): two writes for one id leave exactly one object with the second write's status. **Passing locally against live Objecten.**
- The **Playwright happy path** asserts, after the behandelaar approves, that Objecten holds exactly one `RegisterRecord` for *that* reference — missing, duplicated, or non-public-safe all fail.
- ACL mutation score **92.23%** (baseline 91.37%, break 90).
- `make lint` / `make unit` green locally; full-stack `make verify` runs in CI.

## Definition of Done

- [x] A linked Gitea issue exists (#149).
- [x] Failing test written and committed first.
- [x] Implementation makes the test pass.
- [x] Refactor commit follows if structure improved.
- [x] Conventional Commit messages referencing the issue (`refs #149`).
- [x] All Gitea Actions CI jobs green (run 684).
- [x] `docker compose up` from a fresh clone reaches green health checks within 3 minutes (verify-stack step 1).
- [x] Docs touched — ADR-0028, demo note, PRD §15, BACKLOG.
- [x] ADR added: `docs/architecture/adr-0028-objecten-holds-the-register.md`.
- [x] Demo note appended to `docs/demo-script.md`.
- [x] Closed by the merging PR (`closes #149`).

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)Reviewed-on: #151

docs/PRD.md

@@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ A slice is done when:
 ## 15. Out of scope for v1
 
 - OpenMetadata data governance module (v3 slice).
-- Objecten as the authoritative register record store (v2 slice — v1 uses OpenZaak zaak-eigenschappen as a placeholder).
+- ~~Objecten as the authoritative register record store~~ — **delivered** in S-19a (#149, ADR-0028); the approval path writes a `RegisterRecord` object to Objecten rather than the planned zaak-eigenschappen placeholder.
 - Production-grade Helm chart (sketch only).
 - Multi-tenancy.
 - Real outbound notifications (email/SMS) — logged to console in v1.

docs/architecture/adr-0028-objecten-holds-the-register.md

@@ -0,0 +1,174 @@
+# ADR-0028: Objecten holds the register, OpenZaak holds the process
+
+- **Status:** Accepted
+- **Date:** 2026-08-14
+- **Deciders:** Respellion engineering
+- **Slice:** S-19a (#149), first of the S-19 (#20) split
+
+## Context
+
+Until this slice the register existed only as a **derived** thing: the read projection
+rows the Event Subscriber builds from NRC zaak notifications (ADR-0008). There is no
+system anywhere that holds "who is registered" as a first-class record — drop the
+projection database and the only way back is to replay ZGW history and re-derive it.
+
+That is the wrong shape for a register. A BIG registration is a **fact about a person**
+that outlives the case that produced it: it is looked up, corrected, superseded, and
+retained on its own schedule. The zaak that produced it is a **process record** — it
+opens, moves through statussen, and closes. Storing the fact inside the process record
+(as zaak `eigenschappen`, the v1 placeholder PRD §"Registration" mentions) welds the two
+lifecycles together: the register can then never be read, retained, or corrected without
+going through the case system that happened to create it.
+
+S-18 stood up Objecten + Objecttypen and registered the public-safe `RegisterRecord`
+objecttype (ADR-0027). The open question this ADR closes: **where the authoritative
+register record lives, and who writes it.**
+
+## Decision
+
+**The register record lives in the Objecten API as a `RegisterRecord` object. OpenZaak
+keeps only the process. On approval the ACL writes both: the ZGW eindstatus, then the
+register record.**
+
+### Not zaak eigenschappen
+
+Eigenschappen are per-zaaktype, untyped strings, and readable only by walking the zaak.
+They inherit the zaak's lifecycle and its archiving regime, and they give the public
+register no queryable surface of its own. Objecten gives a JSON-schema-validated record
+(ADR-0027 makes that schema the disclosure boundary), a queryable collection, and a
+lifecycle the zaak cannot drag around with it.
+
+### The ACL writes it, not the domain or the Event Subscriber
+
+CLAUDE.md §8.1 keeps upstream Common Ground modules behind the ACL. Objecten is such a
+module, so the same rule applies: `ObjectenGateway` is the only code that talks to it,
+and the domain keeps handing the ACL nothing but a zaak URL. The alternative — having the
+Event Subscriber write the record when it sees the status notification — would make the
+register a *second* derived artefact of ZGW, which is exactly the coupling this ADR
+removes.
+
+### Two writes, converging rather than transactional
+
+Approval is now two writes across two modules, so it cannot be atomic. Both are made
+idempotent instead:
+
+- a ZGW status is an append-only log entry, so re-setting the eindstatus is harmless;
+- the register write is an **upsert keyed on the zaak id** — search Objecten for an
+  existing object with that `id`, then PATCH it or POST a new one.
+
+A caller that retries a half-failed approval therefore converges. This is the same
+eventual-consistency posture as everywhere else in the system (CLAUDE.md §2.2, §8.6),
+not an exception carved out for this path.
+
+### The objecttype is resolved by name, lazily
+
+The objecttype URL and version number are assigned by Objecttypen at seed time, so they
+cannot be pinned in config — the ACL resolves them by the configured name
+(`Acl__Objecten__ObjecttypeName`), taking the highest **published** version. This is the
+same reasoning as ADR-0021 for zaaktypen.
+
+Resolution happens on the first approval, not at startup, so the ACL needs no `depends_on`
+on Objecten and will not crash-loop when it boots ahead of the seed. A failed resolution
+is not cached, so it is retried on the next approval.
+
+- ponytail ceiling: the resolution is memoised per gateway instance, and the gateway is a
+  transient typed `HttpClient` — in practice one extra GET per approval against a
+  neighbouring container.
+- Upgrade path: lift it into a singleton cache (as `CachedZaaktypeCatalog` does for ZGW)
+  if approvals ever get hot enough for that GET to matter.
+
+### The objecttype's UUID is pinned, not server-assigned
+
+Objecten refuses to store an object whose objecttype it has not been configured with
+(`ObjectType with url=… is not configured`), and its configuration identifies an
+objecttype **by UUID** — supplied through a static `setup_configuration` file applied
+when the container starts, before the `registerrecord-init` one-shot has run.
+
+Rather than thread a seed-time UUID from one container into another's config, the UUID is
+**pinned**: `infra/objecttypen-registerrecord/register.py` creates the objecttype with a
+fixed UUID (the Objecttypen API accepts a client-supplied one), and
+`infra/objecten/setup_configuration/data.yaml` declares that same UUID. Both sides are
+declared up front, both stay idempotent, and neither has to wait for the other.
+
+The cost is a constant duplicated across two files that must be kept in step; each carries
+a comment pointing at the other.
+
+### The ACL must reach Objecttypen at the URL Objecten knows it by
+
+Objecttypen builds the `url` it returns from the request's own Host header, and Objecten
+matches an incoming object's `type` against the `api_root` it was configured with. So an
+ACL that reads Objecttypen at `http://localhost:8020` gets back a `localhost` objecttype
+URL that Objecten then rejects as "not one of the available choices" — even though it is
+the same objecttype.
+
+`Acl__Objecten__ObjecttypenBaseUrl` must therefore match Objecten's configured
+`api_root` (`http://objecttypen:8000/api/v2/`). This is the same class of constraint as
+ADR-0006's "point the ACL at OpenZaak's container IP", and it is why the Objecten
+integration tests only pass from inside the compose network.
+
+### Objecten's notifications are off for this slice
+
+Objecten publishes to a Notificaties API on every write, and `notifications_api_common`
+**raises** rather than skipping when that configuration is absent — so with no NRC wiring,
+every `POST /api/v2/objects` returns 500 after creating and rolling back the object.
+
+Objecten → NRC is not wired: there is no broker, no Celery worker, no `objecten` kanaal and
+no abonnement for it. Configuring only the client side would make writes succeed while
+every message was dropped on the floor — a delivery path that looks wired and isn't. So
+`NOTIFICATIONS_DISABLED` is set for Objecten in both compose files instead.
+
+- ponytail ceiling: Objecten emits no notifications, so nothing downstream can react to a
+  register write yet.
+- Upgrade path: S-19b (#150) needs those notifications to source the projection from
+  Objecten, and turns them on together with the broker, worker, kanaal and abonnement.
+
+## Consequences
+
+**Positive**
+
+- The register is a first-class record with its own schema, lifecycle and query surface,
+  independent of the case that produced it.
+- The disclosure boundary is enforced by Objecten's schema validation (ADR-0027), not by
+  discipline in projection code.
+- The read projection can become a cache of Objecten rather than a re-derivation of ZGW
+  (S-19b, #150).
+
+**Negative / costs**
+
+- Approval writes to two modules and is eventually consistent; a failure between them
+  leaves a zaak in eindstatus without a register record until the approval is retried.
+  Nothing repairs that automatically yet.
+- One more upstream module on the approval path, and one more dev credential
+  (`Acl__Objecten__Token`) in compose.
+- Two new hand-kept constants: the pinned objecttype UUID (two files) and the objecttype
+  name (compose + `register.py`).
+- Until S-19b lands, the public register is still read from the NRC-derived projection, so
+  the register record is written but not yet read — the two must agree.
+
+## Coupling rules touched (CLAUDE.md §8)
+
+None bent. §8.1 is extended in spirit — the ACL is the only code that talks to Objecten,
+exactly as it is the only code that talks to ZGW. The domain still passes only a zaak URL,
+and no service reaches Objecten's database.
+
+## Verification
+
+The end-to-end assertion lives in the Playwright happy path
+(`tests/e2e/registration.spec.ts`, run by `verify-e2e`): after the behandelaar approves and
+the openbaar register shows `INGESCHREVEN`, it asserts Objecten holds exactly one
+`RegisterRecord` for *that* reference, with status `INGESCHREVEN` and no field outside the
+public-safe schema.
+
+It belongs there and not in `verify-domain`, which looks like the obvious home: that check
+completes the Beoordelen task straight through Flowable REST (deliberately — it exists to
+exercise the Workflow Client's REST contract), which bypasses the domain `decide` path that
+calls the ACL. The e2e is the only check that drives a real approval.
+
+`ObjectenGatewayIntegrationTests` (`Category=Integration`, so it runs under `verify-acl`
+inside the compose network) drives the real gateway against a live Objecten + Objecttypen
+pair: two writes for the same id leave exactly one object, carrying the second write's
+status and nothing outside the public-safe schema.
+
+All three findings above — the pinned UUID, the notifications block, and the base-URL
+constraint — came out of running the gateway against those live modules while writing the
+slice, not out of CI.

docs/demo-script.md

@@ -5,6 +5,43 @@ copy-pasteable walkthrough against a local `make up` stack.
 
 ---
 
+## S-19a — approval writes the register record to Objecten (#149, ADR-0028)
+
+**Outcome:** approving a registration no longer only moves the ZGW zaak to its eindstatus — it also
+writes the canonical **register record** into the **Objecten** API. OpenZaak keeps the process,
+Objecten holds the register. The write goes through the ACL (§8.1) and is **idempotent**: replaying an
+approval updates the existing object instead of creating a second one.
+
+```bash
+# 1. Bring the stack up (Objecten, Objecttypen and the RegisterRecord objecttype come with it).
+make up
+#
+# 2. End-to-end: the walking-skeleton e2e submits, approves via the behandel portal, and then
+#    asserts Objecten holds exactly one RegisterRecord for *that* registration:
+make verify-e2e        # → "DigiD submit → … → behandelaar goedkeurt → public INGESCHREVEN"
+#
+# 3. The ACL integration test proves the same writes against a live Objecten (upsert stays one object):
+make verify-acl        # → "Writes a register record and updates it in place on a second write"
+#
+# 4. See it for yourself — every register record currently in Objecten:
+curl -s -H 'Authorization: Token 1234567890abcdef1234567890abcdef12345678' \
+     -H 'Accept-Crs: EPSG:4326' \
+     'http://localhost:8021/api/v2/objects' | python3 -m json.tool
+```
+
+Each object's `record.data` carries exactly `id`, `status`, `reference` — the schema forbids anything
+else (ADR-0027), so no personal data can reach the world-readable register even by mistake.
+
+**The path:** behandel portal → BFF → domain `BeoordeelRegistratie` → ACL `POST /statussen` → ZGW
+`resultaten` + `statussen` (the process), **then** ACL → Objecten `POST`/`PATCH /api/v2/objects` (the
+register). The objecttype URL is resolved by name from Objecttypen on first use, so nothing seed-time
+is pinned in config (ADR-0028, same reasoning as ADR-0021).
+
+**Not yet:** the public register still reads the NRC-derived projection — re-sourcing it from Objecten
+is S-19b (#150).
+
+---
+
 ## S-18c — RegisterRecord objecttype defined + registered (#141, ADR-0027)
 
 **Outcome:** a **RegisterRecord** objecttype with a **published** JSON schema is registered in the