WIP: trim deliberate-trade-off prose from RWM page (depends on #184 + #185)

.github/follow-ups/trim-rwm-deliberate-tradeoff.md

@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+# Follow-up: trim the "deliberate trade-off" prose from the RWM concept page
+
+**Status:** WIP, tracking only. Awaiting upstream merges.
+**Blocked by:** [#184](https://github.com/datajoint/datajoint-docs/pull/184), [#185](https://github.com/datajoint/datajoint-docs/pull/185)
+
+## What
+
+Remove the "deliberate trade-off" prose from
+`src/explanation/relational-workflow-model.md` and replace it with a short
+sentence and a link to `comparison-to-workflow-languages.md`.
+
+## Why
+
+After [#184](https://github.com/datajoint/datajoint-docs/pull/184) (expanded
+RWM intro) and [#185](https://github.com/datajoint/datajoint-docs/pull/185)
+(new deeper pages) both land, the same argument lives in two places:
+
+- RWM page: "The deliberate trade-off" subsection (introduced by #184).
+- Comparison page: a more developed treatment with concrete comparators
+  and the convertibility framing (introduced by #185).
+
+Keeping both creates drift risk and dilutes the overview page. The
+comparison page is the natural home for the developed argument; the RWM
+page should mention the trade-off briefly and link out.
+
+## How (rough outline)
+
+1. Open `src/explanation/relational-workflow-model.md` (post-#184 state).
+2. Locate the section beginning with the heading that introduces the
+   "deliberate trade-off" framing (a few paragraphs near the top half of
+   the page after the opening + four-shifts).
+3. Replace the subsection with a single tight paragraph along these lines:
+   - DataJoint accepts coupling deliberately, in exchange for one formal
+     system across data structure, computation, dependencies, and integrity.
+   - Link out: "see
+     [Comparison to Workflow Languages](comparison-to-workflow-languages.md)
+     for the structural treatment, what file-based workflows and task
+     orchestrators offer, what each omits, and when to use them together."
+4. Verify the surrounding flow still reads cleanly (the "Substrate
+   consequences" section should follow naturally).
+5. Run docs build locally (`mkdocs serve`) to check rendering.
+
+## Out of scope
+
+- No content moves in either direction other than the trim.
+- No nav changes.
+- No edits to other concept pages.
+
+## Pick-up checklist
+
+- [ ] #184 merged to `main`
+- [ ] #185 merged to `main`
+- [ ] Rebase this branch onto `main`
+- [ ] Apply the trim per outline above
+- [ ] Delete this tracker file as part of the same commit
+- [ ] Move the PR out of draft and request review