Set up source-grounded frontend research workflows with infospace-bench

Assistant: codex
Assistant-Model: gpt-6-astra
Assistant-Session: 01a0cffe-206f-7323-89d3-b20ca4cf4bf9
This commit is contained in:
tegwick 2026-09-24 09:47:22 +02:00
parent debf9e0aa0
commit fc8a7dbb49
40 changed files with 1947 additions and 8 deletions

View file

@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
# Local Draft State
## Definition
Keep a draft near the interaction while distinguishing it from committed data.
## Candidate Identity
P01; family affordance; scale L6; status draft; maturity hypothesis; evidence_kind synthetic.
## Context
An interrupted form session awaiting server acceptance.
## Problem
How can input remain intelligible before server confirmation?
## Forces
Interaction continuity improves; divergence-handling complexity increases.
## Solution
Hold a draft locally and display its uncommitted status.
## Dynamics
Submission may move from pending to rejected or accepted.
## Resulting Context
The application must decide retry, reconciliation and recovery behavior.
## Consequences
The user can keep typing but must understand what has actually been saved.
## Failure Modes
Confusing a local draft with committed data; losing a draft on restart.
## Source Evidence
C01 and C02; source/source.md, Scenario and Trade-off, paragraph 1.
## Counterevidence
This synthetic scenario establishes neither recurrence nor durability.
## Review Notes
Hypothesis only. No known uses. Do not promote from fixture evidence.

View file

@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
# Synthetic claims
| Claim | Locator | Paraphrase | Interpretation |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| C01 | source/source.md, Scenario, paragraph 1 | Draft input remains visible during an outage within the current session. | Local draft state may support continuity. |
| C02 | source/source.md, Trade-off, paragraph 1 | Continuity adds divergence-handling obligations. | A force trade-off, not proof of recurrence. |
Evidence kind: synthetic. No claims of persistence after restart or known uses.

View file

@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
# Synthetic source review
Reviewer: fixture; mode: assisted self-review simulation; evidence_kind: synthetic.
| Criterion | Outcome | Evidence |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Traceability | pass | P01 points to C01/C02 and original source sections. |
| Competing forces | pass | Scenario continuity versus Trade-off divergence handling. |
| Recurrence | unknown | A fictional case supplies no independent known uses. |
| Relations | pass | No absent endpoints or invented pattern dependencies. |
| VC-01 applicability | unknown | A full transaction walkthrough remains pending. |
| VC-02 applicability | revise | Source explicitly provides no restart persistence. |
Disposition: retain draft for plumbing only. Research admission requires primary
sources, independent uses and separate scenario walkthroughs. No canon promotion.

View file

@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
# Synthetic relation proposals
No pattern-to-pattern relations are justified: only P01 exists. Server acceptance
is a contextual prerequisite, not an invented second pattern. Evidence: C01/C02.

View file

@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
responses:
- stage_id: claims
input_artifact_id: source/source.md
markdown_path: claims.md
provider: fixture
metadata:
evidence_kind: synthetic
purpose: pipeline verification only
- stage_id: candidates
input_artifact_id: source/source.md
markdown_path: candidates.md
provider: fixture
metadata:
evidence_kind: synthetic
purpose: pipeline verification only
- stage_id: relations
input_artifact_id: source/source.md
markdown_path: relations.md
provider: fixture
metadata:
evidence_kind: synthetic
purpose: pipeline verification only
- stage_id: critique
input_artifact_id: source/source.md
markdown_path: critique.md
provider: fixture
metadata:
evidence_kind: synthetic
purpose: pipeline verification only

View file

@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
---
title: Synthetic interrupted form scenario
author: frontend-patterns test fixture
locator: repository:research/bench/fixtures/source.md
version: '2026-09-24'
accessed: '2026-09-24'
evidence_kind: synthetic
---
# Synthetic interrupted form scenario
## Scenario
A user types into a form while the server is unreachable. The draft remains
visible in the current session. On reconnect, the server can reject submission.
The interface shows pending and rejected states separately from committed data.
## Trade-off
Keeping drafts near the interaction improves continuity but requires explicit
handling of divergence from accepted server data. This fictional example does
not establish recurrence, persistence after restart or accessibility compliance.