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 +1,4 @@
# 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.