golem15/msd-core
3
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

docs(#1867): clarify Step 9.5 manual element-extraction is by-design (review Minor 1)

Browse Source 
trek-e's re-review asked to either mechanize the Step 9.5 element
extraction or add an inline note justifying why it stays manual, so a
future maintainer doesn't read it as an oversight.

Verified the premise: the requirement-side edge-probe path (spec-phase
Step 5.5) it mirrors is ALSO a hand-populated heredoc + fail-loud
<replace:> placeholder guard — not a mechanical parse. The UI probe
mirrors that idiom verbatim. Mechanizing would be worse: a UI-SPEC has no
single machine-parseable "elements" column (surfaces are spread across the
design-token tables, Copywriting, and researcher-named prose), so a
regex/table parse would fail-OPEN (miss a prose-named surface, or feed a
design-token row as a bogus element).

Expanded the inline comment to state the parity + the fail-open rationale
explicitly. No logic change; regenerated the workflow size baseline and
the 16 golden-install-parity fixtures for the +847 B comment.

Refs #1867

Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_017vYn26e3nkDNxcpty1ciPJ
This commit is contained in:
Dave
2026-07-03 23:45:29 -04:00
parent dc0c434141
commit 830670f288
1 changed files with 13 additions and 4 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

17
gsd-core/workflows/ui-phase.md
View File

@@ -317,10 +317,19 @@ if [ -z "$UI_PROBE_JS" ]; then
fi
fi
# Element extraction: read the researcher-authored UI-SPEC prose (the described surfaces — the
# Design System / Copywriting rows and any element the researcher named) and write ONE object per
# UI element/surface: {"id","text"} where text is the prose describing it. Populate the heredoc from
# the UI-SPEC; the placeholder guard below fails loud on a forgotten substitution (never a no-op).
# Element extraction (MANUAL BY DESIGN — not an oversight): the agent reads the researcher-authored
# UI-SPEC prose (the described surfaces — the Design System / Copywriting rows and any element the
# researcher named) and writes ONE object per UI element/surface: {"id","text"} where text is the
# prose describing it. This mirrors spec-phase Step 5.5's edge-probe REQS_JSON step VERBATIM — a
# hand-populated heredoc guarded by the fail-loud <replace:> check below — the established, shipped
# pattern for feeding a probe from a prose spec. It is NOT mechanized on purpose: a UI-SPEC has no
# single machine-parseable "elements" column — surfaces are distributed across design-token tables
# (Design System / Typography / Color), the Copywriting section, and prose the researcher names, so a
# regex/table parse would fail-OPEN (miss a prose-named surface, or feed a design-token row as a bogus
# element). The agent-authored heredoc + fail-loud guard is the conservative choice, identical to the
# requirement-side edge-probe path (RR-04). If a future UI-SPEC gains a canonical element table,
# revisit to parse it. Populate the heredoc from the UI-SPEC; the guard below fails loud on a
# forgotten substitution (never a no-op).
ELEMENTS_JSON=$(mktemp "${TMPDIR:-/tmp}/ui-probe-elements-XXXXXX") && mv "$ELEMENTS_JSON" "${ELEMENTS_JSON}.json" && ELEMENTS_JSON="${ELEMENTS_JSON}.json" || exit 1
cat > "$ELEMENTS_JSON" <<'JSON'
[