mAi
4472faf224
Read-only audit of the t-paliad-207 surface per paliadin's 2026-05-20 re-engage instruction. Six commits shipped under this task are now merged. Two larger follow-ups (m/paliad#39 youpc-laws ingest + #41 DE combined timeline) are filed with concrete scope. Remaining tail is optional polish, best handled as discrete issues rather than a parked inventor.
53 lines
5.3 KiB
Markdown
53 lines
5.3 KiB
Markdown
# t-paliad-207 follow-up scope — close-out assessment
|
||
|
||
**Author:** fermi (inventor)
|
||
**Date:** 2026-05-20
|
||
**Verdict:** **(A) DONE** — interactive session scope is shipped; remaining tail is filed-or-fileable as discrete issues, not a fresh fermi slice.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## 0. What shipped under t-paliad-207
|
||
|
||
Six substantive deliveries on `mai/fermi/interactive-session`, all merged to main as of 2026-05-20 morning:
|
||
|
||
1. **Verfahrensablauf + Fristenrechner polish** — jurisdiction prefix on the picked proceeding, trigger-event label derived from the root rule, flag rows lifted to `/tools/verfahrensablauf`, rule references rendered as `youpc.org/laws#…` links via new `BuildLegalSourceURL`, `Vorab-Einrede → Einspruch` rename (DE i18n).
|
||
2. **DE proceeding picker — sub-group headers** (`Verletzungsverfahren` / `Nichtigkeitsverfahren`) + parallel labels (`LG (1. Instanz)` / `OLG (Berufung)` / …).
|
||
3. **mig 099** — drop the `with_po` flag from the two RoP 19 rules (Einspruch is always-available, not flag-gated).
|
||
4. **mig 100** — `upc.inf.cfi.ccr` visible rule (`Nichtigkeitswiderklage`) so the CCR filing event surfaces when `with_ccr` is set; later corrected to `priority='optional'` via mig 101.
|
||
5. **mig 101** — strip rule-cite brackets from the two Einspruch names + flip the CCR priority `informational → optional`.
|
||
6. **mig 102** — track-aware sequence reshuffle on `upc.inf.cfi` so at any tied date the order is infringement (Replik) → revocation (Erwiderung Nichtigkeitswiderklage) → amendment.
|
||
7. **Notes toggle** — `Hinweise anzeigen` checkbox in the view-toggle bar; compact ⓘ hover hint when off (default), inline `timeline-notes` block when on. `localStorage` shared across both tool pages.
|
||
|
||
Filed two follow-up issues during the session:
|
||
|
||
- **m/paliad#39** — link DE + EPA + EU rule references to `youpc.org/laws` (depends on youpc.org ingesting the corpus).
|
||
- **m/paliad#41** — DE proceedings as one combined timeline per type (LG→OLG→BGH, BPatG→BGH) — corpus + spawn + de-duplication + multi-instance UI.
|
||
|
||
## 1. Why (A) DONE
|
||
|
||
Every concrete thing m surfaced in the session was addressed and merged. The two larger unaddressed asks — combined-timeline behaviour for DE proceedings, and DE/EPA rule-link coverage — are already captured in #39 and #41 with concrete scope notes. Neither belongs as a fermi "next slice" because:
|
||
|
||
- **#41** is a corpus + UI design pass of its own (3 new spawn rules, de-duplication of the existing `de.inf.lg.berufung ↔ de.inf.olg.berufung` pair, multi-court picker shape, instance markers in the timeline body). That's its own design ticket, not a fermi follow-up.
|
||
- **#39** is primarily a youpc.org-side ingest task; the paliad-side change is a 5-line `switch` extension once youpc serves the URLs. Wait for the dependency, then small.
|
||
|
||
Everything else I surfaced in the read-only audit is either pre-existing (not introduced by this session) or speculative (no user complaint behind it).
|
||
|
||
## 2. Optional tail — would file as discrete issues, not a fermi slice
|
||
|
||
Surfacing these for completeness; none are blocking, and most would be small enough to either roll into the existing tickets or land as one-off polish:
|
||
|
||
| # | Candidate | Size | Already covered? |
|
||
|---|---|---|---|
|
||
| 1 | **`legal_source` backfill on 47 unsourced active rules** — query: 4 of `upc.inf.cfi`, 4 of `upc.pi.cfi` (100% gap), 6 of `upc.rev.cfi`, others. Pre-condition for #39's links to bite. | Medium — corpus research per rule | Partially: huygens did the broader citation backfill in t-paliad-208 / mig 097. This is the remaining tail. |
|
||
| 2 | **`upc.pi.cfi` corpus completeness audit** — all 4 of its rules lack `legal_source`; likely also missing the analogous track-of-decision spawn rules to `upc.apl.merits`. | Small audit, medium fix | No — would be a fresh task. |
|
||
| 3 | **Touch-device fallback for the ⓘ hover hint** — `title=` attribute degrades poorly on phones (no hover, no tap-to-show). Either a click-to-popover variant, or accept the gap. | Tiny | No, but no user complaint yet. |
|
||
| 4 | **R.46 mutatis-mutandis distinction in `upc.rev.cfi.prelim` description** — when mig 101 stripped the `(R. 19 i.V.m. R. 46)` cite, the legal nuance dropped from the user-visible name. Could be surfaced in the description text where it doesn't crowd the timeline cell. | Tiny (one row update) | No. |
|
||
| 5 | **Save-modal warning on SoD + CCR double-check** — with mig 100's new `upc.inf.cfi.ccr` rule, a user can save both `sod` and `ccr` from the same modal and get two `paliad.deadlines` rows on the same date. Today's pre-uncheck behaviour for optional priority mitigates accidental double-write but doesn't surface the duplication actively. | Small | No. |
|
||
| 6 | **Deferred slices from earlier design docs that touch this surface**: t-paliad-179 Slice 2-4 (variant chips, lane view, side-by-side compare on `/tools/verfahrensablauf`); t-paliad-169 "+ Eintrag" CTA on the SmartTimeline (project-bound) path. | Each a separate slice. | Yes — parked from their original tasks; would be revisited when m prioritises. |
|
||
|
||
None of these warrant a "next fermi slice" right now. They're polish + corpus tail, and best handled as individual issues that m can pick from.
|
||
|
||
## 3. Recommendation
|
||
|
||
Close t-paliad-207. Fire fermi. The remaining tail (items 1–6 above) is appropriate as a small "polish backlog" m can dip into when relevant, but not a coherent unit of work that needs a parked inventor.
|