-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
data model
This page describes the project file format, the in-memory data structures, and the full lifecycle from loading to saving.
A project is a single JSON file with this shape:
config.ai defaults to true. When false, the ✦ AI button is disabled (with a hover note that
the provider turned it off); the loader reads it into Project.aiEnabled, and serializeProject
writes it back only when disabled, so a normal file stays clean. The project editor edits it as a
checkbox.
config.reviewers defaults to 1 (single-reviewer — every paper carries one annotations tree
and nobody picks a reviewer). A value from 2 to 10 turns on independent multi-reviewer annotation:
each reviewer 1..N annotates into their own tree (Paper.reviews["N"]), and a built-in
Consolidation role (not counted in reviewers) reconciles them into Paper.annotations, which
remains the single, final result — see "Multiple reviewers & Consolidation" below.
serializeProject/buildProjectJson write config.reviewers only when it is greater than 1, so a
single-reviewer file is unaffected byte-for-byte. The project editor edits it as a checkbox +
number field next to the AI opt-out.
Each schema node defines a field or group in the taxonomy:
| Property | Required | Default | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
name |
yes | — | Display label; must be unique among siblings |
type |
no | (group) |
"string" | "number" | "boolean". Omit for a name-only group node |
children |
no | [] |
Sub-taxonomy. A node may have type, children, or both |
min |
no | 1 |
Minimum occurrences |
max |
no | 1 |
Max occurrences: a positive integer, or null for unbounded |
options |
no | — | Array of strings on a string field → renders as a filterable enum dropdown (ComboBox). Only valid when type is "string"
|
description |
no | — | Optional tooltip text |
Validation rules (enforced by zod in annotationDefSchema):
-
namemust be a non-empty string -
maxmust be ≥min(whenmaxis notnull) - A node must have a
typeor non-emptychildren(a name-only node with neither is rejected) -
optionsis only allowed on atype: "string"node; using it on any other type (or a group) is a schema error - Sibling names must be unique (enforced during resolution, not zod)
{
"id": "paper-a", // unique across all papers
"title": "…",
"authors": ["…"], // defaults to []
"doi": "10.1000/xyz", // optional
"abstract": "…", // optional; what screening reads when there is no PDF (see "Screening" below)
"pdf": "pdfs/paper-a.pdf", // path relative to the project JSON file; "" only valid in a screening project
"annotations": {}, // the consolidated result — filled in as you annotate
"reviews": { // optional; each independent reviewer's own tree, multi-reviewer only
"1": { /* AnnotationValueTree */ },
"2": { /* AnnotationValueTree */ }
},
// any other keys preserved verbatim on save
}The samples/project.example.json file shows a complete working example with a schema containing boolean, string, number, repeatable group, and bounded group nodes.
When a project is loaded, raw AnnotationDef[] are resolved into ResolvedDef[] via resolveSchema(). Resolution:
- Applies defaults:
min→1,max→1(if undefined) - Assigns a stable
idderived from the node's path (slash-joined names, e.g."Findings/Claim") - Enforces sibling-name uniqueness (throws
SchemaError) - Passes through
options(if present) for enum string fields - Recursively resolves
children
interface Project {
version: number
title?: string
schema: ResolvedDef[]
aiEnabled: boolean // config.ai; true unless the file opts out
reviewers: number // config.reviewers; 1 (default) = single-reviewer
papers: Paper[]
screening: ScreeningConfig | null // config.screening; see "Screening" below
extra: Record<string, unknown> // unknown top-level fields preserved
}
interface Paper {
id: string
title: string
authors: string[]
doi?: string
abstract?: string // what screening reads when there is no PDF; ordinary metadata otherwise
abstractFromPdf?: boolean // true when `abstract` was PDF-extracted, not authored; see "Screening" below
pdf: string
annotations: AnnotationValueTree // the single/consolidated result — unchanged in meaning
reviews: Record<string, AnnotationValueTree> // each reviewer's own tree, keyed "1".."N"; {} if single-reviewer
aiUsage: AiUsageRecord[] // AI-assisted-annotation disclosure log, oldest first; [] if never used
extra: Record<string, unknown> // unknown per-paper fields preserved
}
interface AiUsageRecord {
provider: string // e.g. "anthropic" — the provider id, not its display label
model: string // exactly as configured, e.g. "claude-opus-4-8"
appliedAt: string // ISO 8601 timestamp of the Apply click
}Annotation data mirrors the schema. At each level it is a map keyed by node name; every key holds an array of instances (length bounded by min/max):
interface AnnotationValueTree {
[nodeName: string]: InstanceNode[]
}
interface InstanceNode {
value?: FieldValue // present if the node is a field (has a type)
children?: AnnotationValueTree // present if the node has children
}
type FieldValue = string | number | boolean | nullExample annotation tree for the sample schema:
{
"Relevant": [{ value: true }],
"Study Type": [{ value: "RCT" }],
"Year": [{ value: 2021 }],
"Findings": [
{ children: {
"Claim": [{ value: "X improves Y" }],
"Evidence": [{ value: "Section 4" }],
"Confidence": [{ value: 4 }]
}},
{ children: {
"Claim": [{ value: "Z reduces W" }],
"Evidence": [{ value: "Table 2" }],
"Confidence": [{ value: 3 }]
}}
]
}
An SLR is normally annotated by ≥2 reviewers independently, then reconciled into one final
answer. config.reviewers (≥2) turns this on:
- Each numbered reviewer 1..N reads and writes their own tree,
Paper.reviews["N"]—AnnotationValueTree, same shape asannotations. Present as a full, normalized-empty skeleton from the moment the project is loaded (normalizeReviewsinproject.ts), for every reviewer 1..N whether or not they have written anything — not created lazily on first write.currentTree'screatepath still exists and still lazily normalizes a genuinely-missing tree, as a defensive fallback; it just no longer does the routine work, since load already has. -
Paper.annotationskeeps its existing meaning unchanged: the single/consolidated result. In a single-reviewer project it is the only tree there is; in a multi-reviewer project it is what the built-in Consolidation role writes — the final, agreed answer, and the only treevalidateProject,hasAnnotations, and any future export read. - Consolidation is not one of the N reviewers (it is not counted in
config.reviewers) — it is a distinct role that compares every reviewer's answer for a field and picks the one that ships.
Lowering config.reviewers doesn't delete data — it makes it unreachable. parseReviews
(src/model/project.ts) keeps any reviews key matching a reviewer number regardless of the
current config.reviewers, and serializeProject writes back every key present in Paper.reviews,
not just 1..N. So a reviewer's tree above the current count round-trips through load/save
untouched — normalizeReviews (below) only ever adds missing keys 1..N, it never removes one
outside that range. What changes is reachability: the Toolbar reviewer switch only offers seats
1..config.reviewers, so currentTree is never invoked for a higher one — it can't be selected,
edited, or (via runValidation) validated — and alignConsolidationNode/adoptUnanimousValues
(both in store.ts) loop 1..project.reviewers, excluding it from matching and unanimous-value
adoption too — both also now check hasAnnotations, not mere tree presence, since every in-range
reviewer has a tree from load regardless of whether they have written anything. Raising
config.reviewers again makes the same tree reachable, unchanged.
Routing. currentTree(project, currentReviewer, paper) in src/state/store.ts is the single
place this is decided: single-reviewer → paper.annotations; Consolidation → paper.annotations;
a numbered reviewer → paper.reviews[N]; multi-reviewer with nobody picked yet → null (nothing
to read or write — an unattributed edit must never land in the shipped tree). Every store action
that touches annotation data (setFieldValue, addInstance, removeInstance,
applyAiSuggestions, runValidation) routes through this, so "which paper" and "which reviewer"
are independent selections: switching reviewer never changes the selected paper, and vice versa.
Reviewer selection (currentReviewer: string | null in the store — "1".."N" or the literal
"consolidation") is a view switch, not an edit: it is not an undo step and does not set
dirty. It defaults to null (unselected) on load for a multi-reviewer project — never silently
to Reviewer 1 — and is persisted per project in localStorage, keyed by the project's save-handle
path, so reopening the same file returns to the same seat.
AI marks are reviewer-scoped too. aiMarkKey(paperId, canonicalPath, reviewer) folds the
active reviewer into the key for a multi-reviewer project (a single-reviewer project's keys are
unaffected — passing null reproduces the original two-part form), so Reviewer 1's "the AI wrote
this" borders never bleed onto Reviewer 2's copy of the same field.
Serialization stays clean for a single-reviewer project. config.reviewers is written only
when > 1, and Paper.reviews stays {} — omitted entirely — since annotations alone carries
the data there, exactly as before this feature existed. For a multi-reviewer project,
Paper.reviews is now always written (see "The empty skeleton is real data" below) — every
reviewer's tree is pruned the same way annotations is, but the key itself is never omitted just
because a reviewer hasn't written anything.
A freshly-created paper's annotations — and, in a multi-reviewer project, every reviewer's
reviews["N"] — is written to disk as the full normalized skeleton: every field present, at
its schema minimum, holding null/false, not {} and not an absent key. This is deliberate,
and it is for something specific: a reviewer's first real annotation then changes a value on a
line that was already there for every other paper and reviewer, rather than adding a brand-new
key. That is what makes a git diff of one reviewer's work legible on its own, and what makes a
git merge of two reviewers' independently-annotated copies of the same file tractable instead of
a near-guaranteed conflict on the shape of the JSON itself, on top of whatever the reviewers
actually disagree about.
It now has a second consumer, and the relationship deserves stating correctly rather than
flatteringly. SaiLoR's own git support (see "Merging two copies of a project" below and
architecture.md's "Git" section) does not rely on git's line-based merge to succeed — its
Pull reads the three revisions of the project file and reconciles them field by field over the
parsed project, so its correctness never depended on the file's line structure to begin with. The
skeleton was not made redundant by that; it is still doing its original two jobs, and both still
matter: it is what makes a plain git diff of one reviewer's work legible on its own, and it is
what makes a plain git merge — run from the command line, or by any tool that is not SaiLoR —
tractable rather than a conflict on the shape of the JSON, on top of whatever the reviewers actually
disagree about.
Two pieces make this hold in practice:
-
pruneTree(src/model/annotations.ts) only drops trailing empties, never an interior gap, and never below a node'smin. Given an already-normalized (all-empty) tree, it is a no-op — see its own doc comment; this is also why consolidation's entry-matching survives a save/reload round-trip (src/consolidate/apply.ts), which depends on the same interior-gap guarantee. -
normalizeReviews(src/model/project.ts) backfills a normalized-empty tree for every reviewer1..config.reviewerswho doesn't already have one, on load — not on save, and not lazily on first write (see "Multiple reviewers" above).loadProject's existingnormalizeTree(schema, p.annotations)call already did the equivalent forannotations; this closes the same gap forreviews.
A file that doesn't have this shape yet is migrated automatically, and re-saved.
needsShapeMigration(project, rawText) (project.ts) re-parses the raw text and structurally
compares (deepEqualJson — order-independent for object keys, order-sensitive for arrays, i.e.
JSON's own equality, never a text/string comparison) each paper's annotations/reviews against
what saving right now would produce. loadFromText (store.ts) checks this immediately after
loadProject and, if true, writes the migrated shape back through getPlatform().saveProject —
but only when there is somewhere safe and unsurprising to write it: a real in-place handle
('electron' or 'fsapi'), never 'download' (which would trigger a browser file download the
instant a project is opened) and never a bare null handle (a ?project= URL, or a browser pick
with no persistent handle — the project is simply held in its migrated, better shape in memory,
which converges again harmlessly next time it's opened). The write is fire-and-forget; on success
saveHandle is refreshed the same way an ordinary save updates it, on failure the project is
marked dirty so the ordinary unsaved-changes guard — not an alarming banner for a fix nobody
asked for — eventually gets it saved.
needsShapeMigration deliberately compares parsed values, not the canonical re-serialization's
text against the raw file's text: serializeProject always pretty-prints with its own key order,
so a text comparison would flag equal-but-differently-formatted (or merely differently-indented)
files as needing migration too — precisely the kind of file every hand-written test fixture in this
codebase is, which is how this got caught. The comparison is scoped to exactly annotations and
reviews; nothing else about a file's formatting or unrelated content is examined.
interface ScreeningConfig {
reasons: string[] // non-empty, trimmed, deduped by project.ts; order is the order reported
}config.screening's presence — reflected in Project.screening: ScreeningConfig | null — is what
makes a project a screening project. config.schema is not the source of truth for one: it is a
derived projection of screening.reasons, produced by screeningSchemaDefs()
(src/screening/schema.ts):
[
{ "name": "Decision", "type": "string", "options": ["Include", "Exclude"] },
{ "name": "Reason", "type": "string", "options": ["Wrong topic", "Duplicate", "…"] }
]Lifecycle step, not a one-off transform. loadProject derives this schema fresh from
raw.config.screening on every load and never reads raw.config.schema for a screening
project (raw.config.schema! is used only in the non-screening branch, where the zod superRefine
guarantees it is present). serializeProject writes the same derived projection back out on
every save. There is no code path in which a screening project's config.schema in the file
and screeningSchemaDefs(project.screening) can disagree once the file has been re-saved by this
app — a hand-edited config.schema in a screening project's file is simply overwritten on the next
save, never read.
pdf may be "", but only here. paperSchema.pdf is z.string().default(''); the
"non-empty" requirement moved out of the field-level zod schema and into projectSchema's
superRefine, which — able to see whether config.screening is set — only enforces it for a
non-screening paper. A screening project built from a reference-manager export routinely has no
PDFs at all yet, so relaxing this only there (never for an ordinary project) is what makes that
workflow possible without weakening the check everywhere else.
screeningStatus(tree) (src/screening/status.ts) reads the tri-state a screening decision
actually has:
Decision value |
Status |
|---|---|
"Include" |
included |
"Exclude" |
excluded |
anything else — null, missing, a non-array node, an unrecognised string |
undecided |
The last row is deliberate and conservative: the file is hand-editable, and an unrecognised
decision is not a decision — it must never be misread as excluded (which would silently drop the
paper from an import) or as included (which would silently claim a paper was screened when it
was not). undecided is the only safe default for anything this function cannot make sense of.
screeningCounts() (src/screening/counts.ts) is the total/included/excluded/undecided +
per-reason breakdown behind ScreeningSummary; it reads through the same seat routing
currentTree uses (reimplemented locally as seatTree, to keep src/screening/ free of a
state/store.ts import — the same precedent consolidate/readiness.ts and
consolidate/disagreements.ts already set). pendingUnanimous() counts papers every reviewer
decided identically that Consolidation has not adopted yet (see the architecture page's "Screening"
section for why that gap exists).
abstractFromPdf is a durable disclosure, the same idea aiUsage embodies for AI-assisted
annotation, applied to a basic text heuristic instead of a model. Paper.abstract can be filled
by a heuristic that reads a PDF's own text (pdfMeta.ts's abstractFromLines — find the "Abstract"
heading and follow its column to the next section) rather than by a human or a reference-manager export,
and when it is, abstractFromPdf: true is written into the file right alongside it — never a
session-only flag, so a co-reviewer opening the file later sees the same "unverified, check the PDF
if in doubt" warning the extracting session did. loadProject drops the flag whenever abstract
itself is empty (a flag with nothing to describe is meaningless, most likely a stale or hand-edited
file), and a later reference-manager import is the one thing allowed to overwrite an
abstractFromPdf-flagged value — every other paper field a reviewer might have typed is left
alone. See the architecture page's "A missing abstract is extracted from the PDF, and flagged
durably" for the full design (both call sites, and why this writes immediately rather than behind a
confirmation step the way AI suggestions do).
src/git/merge.ts's mergeProjects(base, ours, theirs) is a three-way merge over three parsed
Projects — not over the file's text — driven by git's Pull. This is the data-model view of what
it does; architecture.md's "Git" section covers the plumbing that gets it there.
The identity a field is merged under is (paper id, tree, canonical field path). canonical is
formatPath's form (src/llm/paths.ts), e.g. "Findings[1]/Claim" — but the path alone is not
sufficient: the identical path exists once in annotations and once in every reviews[N], so
which tree it lives in ({kind:'annotations'}, {kind:'review', reviewer:'2'}, {kind:'paper'} for
title/pdf/doi/authors, or {kind:'project'} for the project's own title) is part of the key. Two
conflicts on the same canonical path in different trees are different conflicts.
The one rule: a side that did not change a value away from the merge base does not get a vote on it. A field only one side changed takes that side's value automatically; a field both sides changed to the same thing is not a conflict either; only a field both sides changed to different things becomes one — the one case nothing but a person can settle. This is exactly the guarantee the feature exists to make: pulling can never silently discard a reviewer's own change to a field the remote never touched.
Absent reads as empty. A field with no instance at that index reads the same as an instance whose
value is the schema's empty value (null/false) — required because pruneTree already treats
those two as the same thing on disk (see above), so a merge that told them apart would treat a field
one side simply hasn't reached yet as a conflict against a value the other side actually wrote. This
is also what makes instance removal need no special handling at all: an entry one side deleted
reads as all-empty on that side, the field-level rule takes the empties (since the other side didn't
change it either), and the ordinary trailing-empty prune drops the now-trailing instance on the next
save — deletion falls out of the same rule that handles an ordinary edit.
Papers merge by id, in ours' own order followed by the papers only theirs has (in theirs' order). A paper one side deleted and the other side changed is kept, with a note — a field-level UI has no way to ask "keep or delete this whole paper", and the two failure directions are not symmetric (an unwanted kept paper is one click from gone; deleted annotated work is simply gone). Only when the side that kept the paper made no actual change to it does the deletion go through.
reviews is never deleted by a merge — only by both sides having already dropped a reviewer's
key, the same rule normalizeReviews already applies when config.reviewers is lowered (see above).
A reviewer's tree is someone's labour, which is why this is treated differently from a paper: a
project's papers are the project author's call; a reviewer's answers are not anyone else's to delete
by implication.
Paper.aiUsage is a union, not a three-way merge, and does not consult the base: it is an
append-only disclosure log with no delete operation the app exposes, so a record either side still
holds must survive regardless of what the merge base looked like — three-way logic could otherwise
drop a genuine disclosure and misreport how AI was used on a paper.
Paper.equal is a set, merged per-path the same way an ordinary field is (merge3<boolean> on
"does this path's mark include this reviewer's declaration"). A boolean has only two values, so "both
sides changed it, differently" cannot happen — a mark can never conflict.
What refuses, rather than guessing. A change to version, config.schema, config.ai,
config.reviewers, config.screening, or a root/paper extra key, made differently on both sides,
refuses the whole merge and names what could not be reconciled, instead of picking a field-level
answer for something that reshapes the file — most obviously the schema (and, for the same reason,
config.screening: whether a project screens at all, or its reason list, decides config.schema via
screeningSchemaDefs, so a difference there reshapes the file exactly as directly authoring a
different schema would). Project.title is not on this list: it is an ordinary string, a conflict
row expresses it perfectly, and refusing a whole merge over two people renaming the review would be
absurd.
Testing: src/git/merge.test.ts builds every base/ours/theirs through the real loadProject
(never a hand-assembled Project), so fixtures are exactly as schema-normalized and
empty-skeleton-shaped as mergeProjects' real caller hands it — and pins the field-level guarantee,
the interior-gap and instance-removal invariants, the multi-reviewer case, every refusal, and a full
serializeProject/loadProject round-trip of a resolved merge.
- Parse JSON text (or accept pre-parsed object)
- Validate against
projectSchema(zod) — rejects malformed structure withProjectLoadErrorcontaining friendly details -
resolveSchema(screening ? screeningSchemaDefs(screening) : raw.config.schema)— applies defaults, assigns ids, enforces uniqueness. For a screening project the schema is derived fromconfig.screening.reasons, never read fromconfig.schema— see "Screening" above - Check for duplicate paper IDs
- For each paper:
normalizeTree(schema, p.annotations)— reconcile annotation data against the schema - For each paper of a multi-reviewer project:
normalizeReviews(p.reviews, schema, reviewerCount)— the same reconciliation per reviewer's tree, plus a fresh empty one for every reviewer1..Nwho doesn't have one yet (see "The empty skeleton is real data" above) - Extract
extrafields (unknown keys at root and per-paper level) for preservation
Reconciles an existing (possibly partial or loaded) value tree against the schema:
- Drop keys not in the schema
-
Coerce each present instance's structure to the def (ensure
valuefor fields,childrenfor groups) -
Pad up to
max(min, 1)instances with freshmakeInstance()calls -
Clamp down to
maxif exceeded
makeInstance(def) builds a single fresh instance: emptyValue() for fields, initTree(def.children) for children. initTree(defs) creates max(min, 1) instances per sibling.
The store actions setFieldValue, addInstance, and removeInstance mutate the annotation tree via immer. They navigate to the correct container using containerAt(root, path) which follows a PathSeg[] path (name + index pairs). Each mutation sets dirty = true and pushes an undo snapshot onto the store's past stack (consecutive edits to the same field coalesce into one step) — see undo() / redo() in the architecture page.
Cardinality guards:
-
canAdd(def, current)— true ifdef.max === nullorcurrent < def.max -
canRemove(def, current)— true ifcurrent > max(def.min, 1)
Called during serialization. For each node:
- Keep the first
max(min, 1)instances unconditionally - Drop the empty instances trailing the end of the list (so saved files stay tidy)
- Keep an empty instance that has a filled one after it — position carries meaning. Consolidation
records which of each reviewer's entries are the same entry by lining their lists up
(
src/consolidate/apply.ts), and a reviewer with no entry for the second slot holds an empty one there. Closing that gap would slide every later entry down a slot and silently re-point the alignment on the next load - An instance is "empty" (
isEmptyInstance) if its field value is falsy (boolean:false; others:null/undefined/"") AND all recursive children are empty
- Spread
project.extra(unknown top-level fields first) - Write
version,config(dehydrated schema),papers - For each paper: spread
paper.extra, write known fields, thenpruneTree(schema, annotations) -
dehydrateSchema()convertsResolvedDef[]back to compactAnnotationDef[](omits defaults:min: 1,max: 1are not written back) - Output is
JSON.stringify(out, null, 2)— pretty-printed with 2-space indent
ProjectLoadError (src/model/project.ts) extends Error with a details: string[] array. It is thrown for:
- Invalid JSON
- Zod validation failures (issues mapped to
"path: message"strings) - Schema resolution errors (duplicate names, max < min, no type/children)
- Duplicate paper IDs
The store catches these and sets loadError state, which ErrorPanel displays as a modal overlay.
src/model/model.test.ts uses Vitest to test the model layer (and src/state/store.test.ts covers the store's undo/redo history):
- Schema resolution (defaults, ids, duplicate detection, max < min, repeatable detection)
- Annotation tree init (min instances, default values, nested structure)
- Add/remove guards (canAdd/canRemove with unbounded, finite, and min floor)
- Normalize (padding, clamping, dropping unknown keys)
- Full round-trip (load → edit → serialize → reload, preserving data)
- Extra/unknown field preservation
- Prune (trailing empty removal, min retention, interior gaps kept)
- Multiple reviewers:
config.reviewersdefaults/bounds/round-trip,Paper.reviewsparsing (defensive, normalized, malformed/non-numeric keys dropped) and backfilling (every reviewer1..Npresent as an empty skeleton, an out-of-range key never dropped), serialization staying clean for a single-reviewer project (see the"multiple reviewers"describe block inmodel.test.ts) -
needsShapeMigration/the auto-migrate-on-open path: an old-shape file gets fixed and re-saved through a real handle, never through a'download'ornullone, and is stable (no re-migration, byte-identical re-serialization) once fixed — verified end-to-end against real files on disk, not just mocked platform calls
src/state/store.reviewers.test.ts covers the routing rule (currentTree) itself: which tree each store action reads/writes for single-reviewer, a numbered reviewer, Consolidation, and the unselected state; that selecting a reviewer is not an undo step and doesn't set dirty; and that the selection persists per project. src/state/store.aimarks.test.ts covers the reviewer-scoped AI mark keys specifically.
Screening has its own set of test files, mirroring the src/consolidate/*.test.ts convention
(pure functions, no React, no store imports): src/screening/schema.test.ts (the derived schema's
exact shape, reasons flowing into Reason.options in order), src/screening/status.test.ts (the
tri-state read, including a hand-edited unknown decision reading as undecided), counts.test.ts
(the totals, the per-reason breakdown including zero-count reasons, pendingUnanimous), and
validate.test.ts (the two cross-field rules). src/state/store.screening.test.ts covers
setScreeningDecision's seat routing, undo-step shape, the reason-clearing-on-decision-change and
auto-advance rules, and adoptAllUnanimousScreening. src/state/editorStore.screening.test.ts
covers buildProjectJson/validateDraft for a screening draft and the
startFromScreening/resolveScreeningImport partition-and-carry logic, including the
never-drop-on-uncertainty rule for a hand-edited unknown decision. src/model/model.test.ts's
describe('screening') block covers the file-format round-trip, including the single most
important assertion in it: a single-reviewer, non-screening project serializes byte-for-byte
identically to before this feature existed.
-
Adding a field type: Update
FieldTypeinschema.ts→fieldTypeSchemazod enum →emptyValue()inannotations.ts→isEmptyInstance()logic →Field.tsxrendering. Add a test inmodel.test.ts. -
Changing schema validation: Modify the zod schema in
schema.tsor thesuperRefinelogic. Resolution-time checks (sibling uniqueness) are inresolveDefs(). -
Changing serialization format: Update
serializeProject()anddehydrateSchema(). EnsureloadProject()remains backward-compatible or bumpversion. Always run the round-trip test. -
Adding new known paper/project fields: Add to the known keys sets (
KNOWN_PAPER_KEYS,KNOWN_ROOT_KEYS) inproject.tsand to thePaper/Projectinterfaces. UpdateserializeProjectoutput. -
Touching anything that reads or writes
paper.annotationsdirectly: check whether it should instead go throughcurrentTree()instore.ts— almost everything that acts on "the current paper's data" should, so a multi-reviewer project's numbered reviewers and Consolidation all see the right tree. Grep for.annotationsacrosssrc/when in doubt. -
Touching the screening schema or its counts: the pure logic lives entirely in
src/screening/(schema.tsderives the two-node schema,status.tsreads the tri-state,counts.tsaggregates,validate.tshas the two cross-field rules) — extend it there, with a test in the matching*.test.ts, rather than special-casing screening insidemodel/,consolidate/, orstate/store.ts. Those three are meant to stay screening-agnostic; screening reuses them by presenting a two-field schema, not by teaching them what screening is.
These pages are a mirror. They are maintained in
openwiki/ in the repository and published
here automatically. Editing a page here is fine — the change is committed back to that folder — but
the folder is the source of truth. See Operations → Wiki sync.
Repository · README · Issues · Releases · Annotation schema guide
SaiLoR is free software under the GNU General Public License v3.0.
- Things to know
- Getting started
- Screening
- Working with several reviewers
- Setting up a project
- Git support
Developer documentation
{ "version": 1, "config": { "schema": [ /* AnnotationDef[] — the taxonomy. Ignored + derived when "screening" is set */ ], "ai": false, // optional; false disables AI-assisted annotation for this project "reviewers": 3, // optional; >1 turns on independent multi-reviewer annotation "screening": { "reasons": ["Wrong topic", "Duplicate"] } // optional; see "Screening" below }, "papers": [ /* Paper[] */ ], // any other top-level keys are preserved verbatim on save }