creatixchu
6d7bd7e703
Review follow-ups on the presentation intent. The card claimed any single-question request declaring the intent, then sent one of two labels — so a producer offering a third option, or a multi-select batch, lost answers the generic flow would have shown. That contradicts the intent's own contract, so `planReviewOf` now claims only a binary single choice and leaves everything else to the flow that can express it. `ask()` also rejects a plan-review intent on a question with no `detail`: the intent declares detail IS the plan, and without one a honouring UI asks the user to approve something invisible. The client keeps its own fallback — it sits downstream of a wire boundary — but the misconfiguration now fails at the asker. `planReviewOf` stops being a value export of the client contract face (client export discipline: pure helpers stay internal; the tests already import it relatively), and the ui-question README fallback list, both languages, now states every condition the code enforces.
7 lines
465 B
YAML
7 lines
465 B
YAML
# Bilingual-pair consistency record (docs/i18n/README.md): the git blob hash of each
|
|
# side as of the last confirmed-consistent state. Both languages carry equal authority;
|
|
# after editing either side, bring the other along and re-record with:
|
|
# pnpm run verify-translation-pairing --write docs/core-data-structures/user-interaction.md
|
|
user-interaction.md: 2483382eee07d379b13d456149096c8afab70e4b
|
|
user-interaction.zh.md: 57f57277975597fff712705cc741ae8e78643642
|