spec: INTENT-1 — single-branch groups degenerate not malformed, structural adjacency check, timeless scoping - #116
spec: INTENT-1 — single-branch groups degenerate not malformed, structural adjacency check, timeless scoping#116JarbasAl wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 36 minutes You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
…tural adjacency check, timeless scoping Squashed from: - spec: OVOS-INTENT-1 — scope §6 to grammar roles; drop dead §5.5 dialog-registration citation - docs: INTENT-1 consistency and design review — degenerate single-branch groups, structural adjacency, timeless scoping Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Consistency and design review of OVOS-INTENT-1 (Sentence Template Grammar).
Original PR content (unchanged hunks)
(word)is degenerate, not malformed: loaders MUST accept it, SHOULD warn, and MUST fold it to the bare branch; only the empty()remains malformed.Follow-up commit (audit findings not covered above)
BLOCKER — §6.2 mis-scoped
.dialogas engine training data. §6.2 step 3required engines to verify
.dialogslot consistency, and step 5 describedall data reaching §6 as "match-time-filled" — both contradict §5.1, which
defines
.dialogslots as caller-filled before rendering, not engine-filledat match time. No intent engine trains on
.dialog. Fixed by scoping §6(training-data contract) to the input-direction, engine-trained roles only —
.intent,.entity,.voc,.blacklist— and moving the dialog-consumerintake obligation (reading the file/inline phrases) into §7's existing
Dialog renderer bullet, which already owns slot-set verification and fill
discipline for
.dialog.MAJOR — §5.5 cited an undefined wire contract. §5.5 pointed to §6.1 for
"inline caller-supplied-fill phrases registered together," but §6.1 only
ever defined delivery for
.intent/.entity(and by extension.voc/.blacklist) — it never defined a registration mechanism for.dialog.Dropped the dangling
(§6.1)citation and rephrased §5.5 to define theone-dialog unit on its own terms, without implying this spec specifies a
wire contract for dialog delivery (it doesn't, and that's fine — a renderer-
or host-application-specific concern).
Both fixes are additive text-scoping changes; no normative requirement on
.intent/.entity/.voc/.blacklistor the existing.dialogfill rulesin §5.1/§7 changed.
CHANGELOG entry extended accordingly. Still draft; rebased clean onto
current
dev.