🎨 Palette: 디렉토리 이름이 비어있을 때 절대 경로를 보여주도록 접근성 향상

[seonghobae]

💡 What:
파일 시스템의 최상위 디렉토리(예: / 또는 C:\)를 처리할 때, 디렉토리 이름이 비어있는 경우 절대 경로를 대신 사용하도록 main.kt를 수정했습니다.

🎯 Why:
파일 시스템 루트 디렉토리의 경우 curr_dir.name(getName())이 빈 문자열을 반환합니다. 이로 인해 생성된 HTML에서 <title>과 <h1> 요소가 비어 있게 되어 스크린 리더 사용자의 접근성이 심각하게 저하됩니다.

📸 Before/After:

• Before:<title></title>, <h1></h1> (루트 디렉토리의 경우)
• After:<title>/</title>, <h1>/</h1> (또는 해당 운영체제의 루트 경로)

♿ Accessibility:
비어있는 타이틀과 헤딩을 방지하여 스크린 리더가 현재 디렉토리의 컨텍스트(절대 경로)를 명확하게 읽을 수 있도록 접근성을 향상시켰습니다.

---

PR created automatically by Jules for task 16929142384458769298 started by @seonghobae

[google-labs-jules]

👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request.

When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down.

I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job!

For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with @jules. You can find this option in the Pull Request section of your global Jules UI settings. You can always switch back!

New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs.

---

For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task.

[opencode-agent]

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

• Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

• Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

• Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

• Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

• Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

• Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head 5aa6389b73feedb06e2e70f52a17c8dd336caaa3.

• Head SHA: 5aa6389b73feedb06e2e70f52a17c8dd336caaa3

• Workflow run: 30424245633

• Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Changed file (3 files)"]
S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (3 files)"]
R1 --> V1["required checks"]

Loading

[opencode-agent]

OpenCode Review Overview

• Head SHA: 5aa6389b73feedb06e2e70f52a17c8dd336caaa3
• Workflow run: 30424245633
• Workflow attempt: 1
• Gate result: REQUEST_CHANGES (approval step)

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

• Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

• Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

• Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

• Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

• Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

• Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head 5aa6389b73feedb06e2e70f52a17c8dd336caaa3.

• Head SHA: 5aa6389b73feedb06e2e70f52a17c8dd336caaa3

• Workflow run: 30424245633

• Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Changed file (3 files)"]
S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (3 files)"]
R1 --> V1["required checks"]

Loading

[seonghobae]

Closing as superseded by draft canonical #364. Both provide a non-empty absolute-path label when the filesystem root has no name. #364 now owns the bounded post-#363 implementation and must add one escaped shared label, root/non-root generated-file tests, APA 7 doctoring, changelog, exact-head quality/security checks, and independent approval. No evidence from this duplicate head is reused.

[google-labs-jules]

Closing as superseded by draft canonical #364. Both provide a non-empty absolute-path label when the filesystem root has no name. #364 now owns the bounded post-#363 implementation and must add one escaped shared label, root/non-root generated-file tests, APA 7 doctoring, changelog, exact-head quality/security checks, and independent approval. No evidence from this duplicate head is reused.

Understood. Acknowledging that this work is superseded by #364 and stopping work on this task.