type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic #14109

Closed as not planned
Feature
Closed as not planned
type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic#14109
Feature
Labels
domain:specpriority:p3

Description

@os-warren
os-warren
opened on Sep 1, 2026

Found while building a "what does this team owe" lens in objectstack-ai/duly (issue #12): duties grouped by business unit, then by owner, as a collapsible tree. Measured on @objectstack/spec 17.2.0 and @objectstack/console 17.2.0.

What tree actually does

TreeConfigSchema documents it plainly: "Renders a self-referencing object as an indented, expand/collapse tree-grid. Flat records are nested via a single-parent pointer field (parentField)." The renderer agrees — plugin-tree reads exactly four keys (parentField, labelField, fields, defaultExpandedDepth) and builds the hierarchy by matching record[parentField] against the ids of sibling records of the same object.

That is the org-chart / BOM / category shape. It cannot express the other, at least as common, tree: nest records under synthesized levels derived from field VALUES — unit → owner → duty. Those two levels are not records of the object being listed.

The gap has two halves

1. Inexpressible.grouping: { fields: [...] } is the platform's multi-level value grouping and it works — the grid's grouping hook recurses through grouping.fields building nested subgroups with per-level collapse, which is exactly the wanted behaviour. plugin-tree never reads grouping. So the capability exists in the product; it just is not reachable from the view type whose name promises it.

2. Silent when misapplied. On an object with no self-reference, a type: 'tree' view is not an error and not empty — it is flat. parentField is undefined, the renderer's auto-detect (fields[].type === 'tree', or a lookup whose reference equals the object's own name) finds nothing, every record resolves to a root at depth 0, and you get an ordinary table with an expand gutter that never expands. os validate says nothing: view/layout-without-binding does not cover tree (filed separately), and even if it did, every key in TreeConfigSchema is optional so a present-but-empty tree: {} would satisfy it.

Reproduced on duly_duty, whose lookups point at sys_business_unit, duly_catalog_item and a user — no self-reference. All four gates green.

What we shipped instead

type: 'grid' + grouping: { fields: [{ field: 'business_unit' }, { field: 'owner' }] }. It renders the two-level collapsible hierarchy the card asked for. The cost is that the view type no longer says what the view is, and the tree renderer's indent/expand affordances are not available.

Suggested direction

Either of these closes it; the first is smaller:

  • A — let tree consume grouping. When grouping.fields is present and parentField resolves to nothing, plugin-tree synthesizes one level of parent nodes per grouping field, leaf records at the bottom. The authored shape becomes { type: 'tree', grouping: { fields: [...] }, tree: { labelField } } and reads correctly.
  • B — declare the mode. Add groupByFields: string[] to TreeConfigSchema as the explicit alternative to parentField, and make the two mutually exclusive so a view cannot half-declare both.

Whichever way it goes, the silent-flat half wants a gate on its own: a type: 'tree' whose parentField is neither declared nor auto-detectable on the bound object should warn at author time, because the render is a plausible-looking table rather than an obvious blank.

Related

  • The view/layout-without-binding table omitting tree (and timeline, map) is filed separately.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    domain:specpriority:p3

    Type

    Feature

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions

      , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all 
       blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '

      Skip to content
      type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic #14109
      Closed as not planned
      Feature
      Closed as not planned
      type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic#14109
      Feature
      Labels
      domain:specpriority:p3
      Description
      @os-warren
      os-warren
      opened on Sep 1, 2026
      Found while building a "what does this team owe" lens in objectstack-ai/duly (issue #12): duties grouped by business unit, then by owner, as a collapsible tree. Measured on @objectstack/spec 17.2.0 and @objectstack/console 17.2.0.
      What tree actually does
      TreeConfigSchema documents it plainly: "Renders a self-referencing object as an indented, expand/collapse tree-grid. Flat records are nested via a single-parent pointer field (parentField)." The renderer agrees — plugin-tree reads exactly four keys (parentField, labelField, fields, defaultExpandedDepth) and builds the hierarchy by matching record[parentField] against the ids of sibling records of the same object.
      That is the org-chart / BOM / category shape. It cannot express the other, at least as common, tree: nest records under synthesized levels derived from field VALUES — unit → owner → duty. Those two levels are not records of the object being listed.
      The gap has two halves
      1. Inexpressible.grouping: { fields: [...] } is the platform's multi-level value grouping and it works — the grid's grouping hook recurses through grouping.fields building nested subgroups with per-level collapse, which is exactly the wanted behaviour. plugin-tree never reads grouping. So the capability exists in the product; it just is not reachable from the view type whose name promises it.
      2. Silent when misapplied. On an object with no self-reference, a type: 'tree' view is not an error and not empty — it is flat. parentField is undefined, the renderer's auto-detect (fields[].type === 'tree', or a lookup whose reference equals the object's own name) finds nothing, every record resolves to a root at depth 0, and you get an ordinary table with an expand gutter that never expands. os validate says nothing: view/layout-without-binding does not cover tree (filed separately), and even if it did, every key in TreeConfigSchema is optional so a present-but-empty tree: {} would satisfy it.
      Reproduced on duly_duty, whose lookups point at sys_business_unit, duly_catalog_item and a user — no self-reference. All four gates green.
      What we shipped instead
      type: 'grid' + grouping: { fields: [{ field: 'business_unit' }, { field: 'owner' }] }. It renders the two-level collapsible hierarchy the card asked for. The cost is that the view type no longer says what the view is, and the tree renderer's indent/expand affordances are not available.
      Suggested direction
      Either of these closes it; the first is smaller:
      • A — let tree consume grouping. When grouping.fields is present and parentField resolves to nothing, plugin-tree synthesizes one level of parent nodes per grouping field, leaf records at the bottom. The authored shape becomes { type: 'tree', grouping: { fields: [...] }, tree: { labelField } } and reads correctly.
      • B — declare the mode. Add groupByFields: string[] to TreeConfigSchema as the explicit alternative to parentField, and make the two mutually exclusive so a view cannot half-declare both.
      Whichever way it goes, the silent-flat half wants a gate on its own: a type: 'tree' whose parentField is neither declared nor auto-detectable on the bound object should warn at author time, because the render is a plausible-looking table rather than an obvious blank.
      Related
      • The view/layout-without-binding table omitting tree (and timeline, map) is filed separately.
      Activity
      Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
      Metadata
      Metadata
      Assignees
      No one assigned
        Labels
        domain:specpriority:p3
        Type
        Feature
        Projects
        No projects
          Milestone
          No milestone
          Relationships
          None yet
          Development
          No branches or pull requests
          Issue actions
          
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

          Skip to content
          type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic #14109
          Closed as not planned
          Feature
          Closed as not planned
          type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic#14109
          Feature
          Labels
          domain:specpriority:p3
          Description
          @os-warren
          os-warren
          opened on Sep 1, 2026
          Found while building a "what does this team owe" lens in objectstack-ai/duly (issue #12): duties grouped by business unit, then by owner, as a collapsible tree. Measured on @objectstack/spec 17.2.0 and @objectstack/console 17.2.0.
          What tree actually does
          TreeConfigSchema documents it plainly: "Renders a self-referencing object as an indented, expand/collapse tree-grid. Flat records are nested via a single-parent pointer field (parentField)." The renderer agrees — plugin-tree reads exactly four keys (parentField, labelField, fields, defaultExpandedDepth) and builds the hierarchy by matching record[parentField] against the ids of sibling records of the same object.
          That is the org-chart / BOM / category shape. It cannot express the other, at least as common, tree: nest records under synthesized levels derived from field VALUES — unit → owner → duty. Those two levels are not records of the object being listed.
          The gap has two halves
          1. Inexpressible.grouping: { fields: [...] } is the platform's multi-level value grouping and it works — the grid's grouping hook recurses through grouping.fields building nested subgroups with per-level collapse, which is exactly the wanted behaviour. plugin-tree never reads grouping. So the capability exists in the product; it just is not reachable from the view type whose name promises it.
          2. Silent when misapplied. On an object with no self-reference, a type: 'tree' view is not an error and not empty — it is flat. parentField is undefined, the renderer's auto-detect (fields[].type === 'tree', or a lookup whose reference equals the object's own name) finds nothing, every record resolves to a root at depth 0, and you get an ordinary table with an expand gutter that never expands. os validate says nothing: view/layout-without-binding does not cover tree (filed separately), and even if it did, every key in TreeConfigSchema is optional so a present-but-empty tree: {} would satisfy it.
          Reproduced on duly_duty, whose lookups point at sys_business_unit, duly_catalog_item and a user — no self-reference. All four gates green.
          What we shipped instead
          type: 'grid' + grouping: { fields: [{ field: 'business_unit' }, { field: 'owner' }] }. It renders the two-level collapsible hierarchy the card asked for. The cost is that the view type no longer says what the view is, and the tree renderer's indent/expand affordances are not available.
          Suggested direction
          Either of these closes it; the first is smaller:
          • A — let tree consume grouping. When grouping.fields is present and parentField resolves to nothing, plugin-tree synthesizes one level of parent nodes per grouping field, leaf records at the bottom. The authored shape becomes { type: 'tree', grouping: { fields: [...] }, tree: { labelField } } and reads correctly.
          • B — declare the mode. Add groupByFields: string[] to TreeConfigSchema as the explicit alternative to parentField, and make the two mutually exclusive so a view cannot half-declare both.
          Whichever way it goes, the silent-flat half wants a gate on its own: a type: 'tree' whose parentField is neither declared nor auto-detectable on the bound object should warn at author time, because the render is a plausible-looking table rather than an obvious blank.
          Related
          • The view/layout-without-binding table omitting tree (and timeline, map) is filed separately.
          Activity
          Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
          Metadata
          Metadata
          Assignees
          No one assigned
            Labels
            domain:specpriority:p3
            Type
            Feature
            Projects
            No projects
              Milestone
              No milestone
              Relationships
              None yet
              Development
              No branches or pull requests
              Issue actions
              
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

              Skip to content
              type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic #14109
              Closed as not planned
              Feature
              Closed as not planned
              type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic#14109
              Feature
              Labels
              domain:specpriority:p3
              Description
              @os-warren
              os-warren
              opened on Sep 1, 2026
              Found while building a "what does this team owe" lens in objectstack-ai/duly (issue #12): duties grouped by business unit, then by owner, as a collapsible tree. Measured on @objectstack/spec 17.2.0 and @objectstack/console 17.2.0.
              What tree actually does
              TreeConfigSchema documents it plainly: "Renders a self-referencing object as an indented, expand/collapse tree-grid. Flat records are nested via a single-parent pointer field (parentField)." The renderer agrees — plugin-tree reads exactly four keys (parentField, labelField, fields, defaultExpandedDepth) and builds the hierarchy by matching record[parentField] against the ids of sibling records of the same object.
              That is the org-chart / BOM / category shape. It cannot express the other, at least as common, tree: nest records under synthesized levels derived from field VALUES — unit → owner → duty. Those two levels are not records of the object being listed.
              The gap has two halves
              1. Inexpressible.grouping: { fields: [...] } is the platform's multi-level value grouping and it works — the grid's grouping hook recurses through grouping.fields building nested subgroups with per-level collapse, which is exactly the wanted behaviour. plugin-tree never reads grouping. So the capability exists in the product; it just is not reachable from the view type whose name promises it.
              2. Silent when misapplied. On an object with no self-reference, a type: 'tree' view is not an error and not empty — it is flat. parentField is undefined, the renderer's auto-detect (fields[].type === 'tree', or a lookup whose reference equals the object's own name) finds nothing, every record resolves to a root at depth 0, and you get an ordinary table with an expand gutter that never expands. os validate says nothing: view/layout-without-binding does not cover tree (filed separately), and even if it did, every key in TreeConfigSchema is optional so a present-but-empty tree: {} would satisfy it.
              Reproduced on duly_duty, whose lookups point at sys_business_unit, duly_catalog_item and a user — no self-reference. All four gates green.
              What we shipped instead
              type: 'grid' + grouping: { fields: [{ field: 'business_unit' }, { field: 'owner' }] }. It renders the two-level collapsible hierarchy the card asked for. The cost is that the view type no longer says what the view is, and the tree renderer's indent/expand affordances are not available.
              Suggested direction
              Either of these closes it; the first is smaller:
              • A — let tree consume grouping. When grouping.fields is present and parentField resolves to nothing, plugin-tree synthesizes one level of parent nodes per grouping field, leaf records at the bottom. The authored shape becomes { type: 'tree', grouping: { fields: [...] }, tree: { labelField } } and reads correctly.
              • B — declare the mode. Add groupByFields: string[] to TreeConfigSchema as the explicit alternative to parentField, and make the two mutually exclusive so a view cannot half-declare both.
              Whichever way it goes, the silent-flat half wants a gate on its own: a type: 'tree' whose parentField is neither declared nor auto-detectable on the bound object should warn at author time, because the render is a plausible-looking table rather than an obvious blank.
              Related
              • The view/layout-without-binding table omitting tree (and timeline, map) is filed separately.
              Activity
              Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
              Metadata
              Metadata
              Assignees
              No one assigned
                Labels
                domain:specpriority:p3
                Type
                Feature
                Projects
                No projects
                  Milestone
                  No milestone
                  Relationships
                  None yet
                  Development
                  No branches or pull requests
                  Issue actions
                  
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '

                  Skip to content
                  type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic #14109
                  Closed as not planned
                  Feature
                  Closed as not planned
                  type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic#14109
                  Feature
                  Labels
                  domain:specpriority:p3
                  Description
                  @os-warren
                  os-warren
                  opened on Sep 1, 2026
                  Found while building a "what does this team owe" lens in objectstack-ai/duly (issue #12): duties grouped by business unit, then by owner, as a collapsible tree. Measured on @objectstack/spec 17.2.0 and @objectstack/console 17.2.0.
                  What tree actually does
                  TreeConfigSchema documents it plainly: "Renders a self-referencing object as an indented, expand/collapse tree-grid. Flat records are nested via a single-parent pointer field (parentField)." The renderer agrees — plugin-tree reads exactly four keys (parentField, labelField, fields, defaultExpandedDepth) and builds the hierarchy by matching record[parentField] against the ids of sibling records of the same object.
                  That is the org-chart / BOM / category shape. It cannot express the other, at least as common, tree: nest records under synthesized levels derived from field VALUES — unit → owner → duty. Those two levels are not records of the object being listed.
                  The gap has two halves
                  1. Inexpressible.grouping: { fields: [...] } is the platform's multi-level value grouping and it works — the grid's grouping hook recurses through grouping.fields building nested subgroups with per-level collapse, which is exactly the wanted behaviour. plugin-tree never reads grouping. So the capability exists in the product; it just is not reachable from the view type whose name promises it.
                  2. Silent when misapplied. On an object with no self-reference, a type: 'tree' view is not an error and not empty — it is flat. parentField is undefined, the renderer's auto-detect (fields[].type === 'tree', or a lookup whose reference equals the object's own name) finds nothing, every record resolves to a root at depth 0, and you get an ordinary table with an expand gutter that never expands. os validate says nothing: view/layout-without-binding does not cover tree (filed separately), and even if it did, every key in TreeConfigSchema is optional so a present-but-empty tree: {} would satisfy it.
                  Reproduced on duly_duty, whose lookups point at sys_business_unit, duly_catalog_item and a user — no self-reference. All four gates green.
                  What we shipped instead
                  type: 'grid' + grouping: { fields: [{ field: 'business_unit' }, { field: 'owner' }] }. It renders the two-level collapsible hierarchy the card asked for. The cost is that the view type no longer says what the view is, and the tree renderer's indent/expand affordances are not available.
                  Suggested direction
                  Either of these closes it; the first is smaller:
                  • A — let tree consume grouping. When grouping.fields is present and parentField resolves to nothing, plugin-tree synthesizes one level of parent nodes per grouping field, leaf records at the bottom. The authored shape becomes { type: 'tree', grouping: { fields: [...] }, tree: { labelField } } and reads correctly.
                  • B — declare the mode. Add groupByFields: string[] to TreeConfigSchema as the explicit alternative to parentField, and make the two mutually exclusive so a view cannot half-declare both.
                  Whichever way it goes, the silent-flat half wants a gate on its own: a type: 'tree' whose parentField is neither declared nor auto-detectable on the bound object should warn at author time, because the render is a plausible-looking table rather than an obvious blank.
                  Related
                  • The view/layout-without-binding table omitting tree (and timeline, map) is filed separately.
                  Activity
                  Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
                  Metadata
                  Metadata
                  Assignees
                  No one assigned
                    Labels
                    domain:specpriority:p3
                    Type
                    Feature
                    Projects
                    No projects
                      Milestone
                      No milestone
                      Relationships
                      None yet
                      Development
                      No branches or pull requests
                      Issue actions
                      
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

                      Skip to content
                      type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic #14109
                      Closed as not planned
                      Feature
                      Closed as not planned
                      type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic#14109
                      Feature
                      Labels
                      domain:specpriority:p3
                      Description
                      @os-warren
                      os-warren
                      opened on Sep 1, 2026
                      Found while building a "what does this team owe" lens in objectstack-ai/duly (issue #12): duties grouped by business unit, then by owner, as a collapsible tree. Measured on @objectstack/spec 17.2.0 and @objectstack/console 17.2.0.
                      What tree actually does
                      TreeConfigSchema documents it plainly: "Renders a self-referencing object as an indented, expand/collapse tree-grid. Flat records are nested via a single-parent pointer field (parentField)." The renderer agrees — plugin-tree reads exactly four keys (parentField, labelField, fields, defaultExpandedDepth) and builds the hierarchy by matching record[parentField] against the ids of sibling records of the same object.
                      That is the org-chart / BOM / category shape. It cannot express the other, at least as common, tree: nest records under synthesized levels derived from field VALUES — unit → owner → duty. Those two levels are not records of the object being listed.
                      The gap has two halves
                      1. Inexpressible.grouping: { fields: [...] } is the platform's multi-level value grouping and it works — the grid's grouping hook recurses through grouping.fields building nested subgroups with per-level collapse, which is exactly the wanted behaviour. plugin-tree never reads grouping. So the capability exists in the product; it just is not reachable from the view type whose name promises it.
                      2. Silent when misapplied. On an object with no self-reference, a type: 'tree' view is not an error and not empty — it is flat. parentField is undefined, the renderer's auto-detect (fields[].type === 'tree', or a lookup whose reference equals the object's own name) finds nothing, every record resolves to a root at depth 0, and you get an ordinary table with an expand gutter that never expands. os validate says nothing: view/layout-without-binding does not cover tree (filed separately), and even if it did, every key in TreeConfigSchema is optional so a present-but-empty tree: {} would satisfy it.
                      Reproduced on duly_duty, whose lookups point at sys_business_unit, duly_catalog_item and a user — no self-reference. All four gates green.
                      What we shipped instead
                      type: 'grid' + grouping: { fields: [{ field: 'business_unit' }, { field: 'owner' }] }. It renders the two-level collapsible hierarchy the card asked for. The cost is that the view type no longer says what the view is, and the tree renderer's indent/expand affordances are not available.
                      Suggested direction
                      Either of these closes it; the first is smaller:
                      • A — let tree consume grouping. When grouping.fields is present and parentField resolves to nothing, plugin-tree synthesizes one level of parent nodes per grouping field, leaf records at the bottom. The authored shape becomes { type: 'tree', grouping: { fields: [...] }, tree: { labelField } } and reads correctly.
                      • B — declare the mode. Add groupByFields: string[] to TreeConfigSchema as the explicit alternative to parentField, and make the two mutually exclusive so a view cannot half-declare both.
                      Whichever way it goes, the silent-flat half wants a gate on its own: a type: 'tree' whose parentField is neither declared nor auto-detectable on the bound object should warn at author time, because the render is a plausible-looking table rather than an obvious blank.
                      Related
                      • The view/layout-without-binding table omitting tree (and timeline, map) is filed separately.
                      Activity
                      Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
                      Metadata
                      Metadata
                      Assignees
                      No one assigned
                        Labels
                        domain:specpriority:p3
                        Type
                        Feature
                        Projects
                        No projects
                          Milestone
                          No milestone
                          Relationships
                          None yet
                          Development
                          No branches or pull requests
                          Issue actions
                          
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

                          Skip to content
                          type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic #14109
                          Closed as not planned
                          Feature
                          Closed as not planned
                          type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic#14109
                          Feature
                          Labels
                          domain:specpriority:p3
                          Description
                          @os-warren
                          os-warren
                          opened on Sep 1, 2026
                          Found while building a "what does this team owe" lens in objectstack-ai/duly (issue #12): duties grouped by business unit, then by owner, as a collapsible tree. Measured on @objectstack/spec 17.2.0 and @objectstack/console 17.2.0.
                          What tree actually does
                          TreeConfigSchema documents it plainly: "Renders a self-referencing object as an indented, expand/collapse tree-grid. Flat records are nested via a single-parent pointer field (parentField)." The renderer agrees — plugin-tree reads exactly four keys (parentField, labelField, fields, defaultExpandedDepth) and builds the hierarchy by matching record[parentField] against the ids of sibling records of the same object.
                          That is the org-chart / BOM / category shape. It cannot express the other, at least as common, tree: nest records under synthesized levels derived from field VALUES — unit → owner → duty. Those two levels are not records of the object being listed.
                          The gap has two halves
                          1. Inexpressible.grouping: { fields: [...] } is the platform's multi-level value grouping and it works — the grid's grouping hook recurses through grouping.fields building nested subgroups with per-level collapse, which is exactly the wanted behaviour. plugin-tree never reads grouping. So the capability exists in the product; it just is not reachable from the view type whose name promises it.
                          2. Silent when misapplied. On an object with no self-reference, a type: 'tree' view is not an error and not empty — it is flat. parentField is undefined, the renderer's auto-detect (fields[].type === 'tree', or a lookup whose reference equals the object's own name) finds nothing, every record resolves to a root at depth 0, and you get an ordinary table with an expand gutter that never expands. os validate says nothing: view/layout-without-binding does not cover tree (filed separately), and even if it did, every key in TreeConfigSchema is optional so a present-but-empty tree: {} would satisfy it.
                          Reproduced on duly_duty, whose lookups point at sys_business_unit, duly_catalog_item and a user — no self-reference. All four gates green.
                          What we shipped instead
                          type: 'grid' + grouping: { fields: [{ field: 'business_unit' }, { field: 'owner' }] }. It renders the two-level collapsible hierarchy the card asked for. The cost is that the view type no longer says what the view is, and the tree renderer's indent/expand affordances are not available.
                          Suggested direction
                          Either of these closes it; the first is smaller:
                          • A — let tree consume grouping. When grouping.fields is present and parentField resolves to nothing, plugin-tree synthesizes one level of parent nodes per grouping field, leaf records at the bottom. The authored shape becomes { type: 'tree', grouping: { fields: [...] }, tree: { labelField } } and reads correctly.
                          • B — declare the mode. Add groupByFields: string[] to TreeConfigSchema as the explicit alternative to parentField, and make the two mutually exclusive so a view cannot half-declare both.
                          Whichever way it goes, the silent-flat half wants a gate on its own: a type: 'tree' whose parentField is neither declared nor auto-detectable on the bound object should warn at author time, because the render is a plausible-looking table rather than an obvious blank.
                          Related
                          • The view/layout-without-binding table omitting tree (and timeline, map) is filed separately.
                          Activity
                          Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
                          Metadata
                          Metadata
                          Assignees
                          No one assigned
                            Labels
                            domain:specpriority:p3
                            Type
                            Feature
                            Projects
                            No projects
                              Milestone
                              No milestone
                              Relationships
                              None yet
                              Development
                              No branches or pull requests
                              Issue actions
                              
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();

                              Skip to content
                              type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic #14109
                              Closed as not planned
                              Feature
                              Closed as not planned
                              type: 'tree' can only nest by a self-parent pointer — a value-grouped tree is inexpressible, and on an object with no self-reference the view renders flat with no diagnostic#14109
                              Feature
                              Labels
                              domain:specpriority:p3
                              Description
                              @os-warren
                              os-warren
                              opened on Sep 1, 2026
                              Found while building a "what does this team owe" lens in objectstack-ai/duly (issue #12): duties grouped by business unit, then by owner, as a collapsible tree. Measured on @objectstack/spec 17.2.0 and @objectstack/console 17.2.0.
                              What tree actually does
                              TreeConfigSchema documents it plainly: "Renders a self-referencing object as an indented, expand/collapse tree-grid. Flat records are nested via a single-parent pointer field (parentField)." The renderer agrees — plugin-tree reads exactly four keys (parentField, labelField, fields, defaultExpandedDepth) and builds the hierarchy by matching record[parentField] against the ids of sibling records of the same object.
                              That is the org-chart / BOM / category shape. It cannot express the other, at least as common, tree: nest records under synthesized levels derived from field VALUES — unit → owner → duty. Those two levels are not records of the object being listed.
                              The gap has two halves
                              1. Inexpressible.grouping: { fields: [...] } is the platform's multi-level value grouping and it works — the grid's grouping hook recurses through grouping.fields building nested subgroups with per-level collapse, which is exactly the wanted behaviour. plugin-tree never reads grouping. So the capability exists in the product; it just is not reachable from the view type whose name promises it.
                              2. Silent when misapplied. On an object with no self-reference, a type: 'tree' view is not an error and not empty — it is flat. parentField is undefined, the renderer's auto-detect (fields[].type === 'tree', or a lookup whose reference equals the object's own name) finds nothing, every record resolves to a root at depth 0, and you get an ordinary table with an expand gutter that never expands. os validate says nothing: view/layout-without-binding does not cover tree (filed separately), and even if it did, every key in TreeConfigSchema is optional so a present-but-empty tree: {} would satisfy it.
                              Reproduced on duly_duty, whose lookups point at sys_business_unit, duly_catalog_item and a user — no self-reference. All four gates green.
                              What we shipped instead
                              type: 'grid' + grouping: { fields: [{ field: 'business_unit' }, { field: 'owner' }] }. It renders the two-level collapsible hierarchy the card asked for. The cost is that the view type no longer says what the view is, and the tree renderer's indent/expand affordances are not available.
                              Suggested direction
                              Either of these closes it; the first is smaller:
                              • A — let tree consume grouping. When grouping.fields is present and parentField resolves to nothing, plugin-tree synthesizes one level of parent nodes per grouping field, leaf records at the bottom. The authored shape becomes { type: 'tree', grouping: { fields: [...] }, tree: { labelField } } and reads correctly.
                              • B — declare the mode. Add groupByFields: string[] to TreeConfigSchema as the explicit alternative to parentField, and make the two mutually exclusive so a view cannot half-declare both.
                              Whichever way it goes, the silent-flat half wants a gate on its own: a type: 'tree' whose parentField is neither declared nor auto-detectable on the bound object should warn at author time, because the render is a plausible-looking table rather than an obvious blank.
                              Related
                              • The view/layout-without-binding table omitting tree (and timeline, map) is filed separately.
                              Activity
                              Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
                              Metadata
                              Metadata
                              Assignees
                              No one assigned
                                Labels
                                domain:specpriority:p3
                                Type
                                Feature
                                Projects
                                No projects
                                  Milestone
                                  No milestone
                                  Relationships
                                  None yet
                                  Development
                                  No branches or pull requests
                                  Issue actions