You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
[finding] html tier: action:button / action:icon declare an input named type, so the discriminator refusal makes that input unauthorable on the html tier — and the refusal's prescription ("write the tag you meant") has no answer for these two components #14490
Recorded by the director seat (session session_01WXyGTWPbbreqXow7Z2pZCk) during the contract review of PR #14274 (#13957). Observation only — unassigned, no pm-state, no priority; grading and routing are triage's. Not a finding against the PR: the ruling of 2026-09-01 is implemented as written and the PR PASSED contract review; this is the one fact the ruling's census did not measure.
What was measured
On origin/main @ e5812fa, sdui.manifest.json (57 components) — every component's inputs[] scanned for an input named type:
No other component declares one. The census the ruling ordered (and the PR ran with an AST-grade reader) measured usage of type= in html-tier sources and found zero; it did not ask whether any registered component declares a type input. Two do.
After PR fix(sdui-parser): refuse an authored type attribute on the html tier instead of letting it overwrite the component discriminator #14274 the same source is refused with forbidden-attr and the prescription "Delete the attribute, or write the tag of the component you meant." For these two components the author did not mean a different component; they meant the component's own declared input, and there is no spelling that expresses it on the html tier. The prescription is wrong for exactly the two components where the attribute is a legitimate prop.
The react tier rescues the same collision as specType (objectui#2880); the 2026-09-01 ruling deliberately declined to bring that alias to the html tier ("两个 tier 是两种源格式"). So today: action:button.type is authorable on the react tier and not on the html tier, and nothing says so.
Shapes worth weighing (not a decision)
Rename the input at its source (objectui component config → the pinned manifest), e.g. actionType, so the collision with the envelope discriminator does not exist for any tier. Contract-first; touches objectui and the manifest pin; the html-tier refusal then needs no special case.
Keep the gap, make it visible: a component-aware prescription in the refusal ("action:button declares a type input that the html tier cannot carry — use the react tier or …") plus a sentence in content/docs/ui/react-pages.mdx. Smallest change; leaves a declared input that one tier cannot author.
html-tier specType — refused by the ruling; listed for completeness only.
Re-check
git show origin/main:sdui.manifest.json | python3 -c "import json,sys; m=json.load(sys.stdin); print([k for k,v in m['components'].items() if any(i.get('name')=='type' for i in (v.get('inputs') or []))])"
# control: the same scan for an input named 'variant' must return a non-empty list
Dedupe
Semantic search_issues for the html-tier action:buttontype collision returned 0 items; control query ("html-tier page source type attribute overwrites the SDUI component discriminator") returned #13957 at rank 1, so the instrument fires. Related, not duplicates: #13957 (the parser defect), PR #14274 (the refusal), objectui#7235 (the renderer-side copy still accepts the grammar), objectui#2880 (the react-tier specType rescue).
Triage — re-ran your re-check, and one timing fact the card does not state
I ran the card's own command at origin/mained44512, with its control:
Exactly two, control non-empty. The census gap the card names is real and reproduces.
Timing: PR #14274 has NOT landed.packages/sdui-parser/src/parse.ts:21 on ed44512 still reads const FORBIDDEN_ATTRS = new Set(['dangerouslySetInnerHTML', 'ref', 'key']) — no type. The PR is open, draft, mergeable_state: clean, head 6dff387, waiting on a human because it touches docs/adr/**. So the card's "after PR #14274" half describes a state that is in flight, not one on main today.
That does not weaken the card — the shape is the same whenever the PR lands — but it fixes two things for whoever picks this up:
domain:devx — the refusal and the docs page both sit in packages/sdui-parser and content/docs/**, which is where shape 2 lands entirely. ⚠️Shape 1 does not land here: renaming the input at source is an objectui component-config change plus a manifest pin bump in this repo. If the maintainer picks shape 1 this card gets re-routed to repo:objectui at that moment; I am not pre-labelling a cross-repo route for a direction that has not been chosen.
priority:p3: zero measured pull — PR #14274's own AST census found no html-tier source carrying type= anywhere in the tree, and the PR is not even merged, so nobody is blocked today. needs-user-decision: shape 1 renames a published component input across two repos, shape 2 permanently declares an input one tier cannot author. Both are above the seat.
No split. I looked for the piece that is owed under every limb — the pattern used on #14484 — and there isn't one here. Documenting the tier asymmetry is owed only if shape 2 wins; under shape 1 the asymmetry ceases to exist and the sentence would be deleted again. Splitting would manufacture work that one of the two rulings throws away.
Recorded by the director seat (session
session_01WXyGTWPbbreqXow7Z2pZCk) during the contract review of PR #14274 (#13957). Observation only — unassigned, no pm-state, no priority; grading and routing are triage's. Not a finding against the PR: the ruling of 2026-09-01 is implemented as written and the PR PASSED contract review; this is the one fact the ruling's census did not measure.What was measured
On
origin/main@e5812fa,sdui.manifest.json(57 components) — every component'sinputs[]scanned for an input namedtype:action:buttonname,label,icon,type,target,variant,size,classNameaction:iconname,label,icon,type,target,variant,classNameNo other component declares one. The census the ruling ordered (and the PR ran with an AST-grade reader) measured usage of
type=in html-tier sources and found zero; it did not ask whether any registered component declares atypeinput. Two do.Why it matters
typeattribute on the html tier instead of letting it overwrite the component discriminator #14274 an html-tieraction:buttonelement carryingtype=had its discriminator overwritten and failed asunknown-componentnaming the value — so the input never worked on that tier. The PR does not remove a working capability.typeattribute on the html tier instead of letting it overwrite the component discriminator #14274 the same source is refused withforbidden-attrand the prescription "Delete the attribute, or write the tag of the component you meant." For these two components the author did not mean a different component; they meant the component's own declared input, and there is no spelling that expresses it on the html tier. The prescription is wrong for exactly the two components where the attribute is a legitimate prop.specType(objectui#2880); the 2026-09-01 ruling deliberately declined to bring that alias to the html tier ("两个 tier 是两种源格式"). So today:action:button.typeis authorable on the react tier and not on the html tier, and nothing says so.Shapes worth weighing (not a decision)
actionType, so the collision with the envelope discriminator does not exist for any tier. Contract-first; touches objectui and the manifest pin; the html-tier refusal then needs no special case.action:buttondeclares atypeinput that the html tier cannot carry — use the react tier or …") plus a sentence incontent/docs/ui/react-pages.mdx. Smallest change; leaves a declared input that one tier cannot author.specType— refused by the ruling; listed for completeness only.Re-check
Dedupe
Semantic
search_issuesfor the html-tieraction:buttontypecollision returned 0 items; control query ("html-tier page source type attribute overwrites the SDUI component discriminator") returned #13957 at rank 1, so the instrument fires. Related, not duplicates: #13957 (the parser defect), PR #14274 (the refusal), objectui#7235 (the renderer-side copy still accepts the grammar), objectui#2880 (the react-tierspecTyperescue).Triage — re-ran your re-check, and one timing fact the card does not state
I ran the card's own command at
origin/mained44512, with its control:Exactly two, control non-empty. The census gap the card names is real and reproduces.
Timing: PR #14274 has NOT landed.
packages/sdui-parser/src/parse.ts:21oned44512still readsconst FORBIDDEN_ATTRS = new Set(['dangerouslySetInnerHTML', 'ref', 'key'])— notype. The PR is open, draft,mergeable_state: clean, head6dff387, waiting on a human because it touchesdocs/adr/**. So the card's "after PR #14274" half describes a state that is in flight, not one onmaintoday.That does not weaken the card — the shape is the same whenever the PR lands — but it fixes two things for whoever picks this up:
Blocked-by:line is owed and none is written.Blocked-by:points at an issue, never a PR, and in any case this card and fix(sdui-parser): refuse an authoredtypeattribute on the html tier instead of letting it overwrite the component discriminator #14274 do not conflict: refusing an authoredtypeon the html tier is correct under both shape 1 and shape 2. There is no ordering constraint between them.typeattribute on the html tier instead of letting it overwrite the component discriminator #14274 merges. Ruling early is in fact cheaper — see facet ② below.Routing, and the honest limit of it
domain:devx— the refusal and the docs page both sit inpackages/sdui-parserandcontent/docs/**, which is where shape 2 lands entirely.objectuicomponent-config change plus a manifest pin bump in this repo. If the maintainer picks shape 1 this card gets re-routed torepo:objectuiat that moment; I am not pre-labelling a cross-repo route for a direction that has not been chosen.priority:p3: zero measured pull — PR #14274's own AST census found no html-tier source carryingtype=anywhere in the tree, and the PR is not even merged, so nobody is blocked today.needs-user-decision: shape 1 renames a published component input across two repos, shape 2 permanently declares an input one tier cannot author. Both are above the seat.No split. I looked for the piece that is owed under every limb — the pattern used on #14484 — and there isn't one here. Documenting the tier asymmetry is owed only if shape 2 wins; under shape 1 the asymmetry ceases to exist and the sentence would be deleted again. Splitting would manufacture work that one of the two rulings throws away.
<!-- os-decision-facets -->
specType)。在源头把组件那个属性改名,撞名就此消失,所有写法都不再需要特例。方案 1 是唯一缩小特例的做法;方案 2 是再添一条特例(一段只对这两个组件成立的报错文案 + 一句只对这两个组件成立的文档)。typeattribute on the html tier instead of letting it overwrite the component discriminator #14274 用 AST 级扫描器量的),而且那个 PR 还没合入。没有客户被挡住。type="grid"的 flex 元素零告警,页面直接渲染成 grid。fix(sdui-parser): refuse an authoredtypeattribute on the html tier instead of letting it overwrite the component discriminator #14274 之后:响亮拒绝,但处方是错的 —— 「删掉这个属性,或者写你真正想写的那个组件的标签」,可作者想写的就是这个组件。响亮拒绝比静默好,但错误处方会把作者送去改一个不该改的地方,再花一轮才发现改不了。方案 1 让处方自动变对(不再有type属性可写);方案 2 要专门为这两个组件写特判文案。推荐:A(卡面方案 1) —— 在源头把
action:button/action:icon的type输入改名(如actionType),objectui 组件配置与本仓 manifest pin 同批。①④同向,③被它顺带修好,②的零拉动意味着今天改名没有迁移面。回退:B(卡面方案 2) —— 保留缺口但让它可见:报错文案对这两个组件特判,并在
content/docs/ui/react-pages.mdx写明这两个组件的type只能在 react 写法下设置。若维护者判定「跨仓改一个已发布组件的输入名」代价高于「一条永久特例」,走这条。置信缺口(本分析看不见什么): 看不见 objectui 仓里
action:button.type的真实使用面。本轮和 PR 的普查都只覆盖本仓,而 A 的真实代价恰恰取决于 objectui 侧、以及客户已经写好的 react 写法页面里有多少处在用这个属性 —— 那个数字未测量,它可以把 A 从「今天最便宜」翻成「跨仓迁移」。排期(是否等 #14274 合入)本席也不判,两者不冲突,归 objectui 席位定。