Generated from cat-harness/processes/content/voice-review.bpmn by gen-processes-viz.ts — do not edit here. All processes

Voice overlay review

Process_VoiceReview · advisory · 6 step(s)

The voice axis: load whichever editorial voices are active, run each rule’s mechanical half, and decide — for each finding — whether the prose is wrong, the rule does not apply to this content, or this block is a stated exception.

You are in this process after the base voice has been adjudicated, and only if a voice is active at all: the first gateway ends the process honestly when none is, rather than reporting a clean review of nothing.

Three outcomes, all legitimate, and the third is the one that needs recording: an exception without a reviewer entry is indistinguishable from a rule nobody ran. There is also a fourth path the diagram draws deliberately — if the rule’s own citation does not support it, the RULE is the defect, and that becomes a bean rather than a finding against the prose.

How it connects

• Called by: Narrative review
• Calls: Criterion adjudication
• Presented on: no docs page section shows this diagram

Lanes — who acts

lane	role	what it does here
Narrative reviewer	narrative-reviewer	Runs every active voice to completion rather than stopping at the first, because rules from separate voices are UNIONED rather than merged — two voices can both flag capitalisation and both findings must stand, so folding voice N+1’s pass into voice N’s would lose which voice raised what. At each citation, this lane also has to route the defect to the right place: a rule its own citation does not support goes to Task_RuleIsWrong as a finding against the VOICE, never into Task_Adjudicate, which only ever judges the block.

Steps

Every one of the 6 step(s) is documented.

step	lane	skill / sub-process	what it does
Load the active voices Task_LoadActive	Narrative reviewer	voice-overlay-review	The activated set only, never everything shipped. An id naming no shipped voice is an error rather than a skip — a folio that believes it is applying a voice and is applying nothing has the cleanest-looking output of the three.
Run the rule’s mechanical half Task_MechanicalHalf	Narrative reviewer	voice-overlay-review	Whatever patterns and terminology the rule carries. A judgementOnly rule has no mechanical half by declaration, which is different from nobody having written one yet.
Open the rule’s citation Task_OpenCitation	Narrative reviewer	voice-overlay-review	Every rule resolves to a real library/ section or a KG node, and carries the quote it was read from. Opening it is what lets a reviewer say WHY the rule applies — and it is the only way to catch a rule that misread its own source.
The RULE is the defect — bean it Task_RuleIsWrong	Narrative reviewer	voice-overlay-review	A rule its own quote does not support is a finding against the voice, not against the block. Measured precedent: voice-editorializing flags “clearly”, and the exemplar the Milnor gate is named after uses it fourteen times as proof economy (bean 2t41).
Adjudicate: prose, scope, or exception Task_Adjudicate	Narrative reviewer	calls Criterion adjudication voice-overlay-review adjudication	The same three outcomes as the base voice axis. The register is wrong for this block (fix the prose); the rule does not apply to this content (scope it on the voice, one edit rather than ten overrules); or the rule applies and this block is an exception (a reviewer entry saying why).
Record on the block’s QA sidecar Task_RecordOnSidecar	Narrative reviewer	voice-overlay-review	Through qa-merge-findings, so the icon and the published witness agree with the decision. The adjudication LEADS the criterion and the script entry is kept beneath it: a disagreement between a checker and a reviewer is information.

Decisions

Every one of the 3 decision(s) is documented.

decision	what decides it	branches
Any voice activated? GW_AnyActive	Is any voice activated for this block, beyond the base voice already adjudicated? none ends with nothing to review; one or more loads the active voices.	none → No voice — nothing to review one or more → Load the active voices
Does the quote support the rule? GW_QuoteSupports	Answered by opening the rule’s citation: does the quoted source support the rule? no means the rule itself is the defect and is beaned; yes goes to adjudicating the prose, the rule’s scope or an exception.	no → The RULE is the defect — bean it yes → Adjudicate: prose, scope, or exception
Another active voice? GW_MoreVoices	Is another active voice left to review? yes runs that voice’s mechanical half; no records the results on the block’s QA sidecar.	yes → Run the rule’s mechanical half no → Record on the block’s QA sidecar