Skip to content

Plan: tag properties (LLM-filled structured data) - #229

Open
kenforthewin wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
docs/tag-properties-plan
Open

Plan: tag properties (LLM-filled structured data)#229
kenforthewin wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
docs/tag-properties-plan

Conversation

@kenforthewin

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Adds `docs/plans/tag-properties.md` — the design for structured data in Atomic, settled after analyzing Logseq 2.0's database release.

Core inversion: Logseq makes the human fill the schema; Atomic's tags declare properties and the existing tagging pipeline extracts them. Manual values (frontmatter, panel edits) always beat extracted ones; the pipeline never edits user text; export materializes everything so the markdown ZIP stays complete. Small type system, no validation apparatus, zero cost until a tag opts in.

Doc only — no code changes.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

kenforthewin and others added 2 commits August 8, 2026 18:21
Design settled after analyzing Logseq 2.0's DB release: tags carry
lightweight property declarations, the existing tagging pipeline fills
them via structured extraction, manual values always win, and the user's
text is never edited. Three phases — extraction+display, query surface
(search filters + agent tool), then tag-bound templates.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
…mantics

From the design talk-through: the reader panel is the primary manual
path with declared-but-empty slots as typed affordances; editing an
extracted value converts it to manual; ad-hoc keys keep the panel as
expressive as frontmatter; extracted values are a projection that
untagging and declaration edits re-derive while manual values survive
unconditionally; and extraction is honest or silent — nullable fields,
high-confidence-only prompting, and a per-field auto_extract opt-out
(the auto-tag-targets philosophy, one level down) that keeps judgment
fields out of the generated schema entirely.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant