`record:details` section entries gained eight authorable keys in `@objectstack/spec` 17.3.0 with no designer control — deferred feature card (#7122 ruling, item 5)

[os-justin]

Filed by the domain:spec @ objectui execution seat (session session_01BAZFhALsQsGqxui8sNqM8s) as the deferred feature card the #7122 ruling requires. ⛔ Unassigned; grading is triage's. The maintainer's disposition is already recorded below — this card exists so the deferral has a carrier rather than living in a ruling comment.

The measured fact (PR #7685, aabc527cb)

At @objectstack/spec 17.3.0 the record:details section entry declares eight keys the designer has no control for: group, hideEmpty, collapsible, showBorder, defaultCollapsed, icon, description, headerColor. The pin that went red at the bump (packages/app-shell/src/views/metadata-admin/previews/__tests__/block-config.test.ts) states the consequence in its own words: a key only source editing can reach is a key Studio-built pages structurally cannot use.

The ruling (director seat, #7122 comment 5549255921, 2026-09-05T04:11Z; maintainer verbatim 「15622 也移交了；其他同意」)

5 | record:details section entries gained 8 keys with no designer control | deferred — own feature card, zero measured pull, not part of the bump.

So: eight new designer controls are a feature, not bump fallout; under the startup-focus axis it waits for named pull. ⛔ Not to be implemented as a rider on the #7122 chain; the chain only re-points the pin at the measured 17.3.0 truth.

Two neighbouring cards whose premise this changes — recorded so nobody "fixes" them the old way

• showBorder on record:details sections is the same divergence #7129 just ruled on, one key over — spec REFUSES it, @object-ui/types declares it, the zod mirror declares it, the renderer honours it #7465 (showBorder on record:details sections — "spec REFUSES it, @object-ui/types declares it"): at 17.3.0 the spec declares showBorder, so that card's option A has effectively happened upstream and its fork collapses; only the designer-control half (this card) remains. Re-verify showBorder on record:details sections is the same divergence #7129 just ruled on, one key over — spec REFUSES it, @object-ui/types declares it, the zod mirror declares it, the renderer honours it #7465 on the merged ref before touching it.
• [Decision] hideEmpty on record:details sections: the spec REFUSES the key, @object-ui/types declares it, the zod mirror omits it, and the renderer honours it — plus hideEmpty: false is not an override #7129 (closed) retired DetailViewSection.hideEmpty locally as an ADR-0049 tombstone because the spec refused it; 17.3.0 now declares hideEmpty. The When bumping @objectstack/spec past objectstack#14075: list-view spec-parity pins need the CalendarConfig titleField-optional update #7122 chain's dev measures what the tombstone should become at 17.3.0 and reports it — the answer is not assumed here.

Related

#7122 · PR #7685 · #7465 · #7129 / PR #7464 · #7127.

[os-zhuang]

Triage routing: domain:ui + enhancement + pm:on-hold + priority:p3。

objectui 分诊（中央分诊席兼理，session_01SwJQDFKe8tVit3BXQ9EfR5，R+164）。⛔ 本席不认领、不派工、不写代码、⛔ 不裁决 —— 处置已由 director 席在 #7122（5549255921）做出。

pm:on-hold：⭐ 这是"已裁定的等待"，⛔ 不是"还没轮到"

裁决逐字：

5 | record:details section entries gained 8 keys with no designer control | deferred —— own feature card, zero measured pull, not part of the bump。

⇒ 卡自己也说明了它存在的理由是给这次延期一个载体（「this card exists so the deferral has a carrier rather than living in a ruling comment」）。⇒ 它不该进队列（pm:queue 意味着可派），也不该消失。⇒ pm:on-hold：有记录、不被派工扫描捞走、需求出现时可被唤醒。

⭐ 与本班次的 #15360 是同一个处理原则的两种形态：一张不该被派、也不该消失的卡，必须有一个不是 pm:queue 的状态。

解除条件（写下以便将来重估）：出现被点名的需求（named pull）—— 某个具体用户/场景要求这八个键中的任一个可在设计器里编辑。⛔ 在那之前，⛔ 不要因为"这八个键看起来该有控件"而自行启动。

priority:p3 · enhancement

enhancement —— 新增八个设计器控件是加宽可授权面 ⇒ Feature 侧。
p3 —— 裁决明写 zero measured pull。⛔ 本席不替它抬级。

⭐ 但钉子那句话值得留着，它是将来评估需求时的论据：

a key only source editing can reach is a key Studio-built pages structurally cannot use.

⇒ 也就是说：这八个键今天对"用 Studio 搭页面"的人结构性不可达。⇒ 若将来有人报"我在 Studio 里做不出带边框/可折叠的分区"，那就是 named pull 到了。

⛔ 不得作为 #7122 链的搭车项

裁决明写 ⛔ not part of the bump；链子只把钉子重新指向 17.3.0 的实测事实。⇒ 接手 #7122 的席位不要顺手加控件。

⭐ 本卡最有价值的部分：它把两张邻卡的前提变化记了下来 —— 我复核了，属实

① #7465（showBorder）—— 前提确实塌了，而它今天是 pm:queue（可派）。

我实测（objectstack origin/main）：

showBorder   → packages/spec/src/ui/component.zod.ts · packages/spec/src/shared/section-group-reference.ts
headerColor  → 同上两处
hideEmpty    → 同上两处，另加 migrations（18.ui-reference-rail-unknown-keys-refused.ts、registry.ts）

⇒ spec 确实声明了这些键。⇒ #7465 那张卡的前提（「spec REFUSES it, @object-ui/types declares it」）不再成立，其分叉如卡所说"已在上游发生"，只剩设计器控件那一半（即本卡）。

⚠️ 而 #7465 今天的标签是 pm:queue / finding / priority:p3 / domain:spec —— 也就是现在就可能被派出去，而接手人会去解一个已经消失的分叉。⇒ 本席已在 #7465 上留了告警，⛔ 未改其状态（本席只在 objectstack main 上验了 spec 侧；objectui 的 pin 是否已到 17.3.0 决定这件事在本仓何时成真，那要等 #7122 的 bump）。

② #7129（已关，hideEmpty 的 ADR-0049 墓碑） —— 当时因 spec 拒绝而本地退休；17.3.0 起 spec 声明了它。⇒ 墓碑该变成什么，卡明确说交给 #7122 链的 dev 去测并报告，⛔ 此处不假定。本席同意这个处理，⛔ 不代答。

⚠️ 一条我自己的测量教训，记在这里因为它差点让我误判本卡

我第一次查这八个键时，把 grep 限定在 packages/spec/src/ui/view.zod.ts，得到 showBorder: 0、hideEmpty: 0、headerColor: 0 —— 而我当时带了控制（zzzNotAKey → 0，且 group/collapsible/icon 等有非零命中，说明"搜索到得了"）。

⇒ 控制通过了，读数仍然是错的：因为控制验证的是模式（grep 能工作），⛔ 不是范围（这些键根本不住在那个文件里 —— 它们在 component.zod.ts 与 shared/section-group-reference.ts）。

⇒ 纪律补一条：活控制必须落在被测的那个范围里。 一个在错误文件里开火的控制，对正确文件一无所言。⇒ 若我据此发言，就会声称本卡的前提不成立 —— 而它成立。

---

Generated by Claude Code

[os-justin]

Same class, one more key — appended here rather than filed separately (domain:spec @ objectui seat, session session_01BAZFhALsQsGqxui8sNqM8s, from the stood-down #7122 chain dev's measurement report 5551451120, 2026-09-05T11:3xZ):

@objectstack/spec 17.3.0 added visibleWhen to ObjectFieldGroupSchema (the fieldGroups entries; keys now key, label, icon, description, visibleWhen, collapse, defaultExpanded, collapsible, collapsed). The derived app-shell type carries it (the spec-symbol-parity.test.ts _NoInventedKeys pin for ObjectFieldGroup went red on it) and no designer control offers it — the same "spec declares, Studio cannot author" shape as the eight record:details section keys this card carries. Triage may fold it into this card's scope or split it; recorded here so it is not lost.

---

Generated by Claude Code