Format-rule evidence: paper stock, print format, front datestamps #112
Loading…
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Severity: MEDIUM
The problem
EvidenceSource.format_ruleexists in the enum and nothing produces it.docs/circa-spec.md§10.1 ranks photo-format windows as High/hard, and #19 lists format rules as an input to
propagation — but no issue builds the knowledge base or the path from AI
photo_format_cluesto aformat-rule evidence row.
Format windows are among the only genuinely hard bounds available for undated prints, and hard
bounds are what the propagation engine amplifies.
Also in scope: front-of-photo datestamps
#4 covers OCR of the back only. The orange film datestamps printed on the front of late-80s
and 90s prints are ubiquitous and highly reliable; the spec rates front stamps Medium-High. They
need an extraction path too.
Scope
backprints (documented by photo historians with date ranges), border styles, square versus 3R
sizes, Polaroid frame types, front datestamp formats.
source_subtype.Honest assessment
Value depends on this collection's mix. If most prints are borderless 90s 4×6s from one lab, a
handful of rules covers everything; if it is chaotic, curation drags. Build the mechanism thin and
let the collection tell you which rules to add. Some version is needed regardless, since #19
expects format rules as an input.
Done when
format_ruleevidence with the rule recordedReferences
backend/app/models/models.py(EvidenceSource.format_rule, unused)docs/circa-spec.md§10.1Depends on: #3, #4. Feeds: #19.