29 lines
1.0 KiB
Markdown
29 lines
1.0 KiB
Markdown
# Phase 5 Research: Ontology and Learning Materials
|
|
|
|
## Findings
|
|
|
|
The first useful ontology proof does not need heavy parsing. It needs a clean
|
|
boundary that proves uploaded material can become inspectable candidate
|
|
knowledge with provenance.
|
|
|
|
The MVP should:
|
|
|
|
- store material metadata and source text
|
|
- extract concept candidates from known backend interview concepts
|
|
- create prerequisite edges from a small deterministic rule set
|
|
- identify weak concepts when source support is thin
|
|
- never mark generated or inferred content as canonical
|
|
|
|
## Recommended Shape
|
|
|
|
- `internal/ontology` owns material ingestion, candidate storage, and snapshot.
|
|
- HTTP exposes JSON ingestion first.
|
|
- Evidence references use the existing workflow shared type.
|
|
- Gap records distinguish source-backed weakness from generated inference.
|
|
|
|
## Risks
|
|
|
|
- Overbuilding parsers too early would violate YAGNI.
|
|
- Treating keyword extraction as canonical knowledge would violate OpenSpec.
|
|
- A future parser can replace the analyzer behind the same service boundary.
|