Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- provenance:privacy:privacy_sandbox [2026/09/01 17:36] – Replace the DOM self-check prose with a counted table and explain the two-spans-per-marker trap that made two reviewers disagree; log the second review round and the telemetry section added after the generic pass. Authored by Claude. karel.kubicek.claude
+++ provenance:privacy:privacy_sandbox [2026/09/01 17:36] (current) – Remove a literal citation marker the bibtex plugin picked up through its nowiki escape, and stop asserting self-referential heading and table counts for this page. Authored by Claude. karel.kubicek.claude
@@ Line 330: / Line 330: @@
 After each save, ''literature:bibliography'' and the page were purged (''?purge=true'') and the rendered DOM re-checked, counting only inside the ''%%<!-- wikipage start -->%%'' … ''%%<!-- wikipage stop -->%%'' markers so that the theme's own chrome is not counted.
-^ Count ^ [[privacy:privacy_sandbox]] ^ This page ^
+Counts below are for [[privacy:privacy_sandbox]] only. This page's own heading and table counts are deliberately not asserted, because every edit to this paragraph changes them and a self-referential count can never be right for long; what //is// asserted about this page is that it renders **7** downloadable file blocks and **zero** red links.
-| ''%%{[key]}%%'' markers in the wiki source | **33** | 0 |
-| distinct citekeys | **13** | 0 |
-| ''bibtex_citekey'' spans in the rendered DOM | **66** | 0 |
-| ''%%<dt>%%'' entries in the rendered ''bibtex_references'' list | **13** | 0 |
-| ''%%<table>%%'' in the rendered body | **12** | **11** |
-| ''%%<h1>%%''–''%%<h4>%%'' in the rendered body | **23** | **22** |
-| ''%%<WRAP>%%'' boxes | **5** | 0 |
-| ''wikilink2'' (red links) | **0** | **0** |
-| downloadable ''%%<file>%%'' blocks | 1 | **7** |
-**Read the first three rows together, because two reviewers independently got them wrong.** The bibtex plugin emits **two** ''bibtex_citekey'' spans per source marker — an anchor and a link — so 33 markers render as 66 spans. Neither number is the reference count: 33 markers over 13 distinct keys give 13 entries in the reference list. And the rendered heading count is one higher than the source heading count because ''%%~~DISCUSSION~~%%'' contributes its own heading. Counting ''%%^%%''-prefixed lines in the source is **not** a valid table count on this page: the embedded report output contains ''%%==%%''- and ''%%##%%''-prefixed lines that a naive source-side heading count also picks up (44 versus the real 22).
+^ Count ^ [[privacy:privacy_sandbox]] ^
+| citation markers in the wiki source | **33** |
+| distinct citekeys among them | **13** |
+| ''bibtex_citekey'' spans in the rendered DOM | **66** |
+| ''%%<dt>%%'' entries in the rendered ''bibtex_references'' list | **13** |
+| ''%%<table>%%'' in the rendered body | **12** |
+| ''%%<h1>%%''–''%%<h4>%%'' in the rendered body | **23** |
+| ''%%<WRAP>%%'' boxes | **5** |
+| ''wikilink2'' (red links) | **0** |
+| downloadable ''%%<file>%%'' blocks | **1** |
+**Read the first three rows together, because two reviewers independently got them wrong and then disagreed with each other.** The bibtex plugin emits **two** ''bibtex_citekey'' spans per source marker — an anchor and a link — so 33 markers render as 66 spans, and neither number is the reference count: 33 markers over 13 distinct keys give 13 entries in the reference list. The rendered heading count is one higher than the source heading count because ''%%~~DISCUSSION~~%%'' contributes its own heading. And a source-side count is not a substitute for a rendered one on either page: the embedded script output here contains ''%%==%%''- and ''%%##%%''-prefixed lines that a naive source-side heading regex picks up as headings (44 against a real 22).
 Two earlier versions of this paragraph were wrong — first 58/22, then 60/21/4, both counted with an unscoped grep and both before the last round of edits. A review pass could not reproduce either. It is recorded rather than quietly corrected because a provenance page whose own self-check does not reproduce is worse than one that has none, and because getting a trivial count wrong twice is the honest illustration of why the rest of the page is scripted.